Aviation Week Technology 9 2013

Of The Year Awards

The 2014 Aviation Week

Submit your nominations now!

The Aviation Week MRO of the Year Awards honorthe best MRO and aftermarket entities from around the world for

pioneering achievements and value-adding accomplishmentsof the past 12 months.

The awards recognize winners in four categories:

Q Outstanding airline maintenance group

Q Military center of excellence

Q Leading independent MRO organization

Q Innovative supplier service provider

Dont delay! To make your nominations, visit

AviationWeek.com/mroawards

All submissions due by January 10, 2014

AviationWeek.com/mroawards

DEFENDING THE A-10

Reader Robert Owen puts forth that the world has changed as an argument for retiring the A-10 (AW&ST Nov. 25, p. 8). Well the world may have changed, but the aircraft is still relevant.

A-10s can be fitted with directional infrared countermeasures to neutralize improved surface-to-air missile threats. He mentions the new breed of aircraft that can handle the close-air-support (CAS) mission as a matter of routine while involved in other air tasks such as maintaining air superiority. OK. But show me an F-35 or similar aircraft that can loiter and maneuver in harms way, protect the pilot with titanium armor, with shielded exhausts, able to deliver ordnance from multiple pylons and, if hit, land with wheels upsuf-fering minimal damage to be quickly repaired to fight another day.

The aircrafts 30-mm gun also works against road convoys, ships, strafing runs on airfields and armored person-nel carriers. And the cost per flight hour (about $18,000) is a bargain we can ill-afford to discard.

Outfit the A-10 with new wings and defensive systems so we never have to look back after a conflict, wishing we had kept them while historians note the utter failure of gold-plated, short-legged and vulnerable, unsuited types such as a modified F-15, F-16 or F-35s to effec-tively accomplish the CAS mission.John GourleyMERRITT ISLAND, FLA.

QUALITY QUANDARY

I see from reading Quality Ques-tions (AW&ST Oct. 7. p. 30), about the Lockheed Martin F-35, that little has changed in the way major manufactur-ers programs are being managed. The focus on reducing scrap and rework percentages misses many real underly-ing problems.

In the rush to field aircraft and meet testing and delivery schedules, often problems are addressed by the remove-and-replace mantra. Func-tional anomalies are not dealt with head-on since the removed hardware is found to meet requirements when retested to the same original ac-ceptance standards and returned to service. This allows quality assurance (QA) and program management heads to close rejections as No Fault Found (NFF) and meet their objectives.

A three-year study of data on a major program showed clearly there

is low correlation to in-house produc-tion, scrap-and-rework rejections and fielded aircraft-reliability problems. Yes, in-house scrap and rework are large cost drivers and need to be addressed. However, as each step forward is taken in the aircraft life cycle, the cost of rework and reliability increases exponentially.

During the system design-and-development phase of a major pro-gram, there is tremendous pressure on internal budgets and schedules. This results in myriad issues, including:

Hardware/software specifications cut and pasted from previous designs without adequate analysis and testing.

Design changes being deferred/col-lected or being set as Class II when they can and do affect form, fit or func-

tion, allowing the program to avoid configuration change and hardware rework cost.

Multiple rejections on the same system/box/component with NFF dur-ing the flight-test program with little investigation as to underlying causes.

These are specific issues with avion-ics using card racks. Poor documen-tation of reasons for removals also masks problems. To meet budgets, mid-level QAs and operations and en-gineering management will minimize these issues and kick the can down the road. A Quality Transformation Council will indicate major action, but, sadly, have the same results as congressional committees do in ad-dressing the true causes.Jim Mull Lockheed Martin Quality Assurance (ret.)MARIETTA, GA.

SR-72 SMOKESCREEN?

Reader Kevin A. Capps (AW&ST Nov. 25, p. 8) brings up an excellent point. The fact that the Air Force refused funding to continue flying

the SR-71 is but one indicator for a replacement being operational.

He mentions that having the SR-71 out of the bag prevents plausible de-niability when it comes to overflights of other countries airspace as one of the reasons why any SR-71 replace-ment has been kept in shrouds.

If so, what is the purpose of the SR-72? Is it yet another smokescreen being put in place to keep an opera-tional aircraft away from prying eyes?Jacob R. KatzPROVIDENCE, R.I.

SR-72 COULD BE OBSOLETE

If Lockheed Martin can build the SR-72, it will be a technological mar-vel. However, with states dependent on computers for all defense func-tions, the U.S. would be better served by spending the money on cyberwar-fare, which can locate and disable or destroy military installations at the speed of lightquite a bit faster than Mach 6. Vincent Wroble DENVER, COLO.

SR-71 CONTRIBUTORS

A recent letter (AW&ST Nov. 25, p. 8) misstated the developer and sup-plier of the primary navigation system for the SR-71. It was Northrops Nor-tronics Div., not Honeywell.

I was part of Northrops flight-test engineering team at Edwards AFB and Air Force Plant 42 in Palmdale, Calif., for the entire life of the SR program. The Nav was labeled ANS for AstroNavigationSystem as it employed a star-tracking telescope to contain gyro drift and limit naviga-tional errors to less than a mile. The system also controlled the radar and most of the cameras and supplied steering data to the autopilot for the entire mission route.

I do not believe we will ever see anything as exciting as that Blackbird again.Bill MorrisonSOLANA BEACH, CALIF.

Feedback Aviation Week & Space Technology welcomes the opinions of its readers on issues raised in the magazine. Address letters to the Executive Editor, Aviation Week & Space Technology, 1200 G St., Suite 922, Washington, D.C. 20005. Fax to (202) 383-2346 or send via e-mail to: [email protected]

Letters should be shorter than 200 words, and you must give a genuine identification, address and daytime telephone number. We will not print anonymous letters, but names will be withheld. We reserve the right to edit letters.

10 AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/DECEMBER 9, 2013 AviationWeek.com/awst

nior vice president and director of the Defense Sector at SRA International Inc. Van Rensse-lear was vice president-NASA business for the Government Communications Systems Div. of the Harris Corp. and direc-tor of space programs within Raytheons Network Centric Systems.

Chris van Gend has become Singapore-based manager of engineering for Asia for Allianz Global Corporate & Specialty. He was head of the Asia-Pacific hub for Catlins energy and con-struction businesses.

Laura Fowler (see photo) has been appointed managing direc-tor of recruiting and diversity for the Alaska Air Group. She was se-nior manager of human resources at Moss Adams and had been vice president-human resources with Blackrock Alternative Advisors.

USAF Brig. Gen. Catherine A. Chilton is one of five of her rank to be nominated for promotion to major general. She is the mobi-lization assistant to the military deputy in the Office of the As-sistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition at the Pentagon. The others are: Paul S. Dwan, mobilization assistant to the surgeon general of the Air Force; Stayce D. Harris, mobilization assistant to the commander of the 18th Air Force of Air Mobility Command, Scott AFB, Ill.; Wil-liam B. Waldrop, Jr., director of plans, programs and require-ments at Headquarters Air Force Reserve Command, Robins AFB, Ga.; and Tommy J. Williams, mobilization assistant to the di-rector of operations at Headquar-ters Air Combat Command, Joint Base Langley-Eustis, Va.

HONORS AND ELECTIONS

Steve Taylor, president of Boeing Business Jets, has been elected chairman of the Washington-based Gen-eral Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA) for 2014. He was vice chairman of the board and chairman of the Flight Operations Policy Committee and fol-lows Brad Mottier, vice president/

Rafi Maor

John M. Gilligan

Catherine Gridley

F. L. Van Rensselaer, Jr.

R. Van Bruygom

Laura Fowler

Roddy Boggus

Jason W. Aiken has been appointed senior vice president/CFO of Falls Church, Va.-based General Dynam-

ics, effective Jan. 1. He will succeed L. Hugh Redd, 2nd, who plans to retire. Aiken holds those positions at subsid-iary Gulfstream Aerospace Corp.

Scott Webster has been named chairman/CEO/managing director of MBDA Inc., Arlington, Va. He succeeds Jerry Agee, who is retiring. Webster has been a member of the board of directors and was a co-founder of the Orbital Sciences Corp.

Rafi Maor (see photo) has become chairman of the board of Israel Aerospace Industries. He was chairman and previ-ously president/CEO of ECI Telecom.

Vadim Ligay is one of three Russian Helicopters executives who have been promoted to deputy CEO. He has been CEO of Kazan Helicopters. The oth-ers are: Vyacheslav Kozlov, who has been first deputy managing director for economics and finance at the Ulan-Ude Aviation Plant and will oversee Russian Helicopters finance and economics department; and Vladimir Kudashkin, who was chief of staff at the parent Ros-tec State Corp. and will be head of legal affairs and corporate governance.

Catherine Gridley (see photo) has been named vice president-business development for Herndon, Va.-based Technical Services sector of the Northrop Grumman Corp. She was vice president of DynCorp Internationals aviation business and had been presi-dent of customer services at General Electric Co. Aviation Systems.

Eric Stober has become CFO of the Astrotech Corp., Austin, Texas. He was vice president-corporate development.

Richard Van Bruygom (see photo) has been appointed Dallas-based CEO of the Americas division of Worldwide Flight Services of Paris.

Conrad Vandersluis has been pro-moted to sales development director from commercial and contracts man-ager for the London-based AJW Group.

John M. Gilligan (see photos) has been named president/chief operating officer and Franklin L. Van Rensse-laer, Jr., senior vice president-civil and military aerospace of the Schafer Corp., Arlington, Va. Gilligan was president of his own information technology and cyber consulting firm and had been se-

general manager for Business and General Aviation and Inte-grated Systems at GE Aviation. Succeeding Taylor will be Joe Brown, president of Hartzell Propeller. He will continue as chairman of the Policy & Legal Issues Committee. Elected to the Executive Committee and committee chairmen were: Environment Committee, Ed Dolanski, president/CEO of Aviall Inc.; Flight Operations Policy Committee, John Ucze-kaj, president/CEO of Aspen Avionics; and Safety and Acci-dent Investigation Committee, Simon Caldecott, president/CEO of Piper Aircraft. Re-maining on the Executive Committee and as committee chairman are: Airworthiness and Maintenance Policy Com-mittee, Aaron Hilkemann, president/CEO of Duncan Avi-ation; Communications Com-mittee, Larry Flynn, president of the Gulfstream Aerospace Corp.; Global Markets Com-mittee, Simon Pryce, group chief executive of BBA Avia-tion; Security Issues Commit-tee, Mark Van Tine, CEO of Jeppesen; and Technical Policy Committee, Phil Straub, vice president and managing di-rector of aviation for Garmin International.

Roddy Boggus (see photo), a senior vice president and aviation market leader at Par-sons Brinckerhoff, has been named to the board of direc-tors of the International As-sociation of Airport Executives.

He has been a senior executive with architectural and engineering firms ac-tive in the aviation market and was co-owner of Hodges-Boggus Architects, an aviation architectural firm serving airline operations, including American and Continental. c

To submit information for the

Whos Where column, send Word

or attached text files (no PDFs) and

photos to: [email protected]

For additional information on

companies and individuals listed in

this column, please refer to the

Aviation Week Intelligence Network

at AviationWeek.com/awin For

information on ordering, telephone

U.S.: +1 (866) 857-0148 or

+1 (515) 237-3682 outside the U.S.

Whos Where

AviationWeek.com/awst AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY/DECEMBER 9, 2013 11

SPACE

Into the FraySpace Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) launched its first Falcon 9 v1.1 mission to geosynchronous transfer orbit Dec. 3, marking the Hawthorne, Calif.-based startups entry into the com-mercial launch market and positioning it to unseat United Launch Alliance (ULA), the Boeing-Lockheed Martin joint venture that launches most NASA, U.S. Air Force and intelligence community missions. Liftoff occurred at 5:41 p.m. local time from SpaceX Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral. The two-stage, liquid-fueled Falcon 9 sent the Orbital Sciences Corp. SES-8 satellite on its way to a supersynchronous transfer orbit at an inclination of 20.75 deg. for Luxem-bourg-based SES, the worlds second-largest commercial fleet operator by revenue. A little more than 1 min. into the flight, the Falcon 9 reached Max Q, the point at which mechanical stress on the vehicle peaks due to a combination of the rockets velocity and resistance created by Earths atmosphere. The mission follows two launch attempts in late November, including a Nov. 28 abort that occurred when oxygen was detected in the ground side igniter fluid on the rockets first stage, resulting in a slower-than-expected ramp-up in thrust. An attempt on Nov. 25 was scrubbed owing to pressure fluctuations on the Falcon 9s first stage liquid oxygen tank. Accurate orbital insertion of SES-8 is critical to SpaceX, which is counting on three suc-cessful Falcon 9 v1.1 missionsincluding two to be launched consecutivelythat are needed to obtain U.S. government certification for launching sensitive national security payloads.

China to the MoonThe Change-3 spacecraft, which repre-sents Chinas first attempt at a robotic lunar landing, is safely en route after a

Dec. 2 launch on a Long March 3B. The rocket placed the spacecraft, with its lander/rover combo, into an initial lunar transfer orbit with an apogee of 380,000 km. (240,000 mi.), following liftoff from the Xichang Satellite Launch Center. Controllers later adjusted the orbit to set up a Dec. 14 soft landing in the Bay of Rainbows (see page 18). That will be the most difficult part of the mission, says Wu Weiren, the programs chief designer.

Supporting RoleNASA will seek an opportunity to participate in the European Space Agencys (ESA) next two large astro-physics missions, including the launches of a new-generation X-ray telescope and a gravitational wave observatory. Both a large X-ray observatory and a large gravitational wave observatory are prioritized recommendations of the [2010 astrophysics] decadal survey, and so we are pursuing an opportunity to contribute and partner on ESAs

observatories, says Paul Hertz, head of NASAs Astrophysics Div. We will be setting up our discussions with ESA about a potential role for NASA in these missions. In November, ESA announced its selection of the 1-billion ($1.37-bil-lion) large-class missions, which include an advanced X-ray observatory slated to launch in 2028 that will study how ordinary matter assembles into galaxies and how black holes grow and influence their surroundings. A second mission, in 2034, would search for ripples in the fabric of space time created by celestial objects with strong gravity, such as pairs of merging black holes. Preparations for development of the European campaigns will start next year, including a call for mission concepts that will be used in so-liciting proposals for the X-ray telescope.

Kepler a ContenderNASA gave the green light Dec. 4 to continued work on a plan to extend its crippled Kepler Space Telescope mission. Known as K2, the plan is intended to help resume Keplers search for other worlds using an orbital maneuver to compensate for the loss of two of the spacecrafts four gyro-like reaction wheels. This is not a deci-sion to continue operating the Kepler spacecraft or to conduct a two-wheel extended mission, Paul Hertz, head of NASAs Astrophysics Div., said Dec. 4. It is merely an opportunity to write another proposal and compete against the Astrophysics Divisions other proj-

The World


Bombardier Names New Sales Chief

Bombardier Aerospace has appointed Raymond Jones as senior vice president for sales,

marketing and asset management for Bombardier Commercial Aircraft, effective immedi-

ately. He succeeds Chet Fuller, who will leave the company at the end of the year. Jones has

been vice president for worldwide strategic accounts for Bombardier Business Aircraft.

Several weeks into the CSeries flight test program, Bombardier still has not managed to

make major inroads into the market segment it is pursuing. The manufacturer lost several

major campaigns against the Airbus A320neo including at Vueling, EasyJet and AirAsia.

Industry sources say the company should have offered more discounts in the early phases of

the program and that Bombardiers sales strategy has not been aggressive enough.

Amazons UAV Plans Deliver More Hype Than Content

By making its announcement on Cyber Monday, Dec. 2, the biggest online shopping day of

the year in the U.S., electronic-commerce giant Amazon was certain to get exhaustive and

enthusiastic news coverage of its plans to use unmanned aircraft to deliver packages di-

rectly to customers.

While Amazon

has conducted test

fights using a small

quadcopter UAV to

deliver a package,

the realities of the

FAAs regulatory

requirements make

it unlikely the deliv-

ery service, called

Amazon Prime Air, will become available in 2015 as the company suggests.

Dominos Pizza conducted a similar door-to-door demonstration in the U.K. in June

and companies with delivery-service plans ranging from burritos to buyers in California to

medicines to clinics in Africa are waiting for both technology and regulations to be ready.

But the FAAs airworthiness rules for small unmanned aircraft systems (SUAS)expected to

be released for public comment early in 2014 after a lengthy gestation, and not expected to be

finalized until 2015will initially limit operations to vehicles weighing less than 55 lb., flying in

AMAZ

ON

ects for the limited funding available for astrophysics operating missions. In May, when the second wheel failed, the spacecraft lost the ability to point precisely in the direction of Earth-sized planets orbiting Sun-like stars in the so-called habitable zone, where the surface temperature of a planet might be suit-able for liquid water. But in November, NASAs Ames Research Center and Kepler mission developer Ball Aero-space unveiled a plan that could allow the observatory to resume this primary mission by steering it in an orbital path that ensures even distribution of solar pressure across the spacecraft and using it to effect a capability similar to that of a third reaction wheel. However, the concept must be further validated before the Kepler team submits a fund-ing proposal to the divisions Senior Review in April. As part of NASAs process for allocating the divisions limited budget for operating missions in its extended phase, the biannual review will see the $600-million Kepler mission compete for funding against a slate of ongoing astrophysics observatories. The division is facing a House-proposed reduction of $74 million to its 2014 spending proposal, which includes $18.7 million for Kepler.

Phone HomePhoneSat 2.4, one of the record 29 nanosatellites launched last month on a Minotaur rocket from Wallops Island, Va., as part of the U.S. Air Force ORS

3 mission, has radioed controllers at Ames Research Center that its systems are all go. The 1-kg (2.2-lb.) cubesat incorporates the innards of a Stock Nexus S smartphone with the Android operating system in NASAs second demonstration that off-the-shelf cell-phone technology can operate in orbit. PhoneSat 2.4 features solar cells for power and reaction wheels for attitude control, both advances over the first PhoneSat, which included a smart-phone plugged into a cubesat, casing and all, and used its camera to take photos (AW&ST Dec. 2, p. 18).

DEFENSE

Northrop in Bomber RaceNorthrop Grumman will be a competi-tor in the U.S. Air Forces Long-Range Strike-Bomber program, CEO Wes Bush said during a Credit Suisse inves-tor call on Dec. 5. Slightly more than a month ago, after Boeing and Lockheed Martin agreed to team on the project, Northrop Grumman declined to say whether it would bid (AW&ST Nov. 4, p. 22). But now, Bush tells investors, were here to compete, and thats about all Ill say. Most details of the program remain classified, but indus-try sources tell AW&ST that Lockheed Martin has been awarded a contract for a flight demonstrator as part of the Air Forces risk-reduction efforts. However, Northrop Grummans role in the RQ-180 unmanned stealth recon-naissance aircraft (see page 20), as well as its B-2 upgrade activities, make it a strong contender. .

Tranche 3 Typhoon FlightBAE Systems flew the first Tranche 3 Eurofighter Typhoon on Dec. 2 at BAE Systems facility at Warton, England. The Tranche 3s are set to be the most advanced versions of the Typhoon and have the capability to provide more electrical power in readiness for instal-lation of the planned E-Scan radar as

well as ability to potentially fit confor-mal fuel tanks on top of the rear fuse-lage. All three of the manufacturers in the Eurofighter consortiumAlenia Aermacchi, BAE and EADS Cassidian are building Tranche 3 aircraft.

AIR TRANSPORT

China Airline Execs ArrestedChina Southern Airlines employees have again been implicated in corrup-tion, with the airline confirming that four executives are under investigation. But industry officials say around 10 China Southern staff members have been arrested, including two executives of the airlines marketing management committee. So far, the accused have not been found guilty by any court. If they are, it will be the third time since 2006 that major corruption has been unearthed at China Southern. In 2006, executives were found to have siphoned company funds given to an outside in-stitution to manage, and in 2010 others were discovered bribing officials of the Civil Aviation Administration of China to treat the carrier favorably in allocat-ing routes. In the latest case, employees are accused of defrauding the airline by buying tickets at early-purchase prices and then selling them at or near the full price close to the departure date, say the industry officials. The alleged crime required the cooperation of employees and could involve tens of millions of yuan, says one official with knowledge of the case ($1 = 6.1 yuan).

Cost-CuttingQantas Airways has announced a new cost reduction goal of A$2 billion ($1.8 billion) over three years, including 1,000 job cuts in the next year. The move is prompted by a new warning from the carrier that it will report a pre-tax loss of up to A$300 million for the six months through Dec. 31. The airline says it is launching a review of its capital spend-ing and may consider selling assets.

Aviation Week Editor Honored

Aviation Week Senior Air Transport Editor Adrian Schofield was honored at the 2013

Australia and New Zealand Aviation Media Awards, an event held by the National Avia-

tion Press Club in Sydney. Schofield, who works from Auckland, New Zealand, won the

Rolls-Royce Trophy for Technical Story of the Year, for an article on automatic depen-

dent surveillance-broadcast (AW&ST Feb. 11, p. 46). He was also runner-up in the

News Story of the Year category and a finalist for Journalist of the Year.

For more breaking news, go to AviationWeek.com


daylight only, staying below 400 ft. altitude

and within line of sight of the operator.

These restrictions would prevent Ama-

zon from achieving its goal of delivering

packages to customers within a 10-mi.

radius and 30 min. of ordering. Even that

short range would take the UAS out of

visual range of the ground operator and

require the vehicle to have a beyond-line-

of-sight data link and likely some form of

sensing system to help avoid collisions.

While the FAA intends to extend the

SUAS rule over time to allow, first, line-

of-sight operations at night and, later,

flights beyond line of sight, it could take

several years to develop the required

technology and certification standards.

Significant improvements in battery

technology will also be required for small

package-carrying air vehicles to have

useful flight times between recharging.

Up Front

COMMENTARY

Those implementing this strategy continue to rely heavily on private enterprise to provide that advantage. But lately the Defense Department has expressed some angst about investment by private enterprises, and industry continues to fret about human capital and its ability to attract, let alone retain, skilled individuals. Frank Kendall, the undersecretary of defense for acquisition logistics and technology, expressed con-cern last August that contractors would not sustain independent R&D funding.

At a Center for Strategic and Inter-national Studies event on Nov. 7, Kendall said he was particularly worried about R&D accounts. BAE Systems Inc. CEO Linda Goodman voiced related concerns at a Nov. 19 Atlantic Council event: Do we really believe we can maintain our dominance in the air and sea given the flight of talent to more exciting and pre-dictable industries that dont use words like sequester and furlough?

Two data sources underscore lower defense research and investment but do not tell the full picture. The first is the annual defense budget, specifically research, development, test and evalu-ation (RDT&E). In constant fiscal 2014 dollars, so-called next force RDT&E is down approximately 50% from a peak in fiscal 2006 through the pre-sequester plan in fiscal 2018. The long-term R&D that typically goes to universities and labs is down 25% in constant dollars from peak levels in fiscal 2006.

The other source is data reported by large U.S. defense prime contractors for company-funded R&D. That data is

While there is plenty to debate about where U.S. defense

budgets could settle in 2014-15, there is no debate about

the Pentagons desire to continue to compete with cutting-

edge technology. It expects defense advantages to be sustained

through investment in new weapons and support systems that

provide a generational lead over those fielded by adversaries.

The R&D Gamble

Pentagon wants to retain defense advantages

while expecting investments by industry

budget plans do not point to that. Pub-licly traded companies are going to con-tinue to have to keep shareholders con-tent, and one tool for sustained or higher earnings is operating margins. While some businesses will aim to sustain R&D while finding other sources of savings or better pricing, others may make further cuts to R&D and hope their companies can remain competitive.

For the Defense Department, how-ever, simply pressing for higher R&D may not help to sustain a base of skilled engineers and leading-edge technology. Closer attention needs to be given to where R&D dollars are actually being spent and whether there are enough ways for truly innovative technology to

come to the attention of those who would benefit from it, partic-ularly if it chal-lenges existing programs of

record. On the more-is-better issue, in its fiscal 2012, Microsoft reported R&D of $9.8 billion or 13.3% of total sales. Apple reported R&D for its fiscal 2013 of $4.5 billion, or 2.6%. Arguably, just spending more on R&D does not automatically lead to more competitive products.

The Defense Department will have to find additional ways to nurture R&D. Kendall talked earlier in the year about funding prototype development, but that idea seems to have waned. Private enterprise cannot be expected to develop products without some hope that these will earn a return. En-trenched interests are likely to protect programs of record from disruptive technologies. Thats not a new issue, but the department needs to create acquisition paths and programs where new technologies are not blocked by gatekeepers threatened by their fur-ther development or by bureaucracies that could smother R&D with compli-ance and testing costs.

Prospects for more funding seem lim-ited in fiscal 2014-16. Most public compa-nies probably do not have the courage to drop operating margin expectations as they invest in products for introduction in 2017 and beyond. Defense and indus-try will have to work more creatively and effectively with limited resources. c

inconsistent, as it includes a mix of bid and proposal and R&D expenses. But in 2000, Boeings defense and space divisions, L-3 Communications, Lock-heed Martin, Northrop Grumman and Raytheon reported company-funded R&D expense that was 3.9% of total sales. In 2012, that figure was 2.4%.

From a resource perspective, there are other missing pieces of data. The Defense Department does not disclose independent R&D spending under-taken by contractors even though it reimburses them.

Some publicly traded companies report total customer and company-funded R&D while others report only company-funded research and devel-opment. Even the company-funded R&D expense disclosed in annual Securities and Exchange Commission filings is inconsistent. Some compa-nies report independent R&D expense while others report this figure includ-ing bid and proposal expense.

Finally, R&D is reported in total by companies and not always broken out by business unit. For example, General Dynamics reports total R&D, which includes Gulfstream business jets.

Its unlikely that aggregate defense- related R&D spending will increase in fiscal 2014-16. Certainly the Pentagon


By Byron Callan

Contributing columnist Byron Callan is a director at Capital Alpha Partners.

Private enterprise cant be expected

to develop new products without some

hope of a return in the future.

Commanders Intent

COMMENTARY

By Bill Sweetman

Read Sweetmans posts on our weblog ARES, updated daily:

AviationWeek.com/ares

[email protected]

That view is not far beneath a de-bate over close air support (CAS) that has smoldered over decades like a case of inter-service malaria. The latest attack of fevers and night sweats has been triggered by the revelation of Air Force sequester-based budget plans that include retirement of the A-10 Warthog, which nobody ever calls by its official name of Thunderbolt II.

The Air Force is in a fiscal trap that is partly of its own making. Aging combat fleets and an unmanned aerial system (UAS) force that cant survive against any form of air defense are two of its closing walls. The service cannot find the will to escape from its com-mitment to raise its F-35 Joint Strike Fighter buy rate to 80 per year, but it also sees a stark need for aircraft with longer range.

The way to make big savings, the service argues, is to chop entire fleets, shut down their training and logis-tics infrastructure, and stop paying modernization bills. The KC-10 and B-1 bomberalongside the A-10are in just the first wave, but older F-16s and F-15C/Ds are next.

Unfortunately, the A-10 has been the big, ugly symbol of the CAS debate since its conception in the 1960s. The USAF only built it in the first place, it is argued, to deflect the Armys attempt to take over the mission with

Once again, the U.S. Chair Force wants to sacrifice the blood

of the heroic infantry in favor of Mitchellesque strategic-

bombing dreams and white-scarf fighter missions. It should be

disbanded and its functions assigned to fighting services made

up of Real Men.

Making

BaconWarthogs on the

chopping block

the fast and costly AH-56A Cheyenne compound helicopter. Now, say the boot-centric warfare believers, the USAF wants to dump CAS completely.

That argument is off-target. In the last 10 years, the USAF and its allies have provided CAS using fighters, helicopters and gunships. The soldier on the ground wants firepower and cares little where it comes from, so guided artillery and fiber-optic guided missiles have a role to play as well.

Within this family, the A-10 is differ-ent but not unique. What it brings to the party is better persistence than a supersonic fighter, lower cost per hour andits advocates argue that this is crucialflight characteristics that are better suited to operations beneath an overcast.

You may argue that Im missing something here. How do you know when your conversation with a Hog pilot is half over? Thats enough about me, lets talk about my gun. But the A-10 gun, designed to decapitate T-62 tanks, is not ideal for CAS. The attack profile calls for the pilot to turn into a gun run at a considerable distance from the target, at an angle where a small difference in elevation means a big difference in where the bullets hit, and to finish firing before the aircraft busts a height limit. Todays CAS tech-nology has many ways to deliver the

precision that in the 1970s demanded a gun.

The A-10 may have a valid niche role. Its existence alone preserves an Air Force CAS culture, a force that practices that difficult art most of the time. But there is no scenario that calls for 240 of them (the Air Forces pre-sequester planned fleet, through 2030) and the Pentagons cumbersome eco-nomics make small fleets expensive. A better solution might be to think of unconventional ways to sustain a small force of A-10s at a reasonable cost.

Anyone who has been following the development of CAS ought to know these things, as they ought to know that the theoretically CAS-minded Marine Corps has mortgaged its future in order to acquire supersonic stealth fighters (with a two-burst gun pod op-tion), the U.S. Armys attack helicop-ters have been generously funded, and that the Joint Chiefs of Staffchaired by one aviator in the last 30 yearssigned off on the F-35 as the A-10 replacement. (But its the Air Forces fault somehow.)

What is really happening is that some critics of the Air Force like the A-10 not for what it can do, but for what it cantoperate offensively against air defensesand because it forces the Air Force, despite its own selfish plans, to do its job and support ground forces.

But theres that irritating real world, where the ground forces cant get to the fight without airlift; cant stay there without air supremacy; dont know where their adversaries are without air force-provided intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance; and cant talk to their headquarters or even know where they are without spacecraft, which were not wafted into orbit by green-cammoed leprechauns, strange as that may seem.

One sure way to get nowhere is to use the A-10 as a symbol of an offen-sive against independent airpower. In World War 1, debate over military avia-tion pitted Army officers who thought that the airplane was a very large horse against Navy leaders who saw it as a small torpedo boat. Some people dont seem to have moved on. c

USA

F M

SGT.

JEFF

REY

ALLE

N


Inside Business Aviation By William Garvey

COMMENTARY

Business & Commercial Aviation Editor-in-Chief William Garvey blogs at:

AviationWeek.com

[email protected]

Fortunately, she has done it before. In fact, this will be her fifth airlift (in all, Cessna has coordinated seven dating back to 1985), and the veteran Cessnan can be very persuasive. In 1999, she corralled a fleet of 260 Citations to carry 2,000 passengers to and from the games in Raleigh-Durham, N.C. For the last airlift, serving the 2010 games in Lincoln, Neb., she got 161 Citations to participate.

Overseeing the actual airlift de-mands Olympic-level precision. This year, on arrival and departure days a Citation will land or take off from New Jerseys Trenton-Mercer Airport every 2 min. almost uninterrupted for a solid 10 hr., transporting 800 passengers across the U.S.

The jets and crews are provided gra-tis, and the baggage handlers are all volunteers. Bob Gobrecht, president of Special Olympics North America, says the airlift provides a crucial cost-savings to our programs that cannot be overstated.

But the effort represents even more. Says Gobrecht, Youre taking the most marginalized and invisible people

Since Olympic ski runs rarely occur in palm-treed towns, Rus-

sian President Vladimir Putin may soon be sweating the

snow report for Sochi.

But Rhonda Fullerton is

fretting over her sum-

mer Olympics conditions

now. As director of the

Citation Special Olym-

pics Airlift, she must find

big-hearted jet operators

to supply 175 Citations to

carry athletes, coaches or

sponsors to and from the

games in the Princeton,

N.J., area, June 14-21.

Olympic Performance

Aiming for a takeoff or landing every 2 min.

in our society and saying to them: You are important. You deserve the best.

Contact Fullerton before March 1 to volunteer: (888) 565-5438 or [email protected] c

STOCKING STUFFERS

Its that time of year when ads for timepieces crowd newspapers, home mailboxes and every other game break on television. Since pilots are big watch wonks, I offer up two new models that could jingle any aviators Christmas bells.

Garmins wrist-wearable wonder called the D2 (as in Direct To) (see photo) has a Wide Area Augmentation System receiver and its 1.2-in. face displays a moving map as well as GPS-da-ta-driven flight instruments, including an

altimeter with an adjustable barometer setting. It can even activate Garmins new video camera. This mini-G1000 marvel retails for $449.

Meanwhile, Breitlings Emergency (see photo) will soon be keeping its owners out of harms way. The tita-nium case of the precision watch and chronograph contains a personal loca-tor beacon that can transmit an alternating emergency sig-nal on 121.5 mhz and 406 mhz for up to 24 hr. Obtaining oper-ating approvals from various international agencies has delayed actual shipping until early 2014 at least. The timepiece retails for $15,750. c

WELCOME LAW

Serving up a most unlikely exception in a town where Nay! prevails, the U.S. Congress and the Obama admin-istration have said Yea! to the Small Airplane Revitalization Act of 2013, benefitting manufacturers of general aviation aircraft.

The legislation essentially endorses the recommendations of an aviation rulemaking committee to increase safety and reduce government and industry certification costs for light general aviation airplanes. Other coun-tries are expected to act similarly, since the recommendations had international input. Notably, the new law sets a defini-tive timeline for the FAA to complete a sweeping rewrite of Part 23 regulations as a way to ensure it isnt bogged down in agency bureaucracy.

Pete Bunce, president and CEO of the General Aviation Manufacturers Association, says the new law dem-onstrates a bipartisan commitment to safety, as well as a recognition that the FAAs overly bureaucratic, outdated and prescriptive regulations must change. He calls it a win for the government as well as general aviation airframers and suppliers, but more importantly, for the general aviation pilots and passengers who will be able to benefit more rapidly from new safety-enhancing technologies. c

CESS

NA

AIRC

RAFT


GARMIN INTERNATIONAL

BREITLING

Some of the 830 athletes and coaches

airlifted to the 2010 Special Olympics in

Lincoln, Neb.

COMMENTARY

The probable cause of the July 6 Asiana accident at San Francisco International Airport (see photo) has not been determined. But, absent some unexpected new revelations, enough is known about the accident sequence to draw several important conclusions. The pilots either did not understand some of the aircrafts automation modes, and/or were not paying close enough attention to crucial variables, like altitude and airspeed, on final approach. Once they realized their di-lemma, they were not sure how to react. Before they could fly their way out of trouble, they crashed into a seawall.

Even if no flaws in the 777 are un-earthed, dismissing the event as pilot error would miss the point: Asiana 214s flight crew was not adequately prepared for what it encountered. Most important, a growing mountain of data suggest that such unpreparedness is closer to endemic than isolated to cer-tain regions or second-tier operators.

A recently released report by a FAA-tasked working group (WG) listed 18 recommendations on how to make betterand saferuse of flight-path management systems. The 267-page report broke little new ground, but added analytical depth to acknowl-edged weaknesses.

One is that automation has made aircraft so reliable and predictable that pilots have trouble maintain-ing so-called hand-flying skills that areor should becentral to every airmans capabilities.

The reports data sources include 46 accidents and major incidents that

This weeks National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)

hearing on Asiana Airlines Flight 214 is more than a deep

dive into why a Boeing 777 crash-landed at a major U.S. hub on

a near-perfect summer morning. It is the continuation of an es-

calating discussion onas the NTSB puts it so well in its press

advisory on the hearingpilot awareness in highly automated

aircraft.

No Easy AnswersHoning in on degradation of piloting skills

occurred from 1994-2007, nearly 730 relevant Aviation Safety Reporting System reports, and information from 9,000 Line Operations Safety Audit (LOSA) reports compiled by trained observers sitting in cockpits during regular flights.

Among the notable takeaways unearthed by the WG: More than 60% of the 26 accident reports reviewed identified a manual handling error as a factor. (The reports data-collection phase ended before several relevant flight-path management-related ac-cidents, including the high-profile Colgan Air 3407 and Air France 447 crashes, both in 2009, as well as the Asiana crash.)

Also telling is a sample set of 2,200 recent LOSA reports that looked at big-picture flight crew automation-management ratings by category and phase of flight (pre-departure, takeoff/climb and descent/approach/landing). While the number of flight phases with either outstanding or poor/marginal ratings was smallmeaning most crews rated somewhere in between

the total of lowest-rated performances generally outnumbered the highest-rated by about 40%.

As aircraft and airspace manage-ment systems become more capable, pilots do less hand-flying and more system management. One result, in the WGs words: Concern has been expressed that pilot skill degradation occurs because of the use of automat-ed systems results in lack of practice or over-confidence in those systems.

This echoes a 1996 FAA Human Factors report on pilot/flight-deck in-terface. Despite actions taken based on that report and a steady improvement in key accident metrics, the issue is not getting better, and industry does not appear to be moving toward a consen-sus on how to solve this.

The WG, formed in 2006, com-prises representatives from operators, manufacturers, labor groups, govern-ment and academia. The group also interviewed major industry stakehold-ersincluding airlinesto solicit direct input. Significant concerns were voiced about the degradation of manual flying-skill development and retention.

What was not heard was agree-ment on why a pilots hand-flying skills decay, what to do about it, or even consensus on what constitutes an ad-equate set of manual piloting skills.

Complexity in airspace operations is increasing, and as the flexibility in-creases . . . so does the complexity and potential for unexpected events, the flight-path-management report notes. Pilots must be prepared for dealing with the unexpected, and the equip-ment design, training, procedures and operations must enable them to do so.

As the working groups seven-year effort underscores so well: Its easier said than done. c

Airline Intel


By Sean Broderick

Senior Managing Editor MRO Sean Broderick blogs at:

AviationWeek.com/thingswithwings

[email protected]

NTSB

In Orbit

COMMENTARY

By Frank Morring, Jr.

Senior Editor Frank Morring, Jr., blogs at:

AviationWeek.com/onspace

[email protected]

Even if the mission does not work out as plannedthe Moons surface is littered wreckage from failed robotic landingsattempting it underscores Chinas ambitions in space, which have drawn praise from other spacefaring nations. Russian federal space agency Roscosmos posted news of the flaw-less launch on its English-language Facebook page, and the European Space Agencys (ESA) website noted that its ground-based space-tracking network is helping the Chinese, who normally rely on ocean-going tracking vessels for global coverage.

Whether for human or robotic mis-sions, international cooperation like this is necessary for the future exploration of planets, moons and asteroids, ben-efitting everyone, says Thomas Reiter, the ESA astronaut leading the agencys human-spaceflight organization.

In the U.S., however, reaction to the Chinese success has been muted, to say the least. Because powerful members of Congress object to U.S. space coopera-tion with China on human rights and national security grounds, it is not particularly wise for American space-exploration interests to congratulate the Chinese too heartily. Take Moon Express, for example. The Silicon Valley-based commercial lunar-lander startup walked a careful line when it used the Chinese launch to highlight its own work so as not to anger the Capitol Hill potentates who control the flow of funding for U.S. spaceflight endeavors.

There is absolutely no technical

China is on its way to the first controlled lunar landing in al-

most four decadesa planned touchdown in the poetically

named Bay of Rainbows (Sinus Iridium) to unleash a robotic

rover called Yutu (see illustration), an equally poetic reference to

the jade rabbit the goddess Change took with her when she flew

to the Moon. Chinas Change-3 mission made it out of low Earth

orbit Dec. 1 into a translunar trajectory that sets up Yutu for a

landing on Dec. 14.

Sino-sensitivity

NASA edges toward Chinaslightly

exchange involved, and Moon Express itself has no direct interactions with China at any technical level, says CEO Bob Richards. Moon Express pulled that detail from Richards personal blog and included it in a clarification/correction to a press release about the companys work on lunar-based telescopes for the International Lunar Observatory Association. That U.S.-based private group has an exchange-of-imagery arrangement with the Chinese Academy of Sciences National Astronomical Observatories, which has an ultraviolet telescope on Yutu.

Moon Express has collaborative agreements in place with NASA and is well aware that NASA has been expressly prohibited by Congress from collaborating with China in space mis-sions, even on a scientific level, the company says. Moon Express fire-walls prevent the inappropriate flow of technical information, and there are no instances where any protected infor-mation arising out of its relationship with NASA is exposed to third parties, domestic or foreign.

The California company isnt the only organization to clarify how its relation-ship with China is characterized, but in the case of NASA itself the trend was in the other directionif only slightly. During the International Astronauti-cal Congress (IAC) in Beijing this fall, the newly renamed China Manned Space Agency publicized meetings with European, Russian and Canadian space leaders (AW&ST Nov. 25, p. 50). In response to coverage of those meetings in AW&ST, the U.S. agency stressed that Administrator Charles Bolden also appeared publicly on a panel with other heads of space agencies, including Ma Xingrui, who at the time ran the China National Space Agency, which oversees some robotic space exploration.

NASA revealed that Bolden also met Bai Chunli, president of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, to discuss revival of currently suspended collaboration on space geodesy using GPS, very long baseline interferometry, and satellite laser-ranging to measure changes in Earths shape, gravity and rotation. NASA stopped an 18-year collaboration with the Shanghai Astronomical Ob-servatory in 2010 in compliance with statutory restrictions.

Also on the Bolden-Bai agenda was the possibility of using the two nations separate arrangements with the Inter-national Center for Integrated Moun-tain Development in the Himalayan Region in Kathmandu, Nepal, to coordi-nate the use of Earth-observation data products for glacier characterization.

The previously undisclosed talks may mark another shift in U.S.-China space relations. Bolden has visited China as an official guest of the Manned Space Agency, a military organization that oversees Chinas Shenzhou and Tian-gong human-spaceflight programs in low Earth orbit. But he has been blocked from reciprocating by congressional appropriations language drafted by Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Va.), chairman of the House subcommittee that funds NASA and a staunch foe of Chinas government. Bolden notified Congress that he would attend the IAC and hold the bilateral discussions with Bai, in accordance with procedures established in [the ap-propriations language], and members of Congress, including Wolf . . . were made aware, NASA states. c

MOON EXPRESS


Washington Outlook

With Congress nearing a deadline this week to forge a short-

term budget agreement, suggestions for what to protect and

what to cut are coming from all corners. Republicans are trying to

protect three high-priced NASA programs from the budget ax and

free up more than a half-billion dollars for the projects at the same time. And Rep. Mo Brooks (Ala.), a frequent critic of gov-ernment spending, is leading the charge, introducing legislation drawn from the stalled NASA reauthorization bill. His bill would exempt the International Space Station, heavy-lift Space Launch System (SLS) and Orion crew vehicle (see photo) from termination. The bill, which the House Science Committee expects to consider this week, also would free $507 million in funds held to cover termination liability costs under a contract interpreta-tion by NASAs Democratic management based on the 19th-centu-ry Anti-Deficiency Act that prohibits federal employees from spend-ing more than Congress has authorized. The bill prohibits withholding funds from the three programs for termina-tion liability, and de-clares termination-liability provisions in existing contracts for the programs void and unenforceable unless Congress spe-cifically authorizes the funds at a later time. The future for this legislation is diceyeven in the Republican-controlled Housealthough it is sure to attract sup-port in the Senate from Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), the powerful ranking minority member of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee that funds NASA. Mar-shall Space Flight Center, in Brookss North Alabama congressional district, manages SLS development, and has sig-nificant roles in the ISS and Orion proj-ects as well. If the measure passes, it would free at least $192 million for SLS, $226 million for Orion and $89 million for the ISS, says Brookss office.

But the ideas in circulation are not just about how to preserve pro-grams, plenty of interest groups are also flooding Capitol Hill with reports about how to meet spending reduction targets. That includes a proposal by the conservative-leaning National Taxpay-ers Union and the U.S. Public Interest Research Group, backed by Ralph Nader. Their report Toward Common Ground is offering proposals for how the Pentagon can easily save $197.2 bil-lionnamely by cutting the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and replacing it with F-16 and F/A-18 aircraft, eliminating

boosters from the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle and replacing the V-22 Osprey with MH-60 Seahawks and CH-53 Sea Stallions. c

THUMBS UP FOR HANDS ON

The FAA has decided NASA astro-nauts can be allowed to engage in operational flight functions up to and including piloting a commercial space vehicle for aborts, emergency response, and monitoring and op-erating environmental controls and life-support systems during FAA-licensed commercial space launches and reentries. But astronauts beware: Training to become employable by commercial providers may force a take-it-or-leave-it proposition to either

commit to remaining an astronaut, or commit to pursuing a career as a commercial space pilot. Under current regulations, spaceflight participants are not allowed to actually fly space-craft because, when the term was defined, spaceflight participants were seen as untrained passengers. But the FAA decided astronauts can take control of private spacecraft during launch and landing when nominally a computer would be flying the vehicleif emergencies arise. The designation will matter someday. c

SNOOZE BUTTON

Days after word circulated about the FAAs plans to institute sleep-apnea testing for obese pilots and controllers, House lawmakers scrambled to slow the proposal. Last week, the House Trans-portation and Infrastructure Committee approved a bill that would require the FAA to conduct a formal rulemaking if it mandates that pilots and controllers undergo testing for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and potentially seek treat-ment. The rule is prompted by the idea that individuals with a body mass index of 40 or more are at greater risk of being

susceptible to OSA, and would be more prone to sleepiness. The sponsor, Rep. Frank LoBiondo (R-N.J.), who chairs the aviation subcommittee, called the impending policy neither reasonable nor acceptable, and adds that it is stirring a lot of

confusion, uncertainty and concern. c

TOP GUN

Christine Fox, the former director of Cost Assessment and Program Evalu-ation at the Defense Department, took over as acting deputy secretary Dec. 5. Fox has gained renown in a number of roles. These include her leadership on the recent scrub of the Pentagon budget called the Strategic Choices and Management Review, as well as her role as president of the Center for Naval Analysis (CNA). But there is also an element of star power in her back-ground: Back in the 1980s, while work-ing at CNA, she was the inspiration for Kelly McGilliss lead actress role in the 1986 movie Top Gun. c

To Cut or To KeepLawmakers, interest groups make

last-minute budget pitches

COMMENTARY

Edited by Jen DiMascio

Congressional EditorJen DiMascio blogs at:

AviationWeek.com/ares

[email protected]


A bill by Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.)

would exempt the International

Space Station, heavy-lift Space

Launch System and Orion crew

vehicle from termination.

NAS

A


A large, classified unmanned aircraft developed by Northrop

Grumman is now flyingand it demonstrates a major ad-

vance in combining stealth and aerodynamic efficiency.

Defense and intelligence officials say the secret unmanned aerial

system (UAS), designed for intelligence, surveillance and recon-

naissance (ISR) missions, is scheduled to enter production for the

U.S. Air Force and could be operational by 2015.

Funded through the Air Forces classified budget, the program to build this new UAS, dubbed the RQ-180, was awarded to Northrop Grumman after a competition that included Boeing and Lockheed Martin. The aircraft will con-duct the penetrating ISR mission that has been left unaddressed, and under wide debate, since retirement of the Lockheed SR-71 in 1998.

Neither the Air Force nor Northrop Grumman would speak about the clas-sified airplane. When queried about the project, Air Force spokeswoman Jen-nifer Cassidy said, The Air Force does not discuss this program.

The RQ-180 carries radio-frequency sensors such as active, electronically scanned array (AESA) radar and pas-sive electronic surveillance measures, according to one defense official. It could also be capable of electronic at-tack missions.

This aircrafts design is key for the shift of Air Force ISR assets away from permissive environmentssuch as Iraq and Afghanistan, where Northrop Grummans non-stealthy Global Hawk and General Atomics Reaper operateand toward operations in contested or denied airspace. The new UAS under-pins the Air Forces determination to re-tire a version of the RQ-4B Global Hawk

Amy Butler and Bill Sweetman Washington

Return of

the PenetratorStealth takes over where speed left off

with new, classified unmanned aircraft

after 2014, despite congressional resis-tance. The RQ-180 eclipses the smaller, less stealthy and shorter-range RQ-170 Sentinel (see page 22).

If the previous patterns for secret ISR aircraft operations are followed, the new UAV will be jointly controlled by the Air Force and the CIA, with the program managed by the Air Forces Rapid Capabilities Office and flight

operations sustained by the Air Force. This arrangement has been used for the RQ-170, which is operated by the Air Forces 30th Reconnaissance Sqdn., according to a fact sheet the Air Force released after one of the aircraft turned up in Iran.

Northrop Grummans financial re-ports point to a possible award of a secret UAS contract in 2008, when the company disclosed a $2 billion in-crease in the backlog in its Integrated Systems division. This is the operating unit responsible for building the B-2 bomber, Global Hawk and Fire Scout UAS and X-47B unmanned combat air system (UCAS) demonstrator. This year, Northrop Grumman financial re-ports acknowledged that an unnamed aircraft program entered low-rate

RON

NIE O

LSTHOO

RN CO

NCEPT FO

R AW&ST

This concept created for AW&ST of the

RQ-180 shows a cranked-kite design

and high-aspect ratio wings.

GOO

GLE EARTH PHO

TOS

Global Hawk, Davis said, We did not do that without carefully looking at how we cover that [mission] with the U-2 and other classified platforms. But when asked during the open congres-sional hearing to explain, he said, Youd probably need to go into detail within another forum.

In September, Lt. Gen. Robert Otto, the Air Force deputy chief of staff for ISR, said the services first priority in intelligence, surveillance and reconnais-sance is to rebalance and optimize our integrated ISR capabilities.

The mix is not where it needs to be, he said. We are over-invested in per-missive ISR and we have to transform the force to fight and win in contested environments. We will seek a more balanced fleet of both manned and unmanned platforms that are able to penetrate denied airspace and provide unprecedented levels of persistence.

The Air Force could not afford to buy and maintain the target number of 65 MQ-9 Reaper and MQ-1 Predator com-bat air patrols beyond 2014, Otto added, possibly pointing to a shift in priorities to the new Northrop system.

These public statements are a by-product of an internal debate over the number of the new secret UAS to be acquired. While there is apparently agreement on the need for a small silver-bullet force for special military and CIA missions, a larger fleet could be an enabler for fighters and bombers against a wide range of targets. A 2009 report by the influential think tank the Center for Strategic and Budgetary As-

sessments recommends a force of five 10-aircraft squadrons of high-altitude, stealthy, ISR unmanned penetrators. But such a large fleet would be costly and could compete for funding with the Joint Strike Fighter, the Long-Range Strike Bomber and other high-priority programs.

In addition, if the U.S. procures more than a few of the secret RQ-180 aircraft, it will be harder to keep them under wraps. Historically, the Air Force has resisted establishing operational units at Area 51, its most secure known op-erating base, because maintaining compartmentalization there between multiple secret programs becomes dif-ficult. For example, workers are usually confined to their buildings when a clas-sified program other than their own is performing tests outside. The disrup-tion to work grows if one program is running at an operational tempo.

In April, Ottos predecessor as depu-ty chief of staff for ISR, Lt. Gen. Larry James, acknowledged that the Air Force had learned lessons about the need to more widely disseminate infor-mation on classified programs to en-sure operational commanders are fully aware of their capabilities. Responding to a question from Aviation Week at a Stimson Center event in Washington, James said, We have a whole host of programs covering all the different en-vironments, and we ensure that as we develop new capabilities we are in con-versations with people at the right lev-els. We are much better today than we were 10-15 years ago, [when] youd have this new super-secret thing and youd turn up at the combatant commanders door at the start of an operation. Thats not a good place to be.

The RQ-180 has its roots in Northrop Grummans Joint Unmanned Combat Air System (J-UCAS) project. The main reason for J-UCASs cancella-tion in late 2005 was the divergence in requirements. The Navy wanted a carrier-based aircraft, which led to the X-47B program. The Air Force sought a larger, longer-range global strike enabler that would be much more ca-pable than the RQ-170, which was then being developed.


Tap the icon in the digital edition of AW&ST for a detailed look at the development of stealthy UAS, or go to

AviationWeek.com/stealthuas

initial production, the Pentagon term for low-volume deliveries that begin as testing nears completion and be-fore the program is approved for full production.

Beyond the financial disclosures, pub-licly available overhead imagery shows new shelters and hangars sized for an aircraft with a 130-ft.-plus wing span at Northrops Palmdale, Calif., plant and at Area 51, the Air Forces secure flight-test center at Groom Lake, Nev. (see photos below). The company also pushed for a substantial expansion of its Palmdale

production facilities in 2010, perhaps to support work on the RQ-180

(AW&ST Nov. 22, 2010, p. 28).The new aircrafts exis-tence explains an incon-

sistency: Air Force offi-cials have frequently

called for a new, penetrating

ISR capa-bility. Yet

there has

been no public evidence that the service has been planning to develop such an aircraft.

At a House Armed Services Commit-tee hearing in April, Lt. Gen. Charles Davis, the Air Forces top uniformed acquisition official, said the service has no requirement for more Global Hawks beyond 2014 and wants to use that money for much higher priorities.

Defending the planned cuts to the

In 2009-10, as the RQ-180 neared flight testing, shelters were built over

ramps and engine test pits at Palmdale, Calif. (left). Completed between

2006 and 2009 and shielded from view behind an earthen berm, this han-

gar at Area 51, Nev. (above), is most likely the home of the new aircraft.


A fiscal 2007 Navy budget document disclosed that the J-UCAS program had been split in December 2005 into a Navy demonstration effort (which led to the X-47B) and an Air Force clas-sified program. At the same time, Northrop openly discussed a range of longer-winged X-47C configurations, the largest being a 172-ft.-span design with two engines derived from General Electrics CF34 and capable of carry-ing a 10,000-lb. weapon load.

The RQ-180 is smaller than that con-cept, and it is not clear whether it will conduct strike missions. It is similar in size and endurance to the Global Hawk, which weighs 32,250 lb. and can stay on station for 24 hr. 1,200 nm from its base. The much smaller RQ-170 is limited to 5-6 hr. of operation.

A key feature of the RQ-180s design is an improvement in all-aspect, broad-band radar cross-section reduction over Lockheed Martins F-117, F-22 and F-35. This is optimized to provide pro-tection from low- and high-frequency threat emitters from all directions. The design also merges stealth with superi-or aerodynamic efficiency for increased altitude, range and time on station.

The aircraft uses a version of Northrops stealthy cranked-kite de-sign, as does the X-47B, with a highly swept centerbody and long, slender outer wings. Northrop Grumman en-gineers publicly claimed (before the launch of the classified program) that the cranked-kite is scalable and adapt-able, in contrast to the B-2s shape, which has an unbroken leading edge. The RQ-180s centerbody length and volume can be greater relative to the vehicles size.

Computational fluid dynamics per-mit new stealth aircraft to achieve sailplane-like efficiency, industry of-ficials say. The management of complex three-dimensional airflow is the key to achieving laminar flow over much of the wing and designing stealth-compatible exhaust and inlet systems that are lighter and more efficient than those on the B-2.

Aerodynamics and stealth are often at odds. The B-2s toothpick leading edg-essharp at the nose and wingtip and blunter in betweenare the result of a hard-fought trade-off between the team trying to optimize aerodynamic perfor-mance and the group concerned with making it hard to detect. Maintaining a high degree of laminar flow on a swept wing is an achievement in itself, because spanwise air flow tends to induce turbu-

lence and is not made any easier by pos-sible spillage from overwing inlets.

The pursuit of laminar flow and ef-ficiency likely drove the development of new structural and manufactur-ing technologies. Scaled Composites, which Northrop Grumman acquired in 2007, is a world leader in building large composite airframes outside-in in fe-male molds, resulting in a consistent and fastener-free surface.

Engine integration always presents challenges for stealthy designs. The length and volume of the serpentine inlet and exhaust systems (used to

shield metal engine components from radar) are proportional to engine di-ameter, because the duct curvature radius must increase with its area to avoid distortion. Also, higher-bypass engines, which are larger in diameter, tend to be less tolerant of flow distor-tion than low-bypass types. This is one reason why most subsonic stealth air-craft, including the B-2, use adapted fighter engines at a significant penalty to fuel economy.

The RQ-180 could use a medium- bypass-ratio engine, similar to the modified CF34 engine eyed for early

UNMANNED SYSTEMS

The Mach 3 D-21 UAS is developed by Lockheed, initially to be launched at supersonic speed by modified A-12. After a fatal accident, it is modified with a rocket booster for B-52 launch. Four operational missions are attempted without success.

The Teledyne Ryan AQM-91A Compass Arrow, designed for the CIA and U.S. Air Force to overfly Chinas nuclear sites, makes its first flight. Twenty-eight are built but no overflights are attempted.

The Compass Arrow and D-21 are canceled owing to a ban on China overflights and the emergence of better reconnaissance satellites.

19721962 1968

Heritage of Stealthy UAS

Family BusinessSecret stealth UAS must be viewed

in context of related programs

Amy Butler and Bill Sweetman Washington

In December 2011, Iran proudly dis-played on state television a stealthy U.S. unmanned aircraft it claimed it

had downed while conducting recon-naissance overflights. The trophy was a Lockheed Martin RQ-170 Sentinel, an aircraft publicly acknowledged by the U.S. Air Force two years earlier.

Even before, the existence of the

RQ-170 had been a poorly kept secret. The unmanned aerial system (UAS) was operating out of Afghanistan and flying over Pakistan and Iran for an un-determined period before it was photo-graphed at Kandahar AB, Afghanistan, in 2008. Later, in 2011, it was involved in the raid in which Osama bin Laden was killed (AW&ST Dec. 12, 2011, p. 19).

U.S. AIR F

ORCE

U.S. AIR FORCE

X-47-based concepts. Its engine prob-ably has more power than the Global Hawks 7,600-lb.-thrust Rolls-Royce AE3007H, to provide better altitude performance and electrical power for payload growth.

Operationally, the RQ-180s range could be extended by inflight refuel-ing, though it is unclear whether the UAS takes advantage of this technol-ogy. Before 2008, Northrop Grum-man repeatedly stated its belief that the endurance of an X-47-based air-craft could be pushed to 100 hr. with refueling. Beyond that point, the need

to reengineer components to extend the time they could be flown between inspections was predicted to be bur-densome. The limiting factor on Global Hawk endurance beyond its onboard fuel capacity is oil life.

The Navy pursued probe-and-drogue refueling under the X-47B pro-gram, but it used a manned surrogate aircraft for flight tests. The Air Force separately conducted tests in 2008 us-ing its boom-equipped tankers and a manned surrogate, but after 2008, no progress with boom refueling of un-manned aircraft was reported publicly.

Incorporating advances in stealth and aerodynamics, the RQ-180 shows that low-observable technologies can still adapt to counter new threats such as low-frequency radar. It is a stepping-stone to the development of the Air Forces Long Range Strike Bomber, while also complementing the B-2 and other long-range strike assets. By contrast to its predecessors, the RQ-180 secures a foothold for stealth in future war plans, in which extremely expensive do everything platforms are eclipsed by families of networked, cooperative systems. c


The Air Force, CIA and National Reconnaissance Office start a competition between Lockheed and Boeing, which later teamed, to design a UAS code-named Quartz, capable of loitering in Soviet airspace for as long as 40 hr. It is later partly acknowledged under the name Advanced Airborne Reconnaissance System (AARS).

The AARS is terminated in December due to high costs

and collapse of the Soviet threat. Some NRO officials continue to

advocate for a less ambitious version, known as Tier III.

The Tier III mission is split between a long-range, non-stealthy Tier II Plus, which becomes Global Hawk, and the small stealthy Tier III Minus, a subscale AARS. The latter becomes the RQ-3 DarkStar under a sole-source Defense Advanced

contract to Lockheed and Boeing.

The USAF Scientific Advisory Boards New World Vistas project makes first public use of the term unmanned combat air vehicle (UCAV).

DarkStar makes its first flight in March but crashes on its second flight in April.

1983 1992 1994 19961995

The Pentagon played down that embarrassing loss of the UAS. One reason may now be clear. Defense and intelligence sources say the Senti-nel was the result of a quick-reaction project designed for specific missions, and not with an eye toward an endur-ing presence in the fleet. That position was reserved for a new, secret UASNorthrop Grummans stealthy RQ-180 (see preceding article).

To fully understand this new UAS, one must view it in the context of the larger family of systems the Air Force envisions to include long-range strike and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) platforms. A 2010 presentation by the Air Forces

director of operational requirements at the time, Maj. Gen. David Scott, made that connection.

Emergence of the RQ-180 allowed the Air Force to reduce requirements for what was once called the Next-Generation Bomber (NGB), a program terminated in 2009 because of its high cost. The follow-on Long-Range Strike Bomber (LRS-B) is a less-expensive option that will rely on interoperabil-ity with the RQ-180 and other systems in the family.

In 2008, when Northrop is believed to have won the contract to develop the stealthy penetrating UAS, the Air Force was facing criticism from then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates that

it was falling short in supporting ISR requirements for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. But behind the scenes, defense planners and the intelligence community were worried about a lack of information on some well-defended locations such as North Korea and Iran.

This was also in the wake of the Air Force and Navys divorce over the effort to jointly develop a single stealthy UAS capable of ISR collection and striking from land or sea. The Joint Unmanned Combat Air Systems (J-UCAS) pro-gram was terminated late in 2005. The Navy, in search of carrier-based ISR, proceeded with the X-47B UCAS demonstration and now plans to buy a

U.S. AIR FORCEResearch Projects Agency (Darpa)


where weve taken a really close look on the classified side to make sure the investments are closely aligned. We are not missing opportunities there to take cuts on the unclassified side. . . . There were some shifts, [but] nothing overly major at this point.

Because of war requirements in Iraq and Afghanistan, where coalition air forces could operate with little threat from the ground, the Air Force had poured funding into ISR collectors

follow-on called the Unmanned Carrier-Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike (Uclass) system. The Air Force directed its funding and technology to a classified program, likely the RQ-180.

Despite heavy pressure on defense spending, the RQ-180 is moving for-ward. Cuts to classified budgets are relatively proportional to those for white-world programs, says acting Air Force Secretary Eric Fanning. This is the first time Ive been in the Air Force

UNMANNED SYSTEMS

A 2005 Northrop Grumman pro-

posal for an unmanned ISR-strike

prototype was a step on the way to

the RQ-180.

NORTHROP GRUMMAN

without stealthy characteristics such as the Beechcraft King Air-based MC-12W Project Liberty and Blue Devil 1 intel platforms.

For a decade now we have built the most incredible permissive ISR capaci-ty and capability that anybody has ever seen, Air Combat Commands chief, Gen. Michael Hostage, said in Sep-tember. We are being forced to build a capacity [with the Reaper] I know I cant sustain, and I know I dont need based on the national strategy, which calls for operating in heavily defended airspace, as well. He says Pentagon officials are sorting through what is needed to handle the more challeng-ing threats. We are talking about the entire ISR constructhow much in permissive, how much in contested and how much in denied is needed.

Not since the Mach 3 SR-71 program ended in 1998 has the Pentagon been able to overfly targets in hostile air-space to collect intelligence. The prolif-eration of longer-range and integrated air-defense systems, coupled with its high operating cost, banished the Black-bird to museums. And in 1999, the Pen-tagon terminated the RQ-3 DarkStar UAS, a potential successor under devel-

The Quadrennial Defense Review terminates J-UCAS. The Navy moves forward with a simpler program aimed at a carrier-based demonstration and the Air Force pursues a new stealth UAS (AW&ST July 24, 2006, p. 64).

2006

First flight of the Lockheed Martin P-175 Polecat demonstrator is conducted in secret. Unveiled in July 2006, the UAS crashes later in the year.

2005

The Pentagon establishes USAF/Navy/Darpa Joint Unmanned Combat Air System (J-UCAS) program.

2003

The X-45A makes its first flight.

2002

The Pentagon terminates DarkStar due to budget cuts and concerns about the designs stability.

1999

Darpa contracts with Boeing Phantom Works for two stealthy X-45A UCAV demonstrators.

Tap the references in red in the digital edition of AW&ST to access our exclusive coverage of UAS developments.

DARPA

LOCKHEED MARTIN


opment by Lockheed Martin and Boe-ing as a stealthy adjunct to Northrop Grummans RQ-4 Global Hawk, after it encountered flight-stability problems. These developments left unanswered a Pentagon Joint Requirements Over-sight Council mission-need statement for an aircraft capable of operating in defended airspace for long periods.

Though satellites are capable of peering behind borders, they lack the persistence and flexibility of aircraft. Satellites are limited by slant ranges, a problem that aircraft can mitigate by altering their flight paths. Also, adver-saries can predict when a spacecraft will fly overhead and adjust their op-erations accordingly.

High-speed platforms continue to be evaluated, such as Lockheed Martins hypersonic SR-72 concept (AW&ST Nov. 4, p. 18), but planners leery of acquisition foul-ups and higher-risk technology opted for stealth in order to field a system as soon as 2015.

The expectation that the RQ-180 will be fielded soon has helped to ce-ment support for the Air Forces abrupt change of heart on the Northrop Grum-man Global Hawk high-altitude, long-endurance UASonce the centerpiece for the services ISR development plans. The Block 30 Global Hawk was eyed as a replacement for the manned U-2 for stand-off ISR collection, in which air-craft just loiter outside hostile airspace

peering into enemy territory to gather images and signals. Though not able to fly as high (50,000-60,000 ft. versus the U-2s 70,000 ft.-plus), the Global Hawk could loiter for a day or longer and not expose pilots to the health hazards of prolonged missions at extreme altitudes, a problem during long flights supporting operations over Afghanistan.

Despite deeming Global Hawk criti-cal to national security in 2011, the Air Force less than a year later proposed terminating the Block 30 version, cit-ing the high operating cost it had once defended. The Air Force also cited lackluster performance of the Block 30s electro-optical and radar-sensor suite, despite earlier assertions that these issues were manageable (AW&ST June 13, 2011, p. 35).

Now the more advanced, stealthy RQ-180, capable of penetrating an adversarys airspace, has superseded the Global Hawk. The Air Force is now standing behind the U-2, with some cockpit and sensor upgrades, as its workhorse stand-off intelligence col-lector, with the RQ-180 poised to take on the penetrating mission.

In a high-level roles-and-missions trade, the Air Force assumed authority for developing a stealthier, longer-range, land-based UAS capable of penetrating the most defended airspace, guarded by advanced surface-to-air missiles and jammers. Meanwhile, the Navy,

is mired in a debate over how stealthy to make its Uclass air vehicle when a high degree of stealth would push costs higher. With the Air Force operating the RQ-180, the Navy would have the option to cut its costs on Uclass.

Perhaps indicative of the debate, the Navy has been coy on the require-ments and design specifications for Uclass. The Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Staff are pushing for Uclass to operate only in contested airspacethe Pentagons word for areas that are defended but not with the most advanced weapons systems. But Navy officials are hop-ing for a more survivablethough more expensivedesign capable of operating over the best-defended ar-eas or denied airspace, in Pentagon parlance. Furthermore, the Air Force plans to retain its MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper UAS for operation in uncontested or lightly contested air-space. The so-called MQ-X, which was to be a Reaper follow-on, disappeared from Air Force long-range planning in 2012, another sign its UAS planning was refocusing around the RQ-180.

If the RQ-180 can prove itself op-erationally, the Air Force will have ad-dressed its need for a high-altitude penetrator. The next big challenge in rebalancing the services ISR fleet will be to define the future of the Predator and Reaper and their potential successors. c

The X-47B makes its first flight.

An RQ-170 goes down in Iran; Iranian military leaders display the aircraft on television.

The first catapult takeoff and arrested landing of the X-47B. See video at: ow.ly/mS64L

The RQ-180 is in testing.

2011 2013

The Air Force acknowledges existence of RQ-170 Sentinel, made by Lockheed Martin Skunk Works, after it is photographed operating in Afghanistan (AW&ST Dec. 14, 2009, p. 27).

2009

Northrop Grumman reports a spike in restricted programs contracts, potentially connected to the RQ-180 (AW&ST Aug. 29, 2011, p. 46).

2008

The Navy selects Northrop Grummans X-47B for its Unmanned Combat Air System Demonstrator (UCAS-D) program and orders two aircraft.

2007

Boeing unveils self-funded improvements in the X-45C, dubbed the Phantom Ray (AW&ST May 11, 2009, p. 37).

U.S. NAVY

BOEING


European aerospace manufactur-ers are turning up the pressure on governments to develop a

pan-European approach to the conti-nents medium-altitude, long-endur-ance (MALE) unmanned air vehicle requirements.

But their protests appear to be fall-ing on deaf ears as another European nation signs up to purchase the MQ-9 Reaper.

The Netherlands announced plans Nov. 21 to introduce four General Atomics MQ-9 Reapers into full op-erational service by 2017.

The decision sees the Netherlands joining Italy, the U.K. and, more re-cently, France, as the latest member of a rapidly growing Reaper-operating community in Europe.

The Hague opted to purchase the MQ-9 after sending out a request for information for a MALE UAV to 19 manufacturers. Royal Netherlands Air Force procurement officers re-ceived just nine responses, only three of which were complete, according to a letter sent to the Dutch Parliament by Defense Minister Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert.

The General Atomics Reaper was the only model that offers the off-the-shelf capability the Netherlands was demanding, she pointed out.

The U.K. and Italy already operate Reapers; France will follow this year after taking delivery of its first two drones under a letter of agreement signed in August.

The Reaper purchases in Europe so far have been driven by the re-quirements of individual countries, or urgent operational requirements, but Europes governments are work-ing toward an organic capability. In November, several European states, including the Netherlands, agreed to devise a set of common standards for developing MALE UAVs and to estab-lish a community of European drone users that could support development of remotely piloted vehicles that could compete with U.S. and Israeli technol-ogy in the 2020-25 timeframe.

During a two-day meeting with the European Defense Agency (EDA) in Brussels Nov. 18-19, defense ministers agreed the community would welcome any EU member state that either has, or intends to acquire, MALE drones.

Speaking to French lawmakers Nov. 5, the French air force chief of staff, Gen. Denis Mercier, said he is in favor of a European MALE development in the future, but does not see the possi-bility of drone production before 2022.

Between now and then we have to fight the capacity gap and, even more

Tony Osborne London and Amy Svitak Paris

Members OnlyEuropes Reaper club grows with Dutch

purchase of General Atomics UAV

UNMANNED SYSTEMS

important, acquire the expertise that will allow us to specify operational re-quirements, for UAVs, he said. He did, however, laud a push by major Europe-an defense contractors in France, Ger-many and Italy that urges European governments to fund development of a pan-European drone.

It is 1 billion [$1.35 billion] for three nations, thus 333 million per na-tion over 10 years, or 30-odd million per year. If we are no longer capable of making this kind of effort as part of a research and development budget, we might as well give up having this indus-trial capacity, Mercier said of the June proposal by EADS, Frances Dassault Aviation and Italys Finmeccanica to quickly shore-up Europes MALE gap, adding that there is also the proposal of a European Reaper community that is very attractive and complementary [to the MALE proposal].

Meanwhile, agreements between the U.K. and France under the 2010 Lan-caster House Treaties have London and Paris drawing up staff require-ments for an unmanned combat air vehicle, a project for which France is budgeting 700 million for 2014-19, French Defense Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said in November. The two governments are also discussing com-mon requirements for a MALE UAV, though negotiations on development have been shelved in the near-term.

Elsewhere in Europe, Germany has expressed a need for an armed UAV, and Spanish air force officialsdespite facing deep financial challengeshave said that procurement of a MALE UAV is one of their highest priorities (see page 35).

In the Netherlands, military officials are keen to explore the potential ben-efits of closer cooperation with neigh-boring Reaper operators. The Hague already has stated it accepts that there are few options for international cooperation at the initial stage of the program, but that it is already looking beyond, with Hennis-Plasschaert say-ing she is preparing to draw up letters of intent with France and also with Germany, which expressed a similar interest in coordinated capability.

The Netherlands plans to use the Reaper mainly for deployed operations but also to support civil authorities in

The French air forces first Reaper

crews are nearing completion of their

training at Holloman, AFB, N.M.

Aviation Week Technology 9 2013

Documents

Transcript of Aviation Week Technology 9 2013