Smart, Stand-Off weapons coming soon

We're getting close to source selections for the weapons which the ADF believes will transform the Hornet's strike capabilities.
The RAAF's reach and striking power have, for much of the past 50 years, been a function of platform performance and range. Over the past decade, however, the relative importance of weapon range and performance has been growing - now these are becoming key determinants of RAAF combat capability.

The decision to retire the F-111 early, from as soon as 2010, has meant that the F/A-18 Hornet will have to assume the strategic strike role in addition to its existing air defence and attack duties. To match the "Pig's" range and deliver the combat effect that the ADF requires, the Hornet will be backed up by a new fleet of A330-200 tankers and armed with a new family of stand-off weapons, as well as a new generation of "smart" bombs.

The stand-off weapons will be acquired through Project Air 5418 - Follow-On Stand-Off Weapon (FOSOW), for which a source selection is likely within weeks of the publication of this edition of ADM. And by the time this edition is published Defence is likely to have announced the winner of the $75 million Bomb Improvement Program, Project Air 5409.

Meanwhile, the RAAF is still waiting for Initial Operational Capability (IOC) of the Lockheed Martin-Rafael AGM-142E stand-off missile aboard its F-111s. Originally slated to enter service last year, these weapons will now become operational next year. And they will be the RAAF's only tactical stand-off capability (except for the much more expensive Harpoon anti-ship missile) until the FOSOW enters front line service.

Tenders for Air 5418 closed earlier this year. It has been confirmed to ADM that EADS did not bid the Taurus KEPD 350, which is understood to have performed well in the original Air 5418 ITR evaluation back in 1999-2000. It is understood that meeting the ADF's timeline for introduction of the new weapon would have interfered unacceptably with development and integration activities already under way for other Taurus KEPD 350 customers so the decision was taken not to bid for Air 5418.

This left just two contenders in the contest, both American. Back in April the Pentagon's Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified the US Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to Australia of Boeing's AGM-84H Stand-off Land Attack Missile - Expanded Response (SLAM-ER) and the Lockheed Martin AGM-158 Joint Air-Surface Stand-Off Missile (JASSM).

According to the Pentagon Australia has asked for up to 260 weapons. The disparity in price between the SLAM-ER and JASSM, as presented in the Pentagon document, is startling: the total value of SLAM-ER purchase, if all options are exercised, could be as high as US $430 million, including live and training rounds, support equipment, integration and certification support, spares, missile support and test equipment, personnel training and equipment, US Government and contractor technical and logistics support, and other related elements of program support.

By comparison, according to the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, the cost of 260 JASSMs, including the same support, training and spares package as SLAM-ER, would be only US$163 million. However, ADM understands from non-government sources that the JASSM package is significantly more expensive than this; Lockheed Martin sources have declined to name the price they tendered, but affirm it is still cheaper than that attributed to the SLAM-ER.

Like the SLAM-ER, the sale of JASSM to Australia would "contribute to US security objectives by providing a coalition partner with enhanced strike capability for its tactical fighter or maritime patrol fleets," according to the Pentagon. "This will improve the RAAF ability to participate in coalition operations, provide common logistical support with the USAF [and USN, in the case of SLAM-ER], and enhance the lethality of its forces. Australia will have no difficulty absorbing these weapons into its armed forces."

Notwithstanding that the difference in price between the two systems isn't as great as the Pentagon's notification suggests, the distinction is sharpened by comments that defence minister Senator Robert Hill made to The Australian newspaper earlier this year. He is reported as saying then that he would prefer to buy one family of weapons only and that this family of weapons should also be capable of arming the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter without any difficulty.

Whichever weapon is selected, the RAAF needs to balance price, short-term availability and capability against integration issues with not one but four separate platforms: the F/A-18 Hornet' F-35A Joint Strike Fighter; AP-3C Hornet and, very probably, the P-8A Multi-mission Maritime Aircraft (MMA).

At present SLAM-ER is combat proven, available off the shelf and would require no physical integration with either the Hornet or AP-3C Orion, though it would require some systems integration with the AP-3C which differs considerably from the US Navy's post-Avionics Improvement Program (AIP) P-3C Orions. And nor is it on the threshold list of weapons to be integrated with the USAF's F-35A Conventional Take-Off and Landing (CTOL) variant, which is what the RAAF will acquire.

However, SLAM-ER is currently part of the baseline weapons fit for the P-8A and therefore could transition almost seamlessly from the AP-3C to the new aircraft (if the RAAF acquires it - though few doubt this will happen). Also it is available off the shelf, the RAAF's SLAM-ERs would be identical to the US Navy's says Boeing, and it offers both autonomous and Man In The Loop (MITL) targeting with a moving target capability.

Cost and capability aside (it lacks the range of JASSM), the SLAM-ER would need some integration with the AP-3C and then probably a lot with the F-35A; the RAAF would need to shoulder the cost of both integration programs if the US Navy decides it doesn't want SLAM-ER to arm its own F-35s. That might discourage Canberra from acquiring SLAM-ER.

By contrast, JASSM is only just entering USAF service, would certainly require full physical and systems integration with the AP-3C, and some with the Hornet, but none with the F-35. It isn't clear whether JASSM would need integration with the P-8A also; if the US Navy doesn't want this weapon for its MMAs, then Canberra would have to pay for its integration onto the P-8A. Would this be prohibitive?

It had been suggested that, given the current doubt over the F-35's in-service date, the RAAF could acquire SLAM-ER as a short-term measure for its Orions and Hornets and then replace this with JASSM once the F-35 enters service from about 2013 onwards.

This might be a viable scenario if the F-35 is delayed, but while the RAAF and Government acknowledge the risk of a delay in the JSF program, they are planning on the basis that any delay will not be excessive. Certainly, Hill's comments would seem to indicate some resistance to the idea of an "interim" weapon within government.

Apart from anything else, at a time of continued fiscal constraint, Defence may find it hard to acquire credible war stocks of two major weapon systems in relatively short order, both of which will require at least some integration with current or future platforms. Canberra's view may that it is still cheaper to acquire one family of weapons, pay whatever it costs (within reason) for the necessary integration work and devote the balance of project funds to a substantial warstock.

The disparity in price between the two weapons probably favours JASSM. Even allowing for some optimistic Pentagon pricing figures and the likely integration costs with the Hornet and AP-3C (and possibly the P-8A), it may still be cheaper to acquire JASSM for both the legacy fleet and the F-35.

However, until the FOSOW enters service - possibly in 2008, possibly later - Defence must depend on the AGM-142E Popeye missile which is still being integrated with the F-111 under a program worth about $439 million, at February 05 prices.

Integration of the AGM-142 and F-111 has been a slow and complicated process. Predictably, software integration and testing have been the principal causes of the delay. But Defence says that these are now virtually complete and the integration, test and certification program is still on track against the revised schedule drawn up nearly two years ago.

Operational Testing and Evaluation (OT&E) is scheduled to begin later this year and if all goes well the AGM-142E should be fully operational early in 2006. This will provide the RAAF with a stand-off strike capability to tide it over until the arrival of the FOSOW and its integration with the F/A-18 Hornet and AP-3C Orion.

Boeing Australia Ltd is the prime contractor for the F-111 integration process. This is the first time such a complex weapon-platform integration task has been carried out entirely in Australia and the job has involved integrating the missile's own software and associated data link pod with the F-111C mission computer. The difficulties of achieving this have been compounded by airframe wiring modifications required to configure the F-111 for both the AGM-142 and the FOSOW, which was originally intended also to arm this aircraft.

More recently, aircraft software certification issues have added a further layer of complexity to the integration process. These were largely resolved last year and the DMO said then reports it was confident live weapons tests would begin around mid-2005 with Initial Operating Capability scheduled for 2006. The DMO's current line is that dates and schedules indicating changes in capability are classified so no more recent data is available.

The wisdom of pressing on with the AGM-142 is not in question: pending the arrival of the FOSOW the RAAF needs a stand-off weapon - if nothing else, to help the service understand and exploit the capabilities it offers and prepare itself mentally and doctrinally for the arrival of the FOSOW. In any case, the F-111 won't be withdrawn from service until the Hornet/FOSOW/tanker combination is fully operational and deliv erring on its promise.

This is likely to be the last weapon-related enhancement to the F-111 before its retirement. Defence has confirmed to ADM that the F-111 will not be equipped with the enhanced "smart" bombs to be acquired under Air 5409.

Part of the current Hornet upgrade program is designed to equip the aircraft to use these new weapons and the FOSOW to their full potential, including transferring radar and GPS data to the weapon before launch. Defence has decided not to implement a similar upgrade for the F-111 so these aircraft will continue to fly with the legacy (and still very potent) Paveway systems currently in the RAAF inventory.

ADM understands that the source evaluation for Project Air 5409 was completed by early-May and a source selection could be announced before this edition is published. The original version of the DCP stated that Air 5409 aims to enhance the ADF's existing unguided and laser-guided general-purpose bombs with an autonomous, all-weather and precision-guided capability based on GPS. "It may also seek to provide a limited stand-off capability for this weapon", the original DCP added.

There are three contenders to provide a weapon which the revised Defence Capability Plan says will enable "all-weather, autonomous accurate delivery of ADF Mk 80 and BLU-109-series bombs against a broad spectrum of targets."

Air 5409 saw a restricted tender with Raytheon pitting its Enhanced Paveway II laser/GPS-guided bomb kit against Boeing's JDAM GPS-guided bomb kit (possibly with a recently demonstrated laser guidance capability) and Lockheed Martin's own version of the laser/GPS-guided Enhanced Paveway II. Whichever weapon is selected will be fitted to RAAF Mk84 (2,000lb), Mk 82 (500lb) and BLU-109 (2000lb-class penetrator) bombs in the current inventory and should be in service and integrated aboard the F/A-18 Hornet by 2008.

While GPS guidance enables fully "blind" weapons launch (where rules of engagement permit), laser guidance requires the target to be designated either by an aircraft or a ground observer and so maintains a man in the loop. However, weather and battlefield smoke and obscurants can erode the effectiveness of laser guided weapons, hence the recent development of GPS-guided munitions.

ADM understands that none of the weapons offered provides a significant increase in the stand-off range currently available from the Paveway kits currently in RAAF service. Any real increase in range, at least if JDAM is selected, could come from development of the extended range JDAM-ER currently being developed by Hawker de Havilland under a Capability and Technology Demonstrator (CTD) program, Project Air 5425.

Prototypes using a derivative of DSTO's Kerkanya fold-out wing kit were successfully test-flown late last year at Woomera, demonstrating a 60 nautical mile range from 40,000ft. Further work is required before the JDAM-ER is production-ready, ADM understands, and a limiting factor in progress at present is understood to be access to range and T&E assets at a time when the ADF has several aerospace T&E programs under way. Defence and Hawker de Havilland have been negotiating an extension to the original CTD contract schedule to enable further testing to continue.

The USA's original enthusiasm for JDAM-ER has dissipated somewhat, due mainly to the development of the GPS-guided Small-Diameter Bomb (SDB). This is currently in development for the F-15E, F/A-22 Raptor and F-35A and will enter service initially aboard the F-15 in 2007.

The US Navy also reportedly has a requirement for the SDB to arm its Hornets and Boeing is fairly confident the Navy will eventually acquire the SDB. Whether the RAAF will follow suit is unclear: the language coming out of Canberra suggests the SDB will arm the RAAF's F-35s but whether or not it could be acquired for the Hornet, and so lock out the JDAM-ER, is unclear. Much depends on the timing of any US Navy purchase of the SDB.

Having built a close relationship with the US Navy on the back of its Hornet and P-3C Orion fleets, the RAAF has been able to leverage Navy investment in platform and system upgrades and source weapons and equipment from the US Navy inventory. Now it will have to start building a new relationship with the US Air Force on the back of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. One thing's for sure - the RAAF needs a close relationship with at least one of the world's two biggest air forces; it looks as if it will end up enjoying a close relationship with both.

By Gregor Ferguson