Archive: March 30, 2024

US Army refreshes competition for short-range laser

HUNTSVILLE, Ala. — The U.S. Army is evaluating additional 50-kilowatt platforms as it seeks to buy short-range air defense laser weapons, even as its initial four prototypes deploy in U.S. Central Command’s area of operations, a service official told Defense News.

Three of the Army’s Directed Energy Maneuver-Short Range Air Defense systems, or DE M-SHORAD, are in Iraq so the service can experiment with the capability in relevant operational environments. The fourth and last prototype will join the other three after getting some work done, said Lt. Gen. Robert Rasch, the service’s Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies Office director.

“All four will be downrange supporting our soldiers in the fight today,” he said. “What we’re giving up a little bit is our ability to learn how to integrate that capability into the maneuver force, so we have some work to do on the back end. We’re still capturing data; [the Army Test and Evaluation Command] is downrange with us.”

Additionally, the Army will learn from two other 50-kilowatt laser platforms while the first platoon-set of prototypes are away, he explained.

The Army had originally planned to finish the DE M-SHORAD prototyping effort and transition it to Program Executive Office Missiles and Space in 2023. That office had planned to run a competition for the program of record.

But Rasch’s office decided in 2022 that the directed-energy effort needed more time in development, and planned for a fiscal 2025 transfer instead.

The first prototypes consist of a 50-kilowatt laser from Raytheon on a Stryker combat vehicle. Kord Technologies is the lead integrator.

The two new 50-kilowatt platforms the Army will also evaluate, when they are arrive next year, are one option from Washington state-based nLight and another from Lockheed Martin, Rasch said. The designs are different, he added, so aspects like beam quality, affordability and reliability are also expected to differ.

The Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies Office now plans to spend approximately two years to evaluate options before deciding on a way forward.

“We’ve got a few different designs, so we’ll take the data from what we’ve received already, the data that we collect off these other two systems, and combine that together to tee up for the senior leaders, probably late ’26, early ’27 time frame,” Rasch said.

“We want to maintain competition, so it doesn’t really help if we spent a lot of money and almost unfair if we kind of load the deck and we pass off a program decision to, say, PEO Missiles and Space, and it really isn’t a decision; you’ve got one vendor who’s viable,” Rasch said. “Competition makes everybody better.”

While this effort means moving even slower, Rasch did say he “would have loved to have had them all done and be programs of record, but we probably couldn’t have afforded them all anyway. So this gives us a little time to really set up a better competitive space for that next phase affordability.”

With the DE M-SHORAD systems downrange, he added, the Army will learn about lethality and reliability.

“We’ve tested these in labs for decades,” Rasch said. “Now we’re learning some new lessons on what happens when you operationalize these, when you put them in a really ugly, dirty environment that our soldiers put them in.”

The Army is investing about $100 million a year as it prepares to make a recommendation to Army leadership on a strategy, he noted.

Right now, his office is evaluating 10-, 20-, 50- and 300-kilowatt options for a wide variety of threats and missions. The 300-kilowatt laser is designed for the Indirect Fire Protection Capability, which is a system that will use kinetic, laser and high-powered microwave weapons to destroy threats including rockets, artillery, mortars, drones and cruise missiles. The Army is to receive that laser weapon next year.

Not every laser capability we be at the range at the same time, but the service plans to collect data on power, lethality, affordability and reliability across directed-energy weapons through an integrated test campaign to inform senior leaders, Rasch said.

The process will help the service save some money from a testing perspective and, through operational assessments with the user, capture enough data to help the Army pin down the sweet spot for what it will need to counter threats in various environments, he explained.

Fincantieri inks $1.3B deal with Indonesia for two patrol ships

CHRISTCHURCH, New Zealand — Italian shipbuilder Fincantieri announced March 28 it signed a contract to provide the Indonesian Navy with two 4,900-ton PPA ships, although the government has not yet funded the purchase.

The contract, which is worth €1.2 billion (U.S. $1.3 billion), will see two PPA multipurpose offshore patrol vessels originally destined for the Italian Navy allocated to Indonesia instead.

A Fincantieri news release stated the two 143-meter-long ships “are currently under construction and fitting at the integrated shipyard in Riva Trigoso-Muggiano.”

Defense News reported in October that Italy was in talks with Indonesia over this sale. At the time, Junior Defense Minister Matteo Perego di Cremnago said: ““It is not clear which of the vessels would go to Indonesia; that depends on when a contract is signed.”

“This contract is a milestone for the development of a strategic partnership between our group and Indonesia,” Fincantieri CEO Pierroberto Folgiero said, adding this would be the “first of many significant collaborative opportunities” with Indonesia.

Fincantieri said it is the prime contractor and will “coordinate [with] other industrial partners, including Leonardo, for the customization of the ships’ combat system and the provision of related logistic services.”

However, under Indonesia’s procurement process, the signing of this contract does not constitute a final purchase agreement. Indeed, the shipbuilder noted this contract “is subject to the necessary authorizations from the competent authorities.”

Fincantieri announced in June 2021 that it had won an Indonesian contract for six 6,600-ton FREMM-class frigates and two secondhand Maestrale-class frigates. Discussions for the ships are ongoing, but there is not yet a financed deal for the FREMMs.

The Italian Navy’s PPA vessel Francesco Morosini toured Southeast Asia last year, including stops in Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam and Indonesia. The shipbuilder said Jakarta’s interest stemmed from this campaign.

The Italian Navy has ordered seven PPA vessels in three configurations: light; light plus; and full. The light plus variant adds an anti-air warfare capability, while the full version includes an ability to prosecute anti-submarine missions, too.

The platform features a naval cockpit, situated within a diamond-shaped bridge, to reduce bridge crewing.

The service has received three PPAs, and the shipyard has launched a further three.

The final two are slated for commissioning in August 2025 and August 2026, respectively.

With the two offshore patrol vessels under construction in Italy, there will be minimal opportunities for Indonesia’s state-owned shipbuilder PT PAL to participate in the program. However, the firm is currently building two 6,540-ton Iver Huitfeldt-class frigates for the Indonesian Navy under a $720 million contract signed in May 2021. These use Babcock International’s Arrowhead 140 design.

National Guard wish list would restore fighters cut from 2025 budget

The National Guard’s budgetary wish list would restore the dozen fighter jets the Air Force trimmed in its original fiscal 2025 request, and allow the service to buy all of the F-15EXs it originally planned.

The nearly $2.7 billion unfunded priorities list the Guard submitted to Congress asks for another $690 million to buy six more F-15EX Eagle IIs, and another $660 million for six more F-35A Joint Strike Fighters. The $1.35 billion price tag for the additional fighters makes up a little more than half of the National Guard’s unfunded priorities request.

The Air Force earlier this month released a proposed budget that called for buying 42 F-35As from Lockheed Martin and 18 F-15EXs from Boeing, a reduction of six each from what the service had originally projected it would buy. And the service said it planned to cap the total purchase of F-15EXs next year at 98, down from the 104 the service most recently expected to buy.

Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall said before the budget release the service “had to make some hard choices” to fit within the spending caps set by the Fiscal Responsibility Act Congress passed last year. As a result, the service cut its procurement spending by $1.6 billion and boosted its research, development, test and evaluation budget by a similar amount.

The Air Force also said the delay in the F-35 upgrades known as Technology Refresh 3 partly prompted it to dial back its fighter procurement.

The Air Force’s own unfunded priority list did not ask for any additional fighters in 2025.

The National Guard said in its unfunded priorities list that boosting the F-35 purchase next year will allow the Air National Guard to finish building a sustainable fleet of five squadrons flying the advanced fighter jet and increase its capacity in the Indo-Pacific region. It will also allow the Guard to finish standing up another training squadron to help pilots learn how to fly the F-35.

The Guard said the additional Eagle II fighters would let it finish building a fleet of three combat squadrons that fly F-15EXs and would maximize the defense industrial base’s output of these jets.

And the Guard asked for another $288 million to buy more conformal fuel tanks for F-15EXs to extend their range and capability. The Air National Guard wants to have 54 conformal tanks in all in its inventory.

Another $349 million in the request would help the Air National Guard pay for 16 more C-130J Super Hercules transport aircraft expected to arrive in 2026. Congress has not provided enough money to pay for recapitalizing two C-130H units in the guard, the request said, and the additional money would fix that shortfall.

The Air National Guard also wants another $52 million to give its pilots about 4,600 more flying hours. The unfunded priorities list includes $110.4 million for 803 more recruiters, civil engineers, security forces and maintainers.

Argentina to buy surplus F-16 jets from Denmark

SANTIAGO, Chile — Argentina has signed an agreement to buy 24 surplus F-16 fighter jets from Denmark.

Denmark is replacing its F-16 fleet with new F-35 jets, both of which are made by the American company Lockheed Martin.

Argentine Defense Minister Luis Petri and his Danish counterpart Troels Lund Poulsen signed a letter of intent for the sale in Buenos Aires on March 26. The U.S. ambassador to Argentina, Marc Stanley, attended the event.

“Denmark is donating 19 F-16 jets to Ukraine, and the government has decided to sell 24 Danish F-16 jets to Argentina,” Lund Poulsen said in a statement, describing the transaction as a “possible sale.”

“The decision to sell the Danish jets to Argentina has been carried out in close collaboration with the American government, who has approved the sale of the US produced aircrafts,” the Danish Defence Ministry noted in the statement.

Local military sources in Buenos Aires, speaking to Defense News on the condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of military deals, said Argentina will pay $320 million for the acquisition. They also said banks and the U.S. will provide loans to help finance the deal, which not only includes the aircraft but also weapon systems and other equipment made by U.S. businesses. Denmark is also set to provide simulators and a spares.

Those sources added that the final contract will be signed by the end of April in Copenhagen.

The U.S. Defense Security Cooperation Agency will manage the sale and transfer of weapon systems such as AIM-120 advanced medium-range air-to-air missiles, under the Pentagon’s Foreign Military Sales program.

Denmark’s Acquisition and Logistics Organisation will handle the transfer of surplus F-16s, while the Argentine military’s logistics directorate will surpervise the procurement process.

Negotiations for the deal, which began under Argentina’s previous government led by then-President Alberto Fernandez, also considered the procurement of newly built Chinese/Pakistani-made JF-17 fighter jets.

The potential acquisition of the JF-17 was rejected over concerns it could jeopardize relations with the U.S. military.

Nordic nations ponder military changes with NATO in mind

LONDON — With all Nordic countries now part of NATO, the nations must manage how to reconcile and integrate national as well as regional security needs and initiatives with what the alliance requires, which could necessitate changes to existing command structures, officials have said.

In March 2023, the commanders of the Swedish, Norwegian, Finnish and Danish air forces signed a declaration that envisioned the creation of a joint Nordic air force to protect their shared airspaces.

The concept called for the nations to integrate air command and control, joint operations planning, and execution; create flexible air basing; share situational awareness; and produce common air education programs and training exercises.

While the countries have experience in military cooperation, this level of integration between them is unprecedented. Acting as a coordinated force in the air rather than independently will require a shift in the way each nation approaches its airspace security, according to the chief of operations for the Royal Danish Air Force.

“All nations take great pride in their national commands and forces, and our sovereignty is paramount, [but] in order to effectively join our forces, Nordic countries need to have a minute-to-minute command function, which can plan and execute operations, including the use of weapons in defense of our territories,” Col. Søren Andersen said March 27 at an air warfare conference hosted by the London-based Royal United Services Institute think tank.

“For instance, effectively defending Copenhagen would require very close coordination between Sweden, allies and Swedish airspace,” he added. “It requires consensus. … It doesn’t work in a way where I just grab the phone and say, ‘Do you think we should shoot this guy or not,’ and then we can vote on it.

“So it needs to be more firm than that.”

A mini-NATO?

All the Nordic countries are expected to share management responsibilities for the combined military force, but this may require them to release some level of control to a higher authority.

The proposal of a combined polar air force structure has earned the title “mini-NATO” — a notion some officials don’t seem fond of.

“This Nordic initiative is in no way to be seen as a substitute or replacement to NATO, but as part of it,” Andersen told conference attendees.

Along the same lines, Lt. Col. Jan Bjurström, deputy director of air operations in the Finnish Air Force, said “Nordic air forces are not planning a separate structure, but one that complements the military alliance as a whole.”

During his presentation, the Danish official touched on what he called the command structure dilemma, surrounding the challenges of having to consider national, Nordic and NATO operational perspectives. Now that all Nordic states are NATO members, there is the question of how their individual and regional responsibilities will fit within the military alliance’s current command-and-control structure.

A statement published last month by the Norwegian Armed Forces, said the NATO command over the Nordic region would “soon” be transferred from the headquarters in Brunssum, Netherlands, to Joint Force Command-Norfolk in the United States.

The alliance’s command-and-control structure was not specifically designed with territorial defense in mind — something the air chiefs said will need revised to include a Nordic agency.

“The Nordic air power concept and Nordic air operations center need to be aligned with NATO plans and structure. This means that NATO’s C2 needs revision to implement this [air operations center] into it,” Bjurström said.

During the Nordic Response exercise this year, a temporarily combined Nordic air operations center was set up for the first time as a test at the Bodø Air Base in Norway. The center was made up of personnel from the air forces of Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden (Iceland does not have a military).

Hermeus readies Quarterhorse high-speed test aircraft for first flight

Hypersonic aircraft startup Hermeus unveiled its Quarterhorse aircraft on Thursday at its Atlanta factory where the company is preparing the vehicle for its first flight test this summer.

The aircraft, dubbed Mk 1, is the second version of Quarterhorse, a high-speed test platform Hermeus is developing iteratively with a goal of demonstrating autonomous, reusable, near-hypersonic flight by 2026. The company’s initial vehicle, Mk 0, completed its ground-based test campaign last November. Mk 1 will be the first to take flight.

Hermeus’ goal is to build one test vehicle per year, and CEO AJ Piplica told C4ISRNET that as Mk 1 prepares for flight in the next few months, refining the company’s processes for quickly building and testing aircraft is just as important as the capability it will demonstrate in flight.

“That’s something that is very different about the approach we’re taking to aircraft development — being this iterative and really pushing to do one aircraft per year,” he said in a March 28 interview. “I think this particular problem requires it. High speed airplanes and pushing the bounds of what’s been done before really requires it.”

While Quarterhorse in its multiple iterations serves as a stepping stone toward the company’s larger goal of developing hypersonic aircraft — which can reach speeds of Mach 5 or higher — for defense and commercial customers, the Pentagon is interested in using the aircraft to help test its own systems.

The Defense Department lacks the flight test infrastructure to support the more than 70 hypersonic development programs being pursued by the military services. In recent years, the department has been working to increase its flight cadence by funding commercial systems like Quarterhorse and developing flying testbeds for advanced materials and components.

The Air Force Research Laboratory was an early investor in Quarterhorse, awarding Hermeus a $1.5 million contract in 2020 and another $60 million the following year. Last November, the Defense Innovation Unit selected the aircraft for its Hypersonic and High-Cadence Airborne Testing Capabilities program, or HyCAT, which aims to increase DOD’s flight testing capacity.

Hermeus had planned to fly Quarterhorse in 2023, but its decision to build Mk 0 as a ground test platform pushed that target to this year. Piplica said the delay was disappointing, but noted that spending more time wringing out the technology and processes on the ground has started to payoff as the company shifts its focus toward flight.

Following a 204-day build process, Mk 1 will now move through ground testing in Atlanta before it is shipped to Edwards Air Force Base in California for additional tests, Piplica said.

‘Push the envelope’

The goal of the first flight, which will take off from Edwards, is to demonstrate high-speed takeoff and landing. Piplica declined to detail specific speed and altitude targets but said Mk 1 is designed for a “pretty limited” flight envelope. Once Quarterhorse achieves those objectives, the company will see if it can move beyond those limits.

“We’ll push the envelope, get as much data as we can, and we’ll certainly take technical risk in doing so,” he said. “One of the key pieces to our approach is to really push learning as far to the left as early as you can.”

Hermeus will provide data from the flight to AFRL, DIU and other customers. The test will also inform Mk 2, which is set to fly next year and achieve supersonic speeds.

A key difference in that vehicle is that it will feature Hermeus’ Chimera II propulsion system, which includes Pratt & Whitney’s F100 engine. That engine is what will ultimately fly in Hermeus’ first hypersonic aircraft, Dark Horse.

“We’ll be flying that engine about three years earlier than we had originally planned in our roadmap,” Piplica said.

Mk 3 will follow in 2026, and Piplica said he expects that’s the timeframe in which Quarterhorse will start supporting Defense Department testing. As for how or when future vehicles may be incorporated into DOD aircraft fleets, Piplica declined to speculate, though he compared Mk 2 to an F-16-scale, autonomous aircraft.

“How does that play into the future force roadmap of the Air Force and the Joint Force writ large?” he said. “For us, it’s an aircraft on a roadmap that we have to do anyway. That alignment, I think, is really powerful.”

Russia’s air force is hollowing itself out. More air defense can help.

The Russian Aerospace Forces, or VKS, continues to burn through the life span of its fighter aircraft in the war against Ukraine. After two years of air war, its total force is slightly less than 75% of its prewar strength.

The VKS has directly lost approximately 16 fighters over the past eight months. However, this does not account for the imputed losses, which arise from an aircraft accruing more flight hours than planned, reducing its overall life. Based on updated information, the VKS is on track to suffer approximately 60 imputed aircraft losses this year from overuse. That is equivalent to losing 26 new airframes. Meanwhile the VKS currently procures only about 20 total Su-30, Su-34 and Su-35 aircraft per year.

The air war has mostly maintained a steady state since mid-2023, with the exception of February 2024, when the VKS flew approximately 150 sorties per day in support of the Avdiivka offensive. Given that Russia also has been using longer-range glide bombs and devoted more aircraft to air-to-ground roles, the average sortie duration has also likely decreased, reducing the accelerated aging. Still, slightly more than half of the VKS’ tactical airframes are more than 30 years old; these have far fewer flight hours left.

The accelerated aging may be shaping Russia’s combat operations. The majority of VKS fighters operating (and lost) over Ukraine are the newer Su-30, Su-34 and Su-35 aircraft with occasional reported sightings of Su-25s.

The older MiG-31s and Su-27s have been relegated to supporting hypersonic Kinzhal strikes and air patrol at a distance. With an estimated average remaining airframe life of less than 20% and 35% respectively, these older aircraft can be used for this war, but likely have insufficient life to support Russia’s potential future invasions.

Russia’s air-to-air warfare MiG-29s are totally absent, even from air-patrol missions. Given their age, these aircraft may be either unserviceable or are being kept in reserve for a final mission. Regardless, whether due to lack of upgrades, survivability or age, these are effectively paper airplanes.

The Su-24s, on the other hand, were used extensively in the invasion of Ukraine. But there have been no reports of Su-24 losses thus far in 2024. How much are they still flying? These aircraft are old; the newest models were manufactured in 1993. The VKS may have chosen not to configure them for their new FAB-1500 glide bombs, which would also hint at the fact that the Su-24s may be reaching the end of their useful lives.

Ukraine, which is short on air defense munitions, has a few options to accelerate Russian air losses. Attacking air bases would likely reduce VKS sortie rates by more than 20% by disrupting operations and forcing the VKS to fly from more distant bases. The greatest opportunity remains the effect of forthcoming F-16 jets (and possible Gripens) to divert VKS sorties from ground-attack to air-to-air efforts.

Which fighter jet is best for Ukraine as it fights off Russia?

Regardless, more air defense munitions and fighters will be critical to Ukrainian success. Russia is relying on only about 300 combined Su-30, Su-34 and Su-35 aircraft for its operations over Ukraine, including delivering the hugely destructive glide bombs. From a strategic perspective, shooting down these newest VKS aircraft imposes a larger cost to Russia and would have the greatest overall impact on the VKS’ ability to perform strikes. It would also improve the odds of survival of the 45 F-16s allies promised to Ukraine.

The VKS has fewer than 650 tactical aircraft when accounting for end-of-life aircraft; it has even less when accounting for accelerated usage. But these numbers are unlikely to change its behavior, based on Russia’s exhibited willingness to accept high losses even for trivial gains.

In comparison, NATO has roughly 800 fifth-generation aircraft, with another 100 or more arriving every year. This is more than sufficient to counter the VKS in the air and conduct targeted ground strikes, especially given the poor performance of Russian surface-to-air missiles in Ukraine.

To be sure, NATO should expand its production of air-to-air and surface-to-air munitions to deter further Russian aggression and support Ukraine. But with the VKS currently shrinking, the alliance can afford to donate more munitions to Ukraine now without worrying about its immediate strategic reserves.

Michael Bohnert is an engineer at the think tank Rand. He previously worked as an engineer for the U.S. Navy and the Naval Nuclear Laboratory.

Northrop says Air Force design changes drove higher Sentinel ICBM cost

A Northrop Grumman official on Monday attributed the explosive cost growth of the U.S. Air Force’s next intercontinental ballistic missile to the service’s design changes, particularly to the nuclear missile’s silo and connecting cables.

The Air Force’s original plan for modernizing its ICBM enterprise included keeping nearly all its existing copper cabling in place to be reused for the upcoming LGM-35A Sentinel. That’s roughly 7,500 miles’ worth of copper cabling, connecting 450 half-century-old Minuteman III ICBM silos scattered through the Great Plains region with launch control centers and other facilities.

But the company official, who spoke with reporters on the condition that he be identified only as an official familiar with the Sentinel program, said the Air Force concluded it is necessary to upgrade the copper cables with a higher-performing fiber-optic network. That decision apparently came after the service awarded the engineering and manufacturing development contract to Northrop Grumman in 2020.

The Air Force also realized that the original designs for Sentinel’s launch facilities — the massive concrete-encased silos from which the missiles would launch — would not work and had to be changed, the Northrop official said. Those original concepts were drawn up during the technology maturation and risk-reduction phase as well as the early engineering and manufacturing development step.

And with hundreds of launch facilities dotting the Great Plains region, often in 1-acre plots, and thousands of miles of cable stretching across farmland and other privately held property that now must be dug up, the cost of these changes swiftly added up, the Northrop official said.

“As we’ve worked through those changes. That’s led to a design that’s different than the one that they [the Air Force] started with,” the official explained. “When you multiply that by 450, if every silo is a little bit bigger or has an extra component, that actually drives a lot of cost because of the sheer number of them that are being updated.”

In a statement to Defense News, the Air Force said the Pentagon is still studying what exactly caused the severe cost overruns, which triggered a review process known as a critical Nunn-McCurdy breach.

“In accordance with statute, [the Office of the Secretary of Defense] will determine what factors caused the cost growth that led to a critical breach via the Nunn-McCurdy process, which is currently underway,” an Air Force spokesperson said. “Early estimates indicate that a large portion of the Sentinel program’s cost growth is in the command and launch segment, which is the most complex segment of the Sentinel program.”

‘Unknown unknowns’ on $96B program

Sentinel is a massive program to replace the Air Force’s aging LGM-30G Minuteman III ICBMs, which now make up the land-based portion of the U.S. military’s nuclear triad. In 2020, Northrop Grumman received a $13.3 billion cost-plus-incentive-fee contract for Sentinel’s engineering and manufacturing development phase.

The program was expected to run about $96 billion, with the total per-unit cost amounting to $118 million when its most recent cost, schedule and performance goals were set in 2020. But the price tag has skyrocketed at least 37%, and the per-unit cost is now about $162 million.

In a congressional hearing this month, Rep. John Garamendi, D-Calif., pegged Sentinel’s current cost at more than $130 billion.

That triggered the Nunn-McCurdy breach, and the Pentagon is now reviewing Sentinel to figure out how to get it back on track as well as where to find funds to keep it going. Top Air Force officials have publicly said that with Minuteman III well past its originally expected life span, the service has no choice but to replace it with a new, more reliable model — and will find money to pay for it.

Sentinel, which was originally supposed to reach initial operational capability in 2029, is now expected to fall two years behind schedule. The nuclear missile’s first flight test, which had been expected to take place in 2024, is now likely to come in February 2026, according to the Air Force’s budget documents.

The Air Force said in an email to Defense News that the Sentinel’s first flight was pushed back due to longer lead times for components in its guidance computer. But the delayed flight test is not a factor in the program’s Nunn-McCurdy breach, the service said.

In a March hearing held by the House Armed Services Committee’s sea power and projection forces panel, Garamendi voiced his displeasure to Air Force officials over the Sentinel’s cost overruns, as well as the service’s inability to explain potential “trade-offs” to keep the program alive.

Garamendi questioned the need for the United States to spend vast sums of money on Sentinel, arguing the belief that the nation must maintain a triad of nuclear weapons has become a “religious issue, having very little to do with the world in which we’re now living.”

The Northrop Grumman official told reporters Monday that the company’s work on Sentinel continues, despite the Nunn-McCurdy breach and ensuing review process.

“We don’t have a pause on our EMD [engineering and manufacturing development] work,” the official said. “We’re continuing to make progress on developing the missile and iterating the designs for all the facilities.”

In a discussion last fall, Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall said given it’s been so long since the service created an ICBM, early cost estimates for Sentinel were based on “a huge uncertainty.”

“There are unknown unknowns that are surfacing, that are affecting the program,” Kendall said during a November 2023 event with Center for a New American Security think tank. Kendall also said the Sentinel program was “struggling.”

The Northrop Grumman official highlighted such comments — including Kendall’s about the uncertainty that went into the program’s cost estimates — and said some estimates that went into the 2020 baseline review turned out to be incorrect.

Mock-up silo

Northrop also said the company’s effort to game out how a conversion process might work also showed problems with the original plan.

Before it received the Sentinel contract in September 2020, the firm started building a full-scale mock-up of a Minuteman III silo in Promontory, Utah, which it completed in spring 2021. The project was a major undertaking, and on Northrop Grumman’s dime. But the company saw it as a worthwhile investment in its bid to win the lucrative Ground Based Strategic Deterrent contract, as the program was then known.

Northrop didn’t have direct access to the Minuteman III silos — and likely won’t until the government hands them over for conversion into Sentinel silos — since the missiles must remain ready for launch at all times. And so the company considered its construction project the best way to understand how the massive retrofitting process might work — and to find where the biggest risks might lie.

The company’s team, alongside the Air Force, pored through the nonoperational mock-up and started to lay out components akin to what Sentinel would require. But as they did so, the Northrop official said, the group found some of the original conversion plans weren’t going to work.

Other design processes, including computer-aided design work, also helped the Sentinel team map out how much square footage various configurations would take up. In the process, some of the unknown factors that led to the original shaky estimates were cleared up. Still, it became clearer that the costs would be much higher than originally believed.

“They learned, along with us, things that needed to be potentially different or changed from the design,” the official said.

Five programs in one

In January, top Air Force official Kristyn Jones compared the Sentinel project to five major acquisition programs rolled into one. But the nuclear missile itself “is not an area of concern,” said Jones, who is performing the duties of undersecretary of the Air Force.

The Northrop official said the Sentinel missile will not just be a new iteration of the Minuteman series of ICBMs — “it’s not a Minuteman IV,” the official said — but a brand-new weapon top to bottom.

Its solid-rocket motors will be made of composite materials instead of the steel used on the Minuteman III, he explained, and it will have a more advanced guidance system.

Its design also includes modular components that allow the Air Force and Northrop Grumman to more easily add new technology as it becomes available.

And airmen are expected to be able to more easily maintain the Sentinel than its predecessor, with key components accessible without the need to delve too deeply into the missile and bring along a massive security detail while it is opened up.

Sentinel will be slightly larger and lighter than the Minuteman III, which will allow it to carry more propellant and payload, he said. And it is being designed to last until at least 2075 — far longer than the decade Minuteman III was originally supposed to last.

The infrastructure for Sentinel — including the silos themselves, the launch control centers where airmen control the ICBMs, and supporting infrastructure — will also be refurbished.

That portion — which Jones called “essentially a civil works program” — is especially challenging, particularly with issues such as inflation, the supply chain and labor force shortages.

The service and Northrop Grumman plan to reuse the existing Minuteman III silos as much as possible. But that will require a great deal of new construction and equipment updates to ensure the Sentinel silos can keep operating through disruptions such as power outages.

Old computers in launch centers — some of them 1980s-era terminals with green screens — will receive updates with modern equipment.

But not all Minuteman III silos were built in the same configuration, the Northrop official said, which will further complicate their conversions.

With the nation’s roughly 400 Minuteman IIIs spread out across nearly 32,000 square miles in Wyoming, Montana, North Dakota, Colorado and Nebraska, that makes the Sentinel program a massive real estate project, requiring the government to negotiate easements and, in some cases, property purchases with numerous landowners.

All of that adds up to “one of the most large, complex programs I’ve ever seen,” Kendall said of Sentinel in November 2023. “It’s probably the biggest thing, in some ways, that the Air Force has ever taken on.”

There’s also another factor at play: What happens if the Air Force and Northrop Grumman look deeper within the existing Minuteman III silos and find they’re in worse shape than expected?

The condition of the silos is a potentially high-risk area for the program, the Northrop official acknowledged, but the program still expects to be able to reuse existing ones. A “handful” of LiDAR — or light detection and ranging — scans of current ICBM sites already took place, he said, and there have been reviews of silos decommissioned in the 2000s.

But deeper, destructive testing — “breaking apart the concrete to see what’s behind it and what the conditions are” — has not occurred on existing silos, the official said, since they have to remain operational.

Minuteman III silos have concrete liners as well as mechanical launch tubes and missile suspension systems that hold the current ICBMs. The tubes and suspension systems will be replaced, the official said, and the concrete liners underneath will undergo inspection to determine if repairs need done and what is reusable.

The government has contingency plans if the silos’ foundations prove to be seriously cracked or damaged, the official said. That could include remediation work such as patching cracks or replacing portions of the concrete.

If a site is too far gone to fix, however, drilling may have to take place for an entirely new silo.

“There’s currently no plan to dig new holes,” the official said. “But given the site conditions of the land, [there is] certainly the potential that when they get to investigating more of the silos, they may find that [reusing] some of them might not be possible.”

Though the Nunn-McCurdy review process is still underway, the Northrop official said the company is talking to the Air Force about ways to bring down costs. One idea under discussion, he noted, is potentially changing the way mechanical rooms are constructed to build them in a more modular way, which could lower expenses.

But no matter how difficult or expensive Sentinel becomes, or what trade-offs are made to pay for it, the Air Force is adamant it must happen.

Lt. Gen. Richard Moore, the service’s deputy chief of staff for plans and programs, said at the January appearance alongside Jones that extending the Minuteman III missile significantly longer is “not a viable option.”

“We will find the money,” Moore said. “Sentinel is going to be funded. We’ll make the trades to make that happen.”

Sevmash completes upgrades to build Russia’s next-gen nuclear subs

MOSCOW — Russia’s leading manufacturer of submarines said it completed the large-scale modernization of its electroplating workshop, charged with applying a particular coating to metallic products.

The effort, which concluded this month, is meant to increase the energy efficiency of production at Sevmash, which is expected to build a fifth-generation nuclear submarine for Russia.

The shipbuilder has now begun operating electroplating sites focused on ultrasonic cleaning, special chrome plating, solid and electrical insulating anodizing and chemical nickel plating, according to the company.

“By the turn of the 2010-2020s, Sevmash seems to have managed to achieve a more or less stable rate of submarine production. The construction and testing cycle now takes about seven years,” Pavel Luzin, a military expert at the Center for European Policy Analysis in Washington, D.C., told Defense news. “At the same time the plant is working on eight to 10 submarines at different stages of construction. By creating a new production facility, Sevmash strives to increase its commercial efficiency.”

Still, it’s unclear whether things will turn out as planned for the shipbuilder, Luzin added.

“Given the closure of access to Western technologies and equipment, when the entire chain of cooperation involved in the creation of submarines suffers from sanctions, it is difficult to predict how effective the modernization of Sevmash will be,” he said.

The last major modernization of Sevmash’s production facilities took place in the 1970s for the construction of third-generation nuclear submarines. Thanks to its participation in the government’s Federal Target Program, which aims to develop Russia’s military-industrial complex, Sevmash began reequipping and reconstruction in 2011.

Under the program, Sevmash was to receive 46.5 billion rubles (U.S. $507 million). Until 2017, the main expenses involved the purchase of automated technological equipment; multichannel measuring instruments; high-precision, computer-controlled machines; and highly efficient energy and mechanized equipment. The company sourced these from France, Switzerland, Italy, the Czech Republic, Sweden and Germany.

After 2022, Sevmash bought machines and instruments locally and from Belarus. For example, in February 2024, it purchased technological equipment for a deperming demagnetization station for 1.5 billion rubles from the Krylov State Research Center.

Sevmash will continue participating in the Federal Target Program until 2027, but must take this opportunity to modernize its production facilities for the construction of a fifth-generation nuclear submarine.

Luzin said this effort is already on the books, and that “Russia is in a hurry to create fifth-generation submarines, given that the Borei and Yasen subs will be under construction at least until the early 2030s.”

In 2020, the plant began to create a floating dock to replace its existing Sukhona dock built more than 40 years ago. Two years later, Sevmash completed the conversion of equipment from oil and coal to natural gas, which is more economical and energy-efficient. That same year, it completed reconstruction of its deep-water and shallow-water industrial embankments, traversing docks, and discharging berth.

And in 2023, the company wrapped up modernization of its steel workshop, in which it acquired electric arc furnaces to produce steel, equipment for the secondary treatment of steel, gas treatment stations for furnace emissions and closed water circulation cooling systems. According to Sevmash, the goal here was to more effectively schedule work that involves the foundry as well as increase the cost-effectiveness of materials and resources.

The company is updating its crane equipment. It already replaced about 300 pieces, including elevators, manipulators and the cranes themselves. The plant is expected to complete this project by 2027, according to its parent company, United Shipbuilding Corp.

Sevmash’s forging and heating workshop, where parts for future nuclear submarines are heat-treated, is also receiving an upgrade, the plant has reported. Dozens of new electric furnaces and other equipment are undergoing installation there, it said. The replacement of the workshop’s equipment at this scale has not taken place in more than 60 years.

The shipbuilder is also updating its welding equipment. According to Russia’s official procurement website, Sevmash spent about 25 million rubles on welding equipment in 2022, despite a failed effort to buy spare parts for welding from the Swedish company ESAB that year.

Last year alone, 636 units of various equipment were put into operation, Sevmash reported. Among them was a new central digital automatic telephone exchange. And the plant has said it is purchasing transport vehicles.

Another important point in the technical re-equipment of the plant is the creation of the infrastructure necessary for the implementation of the block-modular method of nuclear submarine construction. That approach involves assembling submarines from large blocks filled with equipment. It would replace the current modular-aggregate method at Sevmash, introduced during the construction of third-generation nuclear submarines.

With the new method, most of the assembly work gets carried out in specialized workshops before the blocks are fed to the slipway for the final assembly of the entire submarine. According to Sevmash, this approach will improve the quality of work, reduce labor intensity and production costs, and shorten the construction time of a submarine by 18 months.

For block production to take place, the company would have to expand its assembly and welding workshops, build combined cleaning and painting chambers, and reequip itself for so-called buildingway-delivery production. This work is expected to conclude in 2031.

“The block construction method has been developed for submarines for more than one year, and requires greater accuracy of the entire technological process and a high-production culture at all stages. It is not yet very clear how successfully it can be implemented because it requires the approval of USC, Rosatom and other cooperation participants,” Luzin said.

“In addition, good engineers and workers are needed, but not many people want to move to Severodvinsk,” he added. “And even if the new method is introduced soon, it is not a fact that it will really reduce the time of construction and acceptance tests of the submarine by the expected 18 months.”

Congress funds Taiwan military support as foreign aid bill stalls

Congress funded cash assistance for Taipei’s military while directing the State Department and Pentagon to “prioritize the delivery of defense articles and services for Taiwan.”

The fiscal 2024 State Department spending bill Congress passed on Saturday includes $300 million in Foreign Military Financing, or FMF, for Taiwan. The funding to buy more military equipment comes more than a year after Congress first authorized the cash assistance for Taipei. But the $300 million falls far short of the cumulative $4 billion in Taiwan military assistance in the foreign aid bill that remains stalled in the House.

“It provides new tools to use to try and contribute to the deterrence effort and get weapons to Taiwan more quickly and in larger quantities,” Bonnie Glaser, the managing director of the German Marshall Fund’s Indo-Pacific program, told Defense News. “Another benefit of it is that it signals to the people of Taiwan that the United States prioritizes their defense and is willing to put our money where our mouth is.”

The $300 million figure represents a halfway point between House appropriators – who sought $500 million in Taiwan FMF – and their Senate counterparts who only wanted $113 million.

Taiwan must spend most of that $300 million in FMF grants or loans to procure weapons from U.S. defense contractors but could use $45 million of that money to purchase equipment and services on-island – a privilege called offshore procurement that only Israel has enjoyed so far.

Of the 25-plus countries that receive FMF yearly, the largest recipients are Israel with an annual $3.3 billion, Egypt with an annual $1.3 billion and Jordan with an annual $425 million. The State Department has asked for $100 million in Taiwan FMF as part of its FY25 budget request. It provided Taiwan with $55 million in FMF last year from a portion of Egypt aid frozen over human rights concerns.

Appropriators initially were wary of allocating large FMF sums for Taiwan given pressures on the State Department budget and the relative wealth of the island, whose GDP came in at an estimated $800 billion in FY23.

Glaser noted that Taiwan has increased its defense spending consecutively over the past several years and now spends 2.6% of its GDP on defense, “which is still not enough given the nature of the threat they face.”

The U.S. hopes that rushing an influx of weapons into Taiwan will help deter a potential Chinese invasion. China considers Taiwan to be a rogue province and has threatened to take it by force if necessary. President Xi Jinping has set 2027 – the 100th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Liberation Army – as the date he hopes the Chinese military will have the capabilities to take Taiwan.

“Yes, it’s our taxpayer money and they should be paying for more themselves, but there’s also some value in signaling that this is a priority for the United States,” said Glaser. “It does help to boost the determination of the Taiwanese to defend themselves because they know that the United States cares about their defense.”

Another $4 billion

The Taiwan FMF in the FY24 State Department spending bill pales in comparison to the $3.9 billion in additional military assistance for Taipei that the Senate’s foreign aid bill. The Senate in February passed the bipartisan bill, which primarily provides $60 billion in economic and security aid to Ukraine and another $14 billion in military aid to Israel, in a 70-29 vote.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has so far refused to put it on the floor amid opposition to the Ukraine aid from former President Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, and the right-flank of his caucus. Meanwhile, some progressive Democrats oppose the additional Israel aid in the bill amid the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

Johnson has told Republican defense hawks the House will hold foreign aid votes in April after it returns from its two-week recess, though it will not necessarily take up the bipartisan Senate bill, which hews closely to President Joe Biden’s request.

The Senate bill includes an additional $2 billion in Taiwan FMF and another $1.9 billion that would allow the Defense Department to rush weapons to Taipei from U.S. stockpiles and replenish it.

Using Presidential Drawdown Authority from U.S. stockpiles would allow the U.S. to move materiel into Taiwan faster than through FMF-funded arms sales. The Biden administration has primarily armed Ukraine through drawdowns of U.S. stockpiles since Russia’s 2022 invasion.

“That makes it easier to deliver something if we already have it in our own stockpiles, and we can just give it to Taiwan,” said Glaser. “That seems to cut through quite a bit of the red tape that might be involved in using other methods.”

Lawmakers estimate that there is a roughly $19 billion backlog in U.S. arms sales to Taiwan due to a confluence of issues, including industrial base constraints, a sometimes slow pace of contracting and acquisition and a medley of lengthy technology and security reviews in the Foreign Military Sales process.