• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

AMDR ships

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,212
Reaction score
397
1st picture is why I was skeptical of a 2-pulse booster (in addition to it seeming to be one continuous burn at launch). 2nd is the mandrel from the 1st pulse of the booster. I never put the two together because the mandrel obviously wouldn't produce the profile in the 1st picture.
 

Attachments

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
1,955
Reaction score
37
AMDR Update from Raytheon's 2016 Q4 Conference Call -

OPERATOR: Howard Rubel, Jefferies.

HOWARD RUBEL, ANALYST, JEFFERIES LLC: I want to go back to some of the accomplishments you have had in capturing some development programs. Tom, could you update us on the status of AMDR and when you expect that to start being inserted into the fleet? And the same applies to Next Gen Jammer and associated opportunities there as well.

TOM KENNEDY: Okay, so I'll start with AMDR. AMDR is in test at the Pacific test range out in Hawaii. It's having great results there. Obviously there is a lot of demand signals from the operational Navy side to get that into use as soon as possible. But initially, it goes onto DDG-51s in production, and then it goes into back-fit into the older DDG-51s. So we see a transition into -- starting a transition into production in the late 2018. There is also -- we've already been turned on to long lead for the AMDR and long lead material. But we see that picking up, essentially the production transition, in 2018 and beyond.

On Next Generation Jammer, Next Generation Jammer has entered into main EMD phase of that program. So that will also be transitioning into production in the 2020 type range. One other one you didn't mention, Howard, was we did win the Navy EASR program. Which is a smaller radar than AMDR but essentially based on the AMDR architecture. So between AMDR and EASR, we have the majority of the radars that go on surface Navy ships. And as you know, one of the keys of the administration's efforts moving forward is to increase the number of ships, which then will drive the number of EASRs and AMDRs that are going to be required. So we have a lot of expectations for those two franchises to take off here in the next 3 to 5 years.
 

Moose

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
1,065
Reaction score
48
Going to be some serious decisions around back-fit in the not-too-distant future. Something to keep an eye out for.
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
2,330
Reaction score
77
Moose said:
Going to be some serious decisions around back-fit in the not-too-distant future. Something to keep an eye out for.
AMDR-X as well. Last I read, the Flight III as currently designed does have sufficient electrical capacity to
accommodate it so they may reconsider retrofitting AMDR-X to the first dozen Flight IIIs.
 

Moose

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
1,065
Reaction score
48
Yes. Several people on the "just build Burke variants forever" bandwagon are finding out just how fast they're running out of power margin. And that's for new-build, back-fit will require some hard decisions.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,212
Reaction score
397
Moose said:
Yes. Several people on the "just build Burke variants forever" bandwagon are finding out just how fast they're running out of power margin. And that's for new-build, back-fit will require some hard decisions.
*cough* Zumwalt.
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
2,330
Reaction score
77
http://seapowermagazine.org/stories/20170202-greenert.html

Former CNO: Navy Reaching the Limits of its Afloat BMD Platform Capabilities

By RICHARD R. BURGESS, Managing Editor

WASHINGTON — The Navy has about 10 years to develop a new afloat ballistic-missile defense (BMD) system to keep pace with the threat, a former chief of naval operations (CNO) said.

“We don’t have a keel-up missile defense platform afloat,” retired Adm. Jonathan W. Greenert, told an audience Feb. 2 at a seminar sponsored by the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance, noting that the Navy relied on BMD modifications to existing cruisers and destroyers.

He said the Navy had looked at adapting the large hull of a San Antonio-class amphibious platform dock ship, fitting a large-aperture radar on it to target a battery of BMD-capable missiles.

Greener said the San Antonio-class ships “can generate a lot of electricity” to power more capable radar systems.

“Imagine the size of aperture you could put on there — a TPY-2 [radar] easily, and probably double that — and you can put a lot of missiles in there,” he said.

Noting that the Navy is approaching the growth margin of its Ticonderoga-class cruisers and Arleigh Burke-class destroyers as BMD platforms, Greenert said “we are reaching the limits of our asymptote out there, and probably I’d say we’re probably 10 years from having to move on to another means afloat to meet the threat out there.”
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
2,330
Reaction score
77
sferrin said:
Moose said:
Yes. Several people on the "just build Burke variants forever" bandwagon are finding out just how fast they're running out of power margin. And that's for new-build, back-fit will require some hard decisions.
*cough* Zumwalt.
The Navy's AOA determined that the Zumwalts could accommodate the SPY+25 radar and
Bath had a identified a Zumwalt variant that could accommodate a 21-foot radar ~ SPY+30.

A modified San Antonio class could also accommodate a SPY+30.
 

Attachments

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
1,955
Reaction score
37
Moose said:
Going to be some serious decisions around back-fit in the not-too-distant future. Something to keep an eye out for.
Lockheed has already offered alternatives ;)

Surface Navy 2017: Lockheed Martin pushes solid-state SPY-1 radar upgrade plan



Lockheed Martin Rotary and Mission Systems is proposing a solid-state upgrade for the AN/SPY-1(V) radars fitted to the US Navy's (USN's) DDG 51 Flight IIA Aegis-capable guided-missile destroyers. The plan is leveraging technology from the US Missile Defense Agency's (MDA's) S-band Long Range Discrimination Radar (LRDR).

Disclosing the initiative on 9 January just prior to the Surface Navy Association's annual symposium in Washington, DC, Jim Sheridan, the company's vice president and general manager for naval combat and missile defence systems, said the technology update plan - which would backfit a new gallium nitride (GaN) antenna array and a multimission signal processor (MMSP) into existing destroyers - was potentially applicable to over 30 DDG 51 ships.Having suffered the disappointment of losing out in the AMDR battle, Lockheed is now looking at a solid-state upgrade, which would modernise the radar 'front end' of Aegis Baseline 7 ships, the first of which is USS Pinckney (DDG 91). "We are in the technology development phase," said Sheridan. "Prior to the AMDR award to Raytheon, we took our technology pretty far down the road."

He continued, "The real key was the MDA award to Lockheed Martin for the LRDR programme. The sub-assembly technology that is in the LRDR being built today for installation out of Clear [Air Force Station], Alaska, would be the same as used for the solid-state SPY."

The LRDR is an S-band, GaN-based, long-range radar that will provide precision metric data to improve ballistic missile defence (BMD) discrimination and replace existing sensors in the US Ballistic Missile Defense System. LRDR is due to become operational in 2020.

"I can't get into the specifics [increase in terms of dB] of what that might be, but it would be very significant," added Sheridan. "That's important, given the discrimination requirements today with the threat of stream raids. It is very important to have increased capability."

"For the SPY modernisation, that would [involve] the wholesale replacement of the antenna [and] you'd have an MMSP processor back-end like you do on the [Aegis] Baseline 9 modernisations today."
He further goes on to add that it will be power and cooling neutral.
 

Moose

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
1,065
Reaction score
48
If its power and cooling neutral its substantially less capable than Flight III, likely somewhere in the same neighborhood as the 9-RMA AMDR. In which case the benefit of going with LM rather than just building off the SPY-6 contract seems thin.
 

starviking

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2006
Messages
952
Reaction score
20

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
9,013
Reaction score
199
Moose said:
If its power and cooling neutral its substantially less capable than Flight III, likely somewhere in the same neighborhood as the 9-RMA AMDR. In which case the benefit of going with LM rather than just building off the SPY-6 contract seems thin.
I also note that Sheridan didn't really address issues such as navalisation and whether it would be displacement neutral, given the available spare displacement or lack thereof on the Burke hulls.
 

cluttonfred

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2008
Messages
1,324
Reaction score
17
Website
cluttonfred.info
Very helpful, thanks much.

starviking said:
cluttonfred said:
OK, I'll bite. What are "stream raids?"
D
Missiles coming from the same vector, but separated by time. Apparently picking up the last missiles in such a stream can pose a technical problem.

This Google Books link says a bit about that: https://books.google.co.jp/books?id=RfIbDAAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=air+and+missile+defence+systems+engineering&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=snippet&q=stream%20raid&f=false
 

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
1,955
Reaction score
37
Raytheon radar executes first ballistic missile test


After a series of previous successes, Raytheon’s AN/SPY-6(V) Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) successfully searched, acquired, and tracked a ballistic missile during the first dedicated ballistic missile defense exercise at the U.S. Navy’s Pacific Missile Range Facility (PMRF), the company announced March 31.
 

bobbymike

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
9,043
Reaction score
208
http://raytheon.mediaroom.com/2017-04-06-Worlds-most-capable-X-band-ballistic-missile-defense-radar-upgrades-to-gallium-nitride-technology?WT.mc_id=twitter_socialmedia_N/A&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=organic&utm_campaign=N/A&linkId=36260724
 

bobbymike

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
9,043
Reaction score
208
https://www.fool.com/investing/2017/05/14/raytheon-begins-modernizing-us-navys-favorite-des.aspx
 

bring_it_on

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
1,955
Reaction score
37
Navy, Raytheon beat the clock by months with AMDR development


The Navy's Air and Missile Defense Radar program, being built by Raytheon, managed to pull off an atypical feat for a major Pentagon weapon system project: conclude engineering and manufacturing development many months ahead of schedule.

On April 29, the acting Pentagon acquisition executive cleared the AMDR program to proceed into low-rate initial production, four months earlier than the most optimistic date of July 2017 set by the Navy in 2013, and six months earlier than the September 2017 AMDR program manager estimated last year.

"Milestone C was achieved earlier than previously estimated because developmental engineering for the system hardware is complete and the program had completed statutory requirements," Navy Capt. Thurraya Kent, a spokeswoman for the Navy acquisition executive, told Inside Defense May 17. "The Navy was also able to preserve competitive pricing and assure system deliveries will support ship construction schedules," Kent added.

The AMDR -- dubbed the SPY-6 -- is in development for the next variant of the Navy's Arleigh Burke-class destroyer, the DDG-51 Flight III. It will be the most powerful sensor of its kind in the Aegis fleet -- more than 30 times more sensitive than the currently fielded Aegis radar. The Flight III upgrades also give the destroyers increased shipboard power production -- to support the larger radar -- and hull enhancements.

The AMDR program, a $5.9 billion project to develop and procure the new sensor for Flight III ships, is developing a suite that includes a new S-band radar capable of both ballistic missile defense and air defense as well as an X-band radar, the SPQ-9B. AMDR also includes the Radar Suite Controller, a new component that -- according to the manufacturer -- will "manage radar resources and integrate with the ship's combat management system."

What impact does achieving this milestone early have on the program?

"Achievement of MS C allows limited production of the first three shipsets of SPY-6 equipment at competitive pricing," Kent said.

On May 1, the Navy exercised a $327 million contract option for low-rate initial production for a first batch of the new S-band radars, the latest action on a potential $1.6 billion contract the government awarded Raytheon in 2013. This follows a $110 million contract the Navy awarded Raytheon's Integrated Defense Systems in Sudsbury, MA, last December to begin buying long-lead materials in anticipation of the LRIP decision.

Schedule estimates for future milestones are not affected, she added, effectively buying the program buffer for the goal: meeting the "in yard need date" to deliver the first shipset for integration with the lead Flight III ship no later than September 2019.

Last summer, the Government Accountability Office found the AMDR program was progressing as planned "but extensive development and testing remains." Further, citing the complexity of ship design and construction changes associated with integrating the AMDR into the DDG-51, the GAO report recommended the Navy delay procuring the lead Flight III ship.

The Pentagon's portion of the fiscal year 2017 omnibus appropriations bill includes a provision that directs the Navy to postpone plans to proceed with the first Flight III ship and instead award a DDG-51 Flight IIA ship.

What impact does this directive have on the AMDR program?

"None," said Kent. "The initial AMDR production units will be delivered to support Flight III construction schedules. The Navy continues negotiations with both shipbuilders for the Flight III capability," she added.
 

Moose

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
1,065
Reaction score
48
AN/SPY-6 has gone remarkably well since Raytheon got the contract in 2013, and even back to the program's launch in 2010 the management has done well. The Navy and Raytheon people who've sheparded this along really are doing great work.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,212
Reaction score
397
Looks like it gained 35 pounds, and with the same rocket motor. . . :p
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
2,330
Reaction score
77
sferrin said:
Looks like it gained 35 pounds, and with the same rocket motor. . . :p
I was under the impression that ESSM Blk 1 was (for the typical illuminator) illuminator limited and not kinematically limited.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,212
Reaction score
397
I'm still curious why they went with this Block II iteration rather than just adopting the SLAMRAAM-ER. ???
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,264
Reaction score
148
sferrin said:
I'm still curious why they went with this Block II iteration rather than just adopting the SLAMRAAM-ER. ???
We've gone over this before. There's a bunch of compatibility features in ESSM Blk II that aren't in the stock AMRAAM seeker.

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,26880.msg276477.html#msg276477

www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,23897.msg291412.html#msg291412
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,212
Reaction score
397
TomS said:
sferrin said:
I'm still curious why they went with this Block II iteration rather than just adopting the SLAMRAAM-ER. ???
We've gone over this before. There's a bunch of compatibility features in ESSM Blk II that aren't in the stock AMRAAM seeker.

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,26880.msg276477.html#msg276477

www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,23897.msg291412.html#msg291412
Yep, you're correct of course. Sometimes it's difficult to keep everything straight. Guess it would help if I wrote it down somewhere. :-[
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,264
Reaction score
148
No worries. Lots of moving parts to keep track of on these programs.
 

Moose

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
1,065
Reaction score
48
TomS said:
No worries. Lots of moving parts to keep track of on these programs.
Ain't that the truth.
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
2,330
Reaction score
77
https://youtu.be/fuUbLU-DdgA


Te first Evolved Seasparrow Missile Block 2 firings were conducted at the Pt. Mugu Sea Range
off the coast of California, June 12-13, 2017. Representatives from the NATO SEASPARROW
Project Office, U.S. government technical support agencies, and Raytheon Missile Systems
conducted Controlled Test Vehicle (CTV) firings from the Self-Defense Test Ship. These flights
were unguided and intended to prove the missile could be fired safely and follow a pre-programmed
course. The first CTV flight profile included a high elevation launch, simulating egress from a
vertical launcher. The second CTV firing included a low-elevation trainable launcher profile launch.
Both CTV flight test were highly successful. The next series of planned test flights will increase in
complexity to demonstrate the progress of ongoing development
 

DrRansom

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Dec 15, 2012
Messages
527
Reaction score
4
Does the Block 1 ESSM have a thruster ring, like the PAC-3? In the second video, a thruster can be seen near the nose tip as the missile executes a Skid Turn.
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
2,330
Reaction score
77
To me, it looked like vortex shedding from the strakes.
 

DrRansom

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Dec 15, 2012
Messages
527
Reaction score
4
marauder2048 said:
To me, it looked like vortex shedding from the strakes.
If you look at 1:34, there is a light at the tip, which persists for a few seconds before the smoke trail appears.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,212
Reaction score
397
DrRansom said:
Does the Block 1 ESSM have a thruster ring, like the PAC-3? In the second video, a thruster can be seen near the nose tip as the missile executes a Skid Turn.
ESSM has a module at the tail for vectoring that gets dropped right after the tipover. It can be seen below. (Note, you don't see them on those launched from Sea Sparrow 8-cell launchers as it's not required.)
 

Attachments

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,264
Reaction score
148
I'm not sure what we're seeing in the video, but I'm pretty sure it's not a thruster. They haven't mentioned adding such a capability in any published materials, and if it was an unpublished capability, they wouldn't have released video that showed it off.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,212
Reaction score
397
TomS said:
I'm not sure what we're seeing in the video, but I'm pretty sure it's not a thruster. They haven't mentioned adding such a capability in any published materials, and if it was an unpublished capability, they wouldn't have released video that showed it off.
As Marauder pointed out, it's probably vortex shedding. One can clearly see the TVC module aft of the tailfins at 0:25 and see it dropping off here:
 

Attachments

bobbymike

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
9,043
Reaction score
208
https://news.usni.org/2017/12/20/ddg-51-flight-iii-design-efforts-nearly-complete-radar-power-systems-testing-in-2018
 

bobbymike

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
9,043
Reaction score
208
https://www.themaven.net/warriormaven/sea/navy-builds-first-new-ddg-51-flight-iii-destroyer-in-may-8fW6qg1aoUyskKjIDnx5wQ?full=1
 
Top