Typhoon's present and future

The Typhoon’s future

Farnborough brought forth a much celebrated agreement between UK, Germany, Italy and Spain for the go ahead to the next phases of the Eurofighter Typhoon’s enhancement programme. Good news, undoubtedly, but is it really something worth celebrations?

Sadly, looking into the details, the situation isn’t properly one which inspires pulling out champagne bottles from the fridge. In fact, the Typhoon evolution is finally about to move one step onwards, but seems to have effectively been slowed again for other aspects, and it continues to be hampered by lack of money and unity of intents and action between the four partner nations.

There is, however, a ray of hope as I’ll explain in this article. Please bear with me as we delve in a world made of Tranches, Blocks, Software Releases, Change Proposals and countless other confusing elements.  

Phase 1 Enhancement (P1E)

The thick of the Typhoon fleets in Europe currently is made up by Tranche 1 Typhoons with a very limited air to ground capability.

The Tranche 1 Typhoons were initially delivered with Basic Air Defence capability (Block 1), then came the Block 2 and 2B with more complete AA capabilities, and finally the Block 5, which introduced some air to ground strike capability. All Tranche 1 Typhoons are being upgraded to Block 5 standards under the R2 retrofit program.

Block 5 Typhoons, known in the RAF as FGR4, (Fighter/Ground attack/Reconnaissance) come with the capability of employing laser guided ammunition (Paveway II for the UK, GBU-10 and GBU-16 for the other partner nations), but only with laser designation provided by a third party (either a land-based designator or a pod installed on another aircraft, much like the Tornado GR1 in the Gulf War, which launched paveways on laser designations made by the old Buccaneers!

This same level of capability is provided by the Block 8 airplanes, part of the Tranche 2 order.

The sole Royal Air Force in 2006 launched an urgent national initiative for fitting Tranche 1 Typhoons with a better “austere land attack” capability, as a replacement for the Jaguar airplane and as a step in preparing the Typhoon for an anticipated deployment to Afghanistan in 2011. The deployment actually never happened, but the initiative became a £73m deal signed on 20 July 2006. Known as Change Proposal 193 (CP193) within the Typhoon program logs, this modification gave the Typhoon Tranche 1 Block 5 of the RAF the capability to employ the Litening III laser designation pod, removing the need for third-part designation. It also enabled carriage of the Enhanced Paveway II, which adds GPS to the laser seeker so to enable all-weather attack capability.

Good work was made on the Litening III integration, which incorporates a ROVER 3 (remotely-operated video enhanced receiver) air-to-surface secure full-motion video data link, which allows pictures and data to be transmitted from the Litening pod directly to a forward air controller on the ground via a laptop-type terminal, with minimal lag or latency. This enhances close air support effectiveness by improving target identification and minimising miscommunication. ROVER also provides a limited real-time reconnaissance capability, since Litening III can record still imagery as well, “taking photos” like a recce pod. The system is also compatible with the later Rover 4 and Rover 5, and with the Rockwell ‘StrikeHawk’ Miniature Tactical
Video Downlink Receiver adopted by the British Army’s Fire Support Teams.

In 2007, finally, the other partner nations joined in the Air to Ground development effort with Change Proposal 210, which basically introduces in all nations the capabilities the RAF added with CP193. The agreement came too late to have this capability included in the Tranche 2 Block 8 airplanes, so that, while they incorporate over 400 improvements, the current Tranche 2 Typhoons have less air ground usefulness than Tranche 1 Block 5.

The Phase 1 Enhancement contract, born from CP210, was finally signed on 30 March 2007.

Improvements will be delivered in two incremental software releases: P1EA will come with the SRP10 software  while P1EB will come with the SRP12 software.

Test activities began on 24th October 2008, using the Alenia-owned IPA5 development airplane to start flight trials with the 500-lb Paveway IV.

It was then joined in 2009 by IPA-7, owned by Germany’s Cassidian, which flew handling trials with the Paveway IV bombs loaded and the new P1EA Missile Warner system installed.

Spain’s IPA-4 airplane flew with the 1000 pounds EGBU-16 between February and April 2009, and made five drops of the bomb, and finally, from 18 june 2009, BAE’s IPA-1 began drop trials of Paveway IV, making 15 bomb drops over the Irish Sea. In February 2011 there was the first guided launch of Paveway IV, and in early 2012 the final demonstration, validating in full the self-designation capability and employment of Paveway IV in all its modes, was started.

[NOTE: IPA stands for Instrumented Production Aircraft. These are five production standard aircraft plus 2 converted Series Production aircrafts fitted with telemetry instruments for dedicated flight testing and further systems development. They are owned and operated by the various companies part of the Eurofighter team:

BAE has the IPA1, IPA5 and IPA6.

Alenia (Italy) has the IPA2

EADS (Germany) has the IPA3 and IPA7

EADS Casa (Spain) has the IPA4

IPA6 is a Typhoon Tranche 1 standard (BS031), taken up from the RAF order and fitted with Tranche 2 avionics for testing prior to Tranche 2 deliveries to the air forces.

There are also 6 DA Typhoons (Development Airplanes), some of which have now been assigned to museums, while others remain in use for testing. One DA airplane, Spain’s one, was lost to an engine failure in 2002.]

As of now, P1EA flight testing is complete, and the NETMA agency is going to give its documentation to the partner nations, which will then complete their own process for clearance and entry into service.

According to Eurofighter, P1EA introduces the following improvements:

-          Integration of Paveway IV and EGBU-16

-          Dedicate Air-Ground mode for the 27 mm gun control software

-          More mature integration of the laser designation pod

-          Expanded communications fit, new radios

-          IFF mode 5 upgrade

-          Multifunctional Information Distribution System (MIDS) enhancements

-          New Differential GPS navigation system

-          Complete digital integration of IRIS-T short range air to air missile

The more mature integration of the laser pod comes down mainly to enabling it to work at wider angles than those cleared with CP193.

The IRIS-T so far was not completely integrated. To the UK this is of little interest, since it uses ASRAAM, and this was fully integrated already in Tranche 1 Block 5.

P1EA also includes unspecified improvements to a range of systems including Rover terminal integration (to share imagery from the targeting pod with air attack controllers on the ground equipped with the Rover laptop), IFF, Forward Looking Infra Red FLIR, Chaff/Flare and DASS self-protection system, with improved accuracy of threat detection and enhanced countermeasures technologies.

SRP 10 software will also allow up to six non-sequential or four simultaneous surface strikes in a single pass.

P1EA will finally hit service in the first quarter of 2013, if all goes according to plan. By September, the RAF expects the Paveway IV bomb to finally be operational on the Typhoon.

The P1EB software will add new display formats for the air-to-ground role, significantly improving the Human Machine Interface (HMI), minimising the pilot’s workload in the most complex scenarios and facilitating simultaneous swing-role operations by allowing a pilot to continue a bomb run while at the same time fighting off air attacks. Pilot workload will be further reduced by expanded and enhanced Data Link 16 / Multifunctional Information Distribution System (MIDS) functionality, with much greater data transmission capacity.

There will also be a two-stage delivery of Direct Voice Input upgrades, with the first package of enhancements increasing the vocabulary to almost 90 commands, and allowing the pilot to request information to be displayed for any target or waypoint by voice command.

It will also allow the pilot to manipulate the Laser Designator Pod and even to create a waypoint at a point of interest with just two commands. Combined with the HEA (Head Equipment Assembly), with the Striker head-mounted display, this will dramatically improve combat effectiveness, as the pilot will be able to engage targets in all directions without having to physically turn the fighter around. He will also have complete access to all relevant information on his display, regardless of where his head is pointed, without the need for looking down at the HUD or cockpit screens.

P1EB flight trials should have already begun: the plan was to start the test flying on July 20 with BAE’s IPA6 airplane.

But Brimstone and Storm Shadow? Keep waiting.

P1E is to be followed, in the future, by a Phase 2 Enhancement program (P2E), again released in incremental steps.

There is a first commitment to this next phase, a “contract one” signed, but we are still quite far from having a precise plan for the future. According to Eurofighter:

In the future, it is anticipated that Nations can continue to develop the product but maintain a common baseline product and reduce the dependency on funding being available from other nations. This approach has already been successfully applied to the Tranche 1 product (Note: with RAF money with CP193).

As it has done with AESA development, industry has self-funded some forward development work on advanced air-to-ground capabilities in support of the export campaigns.

There is a growing recognition that with the partner nations all under budgetary pressure, in order to sustain the technology base, Eurofighter may have to share the development of new technologies with partners beyond Europe. As a result, export customers will have the same ability to push the pace of weapon integrations, even if the weapon required is not a priority for the partner nations.

The ability to integrate a new targeting pod and new weapons (ones not previously associated with the Typhoon), and in such a rapid timescale, speaks volumes for the adaptability and agility of the aircraft – and of its manufacturers.

With the India order a broken dream, it is Saudi Arabia that has to drive things forwards, along with the UK.

And, luckily, the Saudis are quite active: this year their Tranche 2 airplanes will be modified to use a Laser Designation Pod, and they will be the first nation having self-designation capability on Tranche 2 airplanes, for the issues described earlier. The pod selected is the French Damocles LDP, already used by the Saudis on their Tornado fleet. Saudi Arabia purchased Paveway IV bombs from the UK for 457 million USD, initially for use on Tornado, and then on Typhoon, in early 2011, but the US are opposing the sale, and Saudi Arabia is reportedly considering buying France’s AASM if the issue can’t be solved. It would be a major blow for Raytheon UK, caused by what is supposed to be “the best ally”, the nation which, more than anyone else, pours technology and weapons into Saudi Arabia. But the US do not want to take risks on the US-produced advanced Anti-Jamming GPS unit used on the Paveway IV, and the diplomatic conflict continues to rage, albeit behind curtains of silence.  

In addition, Saudi Arabia has abandoned earlier plans of producing the last 48 of its 72 Typhoons locally. Difficulties with the industry complex meant a change of plans, and now BAE Systems will build at Warton, in the UK, all of the Saudi Typhoons. In exchange, the last 24 airplanes will have Tranche 3 features, and Saudi Arabia is pushing for the airplanes to come fitted for (and possibly with) electronically scanned array radars and conformal fuel tanks. They are pressing ahead energically with P1E enhancements, which they might achieve before of the four original partner nations.

Saudi Arabia likes the Typhoon, but wants it to develop its air-ground capability. Quickly. Providing them with the capability they want is crucial for securing a widely anticipated second Typhoon order, which could be for another 72 airplanes.

The UK might find the best ally in Saudi Arabia, in the fight for ensuring that the airplane is finally fully developed and armed.

Going with the original European partners seems to slow everything down. According to Eurofighter:

The four nation future capability plan is also under evaluation, though it is likely that Storm Shadow/Taurus cruise missiles will be integrated by 2015, with the advanced Dual Mode Brimstone multi-role close air

support weapon following.

Ignoring the fact that Dual Mode Brimstone will start being supplemented and replaced by Brimstone 2 already next year, it must be noted that we are facing another delay in the plan. It had been hoped to see Storm Shadow and Brimstone fielded by 2014.

Both weapons are said to have Saudi Arabia’s interest, so perhaps the RAF and RSAF could go ahead on their own.

Again, Eurofighter adds:

The Typhoon will wait until mid 2016 for clearance of the Meteor BVR air-to-air missile under a specific Meteor Integration Contract, though development and risk reduction activities are moving ahead, and the planned AESA radar will be introduced in 2015.

Mid 2016 now…? Well, not bad, considering that the Typhoon was originally planned to have Meteor by 2011! Until this Eurofighter news came out, the planned ISD in the RAF was July 2015, but even this target will apparently be missed by a good bit.

Even the AESA radar bit is not as good a news as it would seem. Even if the AESA radar was available by 2015, would it be actually be fitted into the airplanes? Would it be provided at build on Tranche 3 aircrafts at least? For Tranche 2 it is too late already, and a retrofit will be needed if AESA is to be fitted.

Worst part is that it might be late even for Tranche 3 production: orders for Captor radar components for the Tranche 3 Typhoons have already been placed, and work started. Large parts of the system should be the same, but it is not clear what the plan exactly is.

In 2010 the RAF had walked ahead of the other partner nations by placing a 16 million pounds national contract with Selex Galileo for the development and demonstration of an AESA radar solution for Typhoon. It should fly on a RAF Typhoon next year, and is known under the program name Bright Adder. The radar is to have a big air-ground focus, but also, reportedly, the capability to work as a communication data link and an electronic warfare weapon.

The radar aerial is not fixed like in current AESA radars, but mounted on a repositioner, giving a 200° field of view, against a common 120°. 

Similar, yet not the same, is the Captor-E main AESA effort, being brought forwards by the Euroradar consortium. It first flew on a Typhoon in May 2007, and earlier still there was CAESAR (Captor AESA Radar), test flown on a BAC-111 test-bed aircraft.

However, progress was scarce, and the RAF decided to go ahead on its own to have a Plan B in case things would not work.

Finally, in July 2010 the Euroradar consortium made a formal offer to provide an AESA solution for the Eurofighter, following which industry funded the development of a production-series standard AESA radar system, and this is what is now being pushed forwards.

The unit is based in part on the back end of the existing CAPTOR, and on the Selex Vixen 1000E or Raven ES-05 currently under development for the Gripen NG. It uses a similar wide field of regard repositioner for wide field of view, like Bright Adder.

Intended capabilities include greater simultaneous radar functionality, with faster and more accurate detection and tracking of multiple aircraft.

The UK Typhoon Tranche 3 should be at least fitted for (and hopefully with...) adoption of two dorsal 1500 liters Conformal Fuel Tanks. These would prove incredibly useful in the land attack role, as they equate the capacity of 3 auxiliary fuel tanks but do not take away any of the weapon pylons.

This is crucially important because the sole 2 pylons rated for Storm Shadow carriage are the “wet” pylons: either it carries Storm Shadow, or the fuel tanks.

The third auxiliary fuel tank would go in ventral position, where the Laser Designator Pod is normally installed, even if for a long time the LDP has been shown in Eurofighter images fitted at one of the semi-conformal hardpoints under the fuselage. 

It is obvious that having conformal tanks solves a few awkward problems!

BAE Systems curiously reports a story slightly different: according to them, there is no longer a P2E phase, this having been abandoned 

“… in favour of a more organic ‘heartbeat upgrade cycle’. This will see new capabilities being integrated according to a two-year software upgrade cycle featuring SRP 14, SRP 16, SRP 18 and SRP 20, rather than one single big upgrade.”

One possible interpretation of this difference is that, as I suggested, the UK might be looking to a national plan, coherent with the larger Eurofighter plan, but at the same time different. BAE, RAF and RSAF might be about to go onwards on their own path. And indeed BAE adds:

In the wake of the recent ‘Contract One’ signature, the UK now has the power to be able to press ahead with such upgrades even without the participation of the other partner nations. This is a new and important development, and, in concert with the demonstrated new ability to rapidly integrate new

weapons (shown by recent Saudi Typhoon plans), should ensure that the RAF can equip its Typhoons

with the capabilities it requires more quickly than would otherwise have been the case.

Many new capabilities will of course, still be required by all of the Typhoon partner nations, and incorporated as part of a four-nation approach, including – for example – AESA radar.

According to some sources the Storm Shadow/Taurus air-launched cruise missile and the Brimstone air-to-surface missile should be integrated under SRP 14.

Similarly, SRP 14 should also introduce an initial operating capability for the Meteor air-to-air missile, with SRP 16 adding full Meteor operating capability.

The planned AESA radar (known as Captor E) should be introduced with either SRP 16 or SRP 18, though at one point this was expected with SRP 14 (in the case of aircraft built for India) and with SRP 16 for the four partner nations to meet an entry-into-service target date of 2015.

The situation is complex, between Tranches, Blocks, SRPs and, now, even the contradictions between BAE’s words and Eurofighter’s words.

I must also admit that I really can’t understand how the “2-year cycle” for software releases actually works. If SRP16 means 2015 ISD, SRP14 should arguably mean ISD in 2013, no? Instead, in 2013 we’ll get SRP10.

The feeling is that software releases are actually years late into active service…

RAF Fleet growth

Number 1 (Fighter) Squadron will reform officially at the RAF Leuchars Jubilee Air Show on 15th September becoming the fourth front line squadron to operate the Typhoon in the UK. According to the MOD Business Plan 2012, the new squadron will achieve Initial Operating Capability in March 2013.

The fifth Typhoon squadron, again to be based in Leuchars (until the planned move to Lossiemouth, at least) will stand up and achieve IOC between April 2013 and March 2015. The identity of the squadron is not yet known.

Full Operating Capability for the Typhoon force is expected in March 2018.

The latest reports, via Jane’s, suggest that the plan of retiring the Tranche 1 Typhoons by 2019 will be abandoned. They will instead be retained, and two more squadrons will be formed, to keep up RAF strength as the Tornado GR4 bows out, by 2019 according to the latest plan.

In addition there would be 48 F35B for the Carrier Strike fleet, procured apparently between 2013 and 2023.

There are some problems in retaining the Tranche 1s, however. The role for which they could more easily be retained is the Air Defence / Quick Reaction Alert role, but even for this, the airplanes would ideally need the AESA radar, since Meteor is best exploited with such a radar system. Other improvements would also be necessary, and of course the missile integration would have to be validated on the older Typhoons. As it is, Meteor is being integrated on Tranche 2 and Tranche 3 only.  

On the other hand, using them in the Swing Role / Land Attack role in the long term is hardly conceivable, as it would require a massive weapon integration effort, plus even more modifications to software and hardware.

And unfortunately, Tranche 1 airframes are weaker than Trance 2 and 3 ones: there are narrower payload limits, and other differences that make it impossible / economically unfeasible to upgrade them to a common standard. It’s the first reason why the plan for an early retirement in 2019 came up to start with.

Development of Tranche 1 Typhoons was indeed to end with SRP 4.3 / Block 5 under the main Typhoon contract. Fortunately, an agreement has been found between the partner nations to continue delivering “Drops” of software upgrades into Tranche 1 airplanes.

It’ll be interesting to see how the RAF approaches the unique challenges of keeping the Tranche 1 in service into the 2020s, if this ends up being the path chosen as it now appears likely. For sure, it’ll be years still before the Typhoon becomes a complete system.

Typhoon’s performance in Libya

All Typhoons employed in Libya were Tranche 1 Block 5 ones, due to the awkward situation we talked of earlier, which sees Tranche 2 airplanes being currently less capable in Air to Ground work than the older Tranche 1.

The Typhoon was limited by its AG armament, limited to the sole 1000 pounds Enhanced Paveway II and Enhanced Paveway II+  (The Plus is a UOR development which couples the Paveway II to the anti-jamming GPS module used by the Paveway IV), but in one area at least it came with a great advantage on Tornado GR4.

The Typhoon is fully network-integrated, and thanks to its Data Ling 16 MIDS it can see the situational awareness picture all the time, sharing data in real time with Sentry, Sentinel, Reaper, with all NATO combat airplanes and with suitably equipped ground stations.

The Tornado GR4, unfortunately, to this day is left without a Data Link capability. It is a very relevant limitation, which makes everything more complex: Flight Lieutenant John Robins-Walker, of 14 Squadron, said after an Afghanistan tour that the lack of Data Link connectivity left them without situational awareness, almost like they were blind. To know the situation in the crowded Afghan sky, they could only relay on radio calls to the AWACS assets in flight at the moment.

For a Tornado GR4, sharing data with other assets is currently impossible, other than via voice communication on the radio, whereas a Link 16 enables a constant upgrade on the position and status of all allied platforms and also makes it possible for the troops on the ground, of any NATO nation, to send standard 9 lines messages for calling Close Air Support, in near real-time and without translation issues, an important factor in a multinational scenario of operations.

The RAF is aware of this problem, and in December 2007 a contract was signed for the Capability Upgrade Strategy (Pilot) programme. This was confirmed in the SDSR 2010 when the decision was made to keep Tornado in service:  

[…] 96 Tornado GR4 aircraft will receive capability upgrades between 2011 and 2014 at an estimated cost of around £300 million. This number of aircraft is sufficient to maintain the operational capability of the Tornado GR4 Forward Available Fleet until OSD. There are currently no plans for the aircraft to receive any further capability upgrades after 2014.

Under CUS(P), General Dynamics UK was selected to provide the Tactical Data Link (TDL) sub-system of the Tactical Information Exchange Capability (TIEC) programme for the Royal Air Force Tornado GR4 and Harrier GR9 aircraft, integrating the Link-16 and Improved Data Modem (IDM) on the aircrafts. TIEC integrates the Link-16 and IDM messaging functionality with the aircraft systems to provide the aircrew with enhanced situation awareness that will enable the prosecution of Time Critical and Time Sensitive Targets and will support dynamic re-tasking of the platform and provide a significant enhancement in the area of coalition operations.

The Harrier GR9 was ahead of Tornado in terms of network integration, and flew with its own TIEC version in June 2010.

The TIEC is/was to enter service in 2012 on Tornado GR4, but current status of the programme is not known. A Tornado GR4 fitted with TIEC first flew in November 2010, however, and hopefully we’ll hear something soon about Entry into Service.

The Tornado GR4 is also due to get Secure Communications on Tornado (SCoT), a packet of software-controlled radios developed by Ultra under a 2005 contract. SCoT flew in 2010, but it is not yet in service. Its main purpose is to simplify the pilot’s life by memorizing frequencies and radio networks, allowing the crew to select the needed channel for talking with other airplanes or troops on the ground much more quickly and easily, using a simple interface.

As a UOR, in the meanwhile, Tornado was fitted with the CAGNET multi-band transceiver (based on a Rohde & Schwarz MR6000L software radio) which embodies the Have Quick II waveform used for air-ground communications with JTACs. CAGNET is effectively an half-way house for the longer-term SCoT in which Rohde & Schwarz figures as a principal subcontractor. SCoT in fact uses the very same transceiver, but has additional waveforms including SATURN.

The current MOD position is that whatever improvement Tornado needs, it must get it by 2014, because there won’t be funding for any other upgrade after that date, due to the currently anticipated Out of Service date being 2019. The Tornado’s force at readiness is also going to shrink massively by 2015 as Afghanistan needs end, dropping from 40 elements at readiness to 18.

In the meanwhile, Typhoon force elements at readiness will increase, and their air to ground capabilities will expand. As we’ve seen, though, Tornado GR4 is going to stay the sole Storm Shadow/RAPTOR/Brimstone platform for quite a while still.

In Libya, the Tornado GR4 and Typhoon flew together so that the Tornado crews could be briefed on the radio by the accompanying Typhoon crew about the Data Link 16 picture that the GR4 can’t see. The Typhoon also worked as a “mini-AWACS” of sort, thanks to its powerful radar and data link, and its DASS self-protection system would keep track of any menacing radar transmission in the area, helping to keep the pilots aware, both on the Typhoon and on the Tornado accompanying. In exchange, initially, Tornado GR4 pilots guided the far less experience Typhoon pilots in the ground attack missions, and for a while laser-designated the targets for the Typhoons.

Eventually, when enough operational experience was built up, Typhoons started to carry Litening III and self-designated their targets.

To understand what kind of impact Data Link 16 and MIDS have, I’m reporting the words of Wing Commander Patounas, 3^rd Squadron RAF, as appeared in the BAE book “Typhoon: a year on the road”.

As I coasted out from Sicily, I could move my map down to Libya, see every single aircraft that was in the AOR, click on any track, open it up and it would tell me the call sign, how much fuel it had, the height and heading, and its type, tanker, UAV, fighter, ISTAR, the whole hit.

“I had a picture of what was going on in the AOR and the disposition of the maritime fleet, so I could see where the carrier group (sadly not a UK Carrier group…) was, where any destroyers were, and see which types they were.

“And if ASTOR or Joint STARS were out there and painting ground tracks, that information would also be available. I could have details of ground tracks of interest and still have an hour transit to go. I was able to form a picture of what’s going on before I got there.”

 “We’d get airborne about 20 minutes after the Tornados and put them up on our radar, typically 100 miles ahead. We’re all heading to a point in space where we’re supposed to meet the tanker. Looking at the display I can see that there is no tanker; sometimes tankers break. So I already know there’s no fuel and spoke to C2 [the command] using JVOICE, which is the voice capability on Link 16, who advise me that a tanker is coming. Once I know the position to meet the tanker, I would instruct the Tornados and meet them at that point. That saves the Tornados a whole stack of gas because they have not gone hundreds of miles in the wrong direction.

“That’s one part of the link. If I received tasking away from a Predator, I would always want to know where it was and would ask to speak to the Predator crew to see if they had identified anything of interest. Because we can travel quickly, we can pop over to the Predator’s location and help, or add perspective to what the crew is watching on their screen, and often bring weapons to something that the crew wouldn’t engage.

“You can be pro-active in your search, go to where you’re told but you don’t know what you’re looking for because you don’t know what’s going to be there or what’s going to occur, it was all very dynamic.

“Rather than just sitting [on Close Air Patrol] unaware of what’s going on around you, [MIDS allows] you

to see there’s nothing going on where you are and that everyone’s at a different location. By suggesting that you move there to help we could help C2 out that way.

“And also you can send effectively text messages, so if you have radio problems, you can just send people messages over and above, so it really, really does enhance stuff.”

Provided the aircraft is on the link, the pilot has connectivity and can speak and communicate. “It’s like a wireless internet connection: when you’re on it you can use all the functionality,” said Patounas.

MIDS also helped pilots to de-conflict. Even in a tactical fighting situation flight safety is paramount and MIDS allowed aircraft to be identified in the battle space.

“C2 can’t tell you everything, but before we even get there [using MIDS] I can advise that there’s a pair over there, and we’re heading to that same area. Often you’d see them ahead of when you would have ordinarily picked them up.”

MIDS is also a huge advantage with locating the positions of unmanned aircraft, which move slowly and are difficult to spot. They are displayed and could be seen nine times out of ten when in the vicinity, according to one Typhoon pilot.

Two projects worth thinking about

Two very interesting written answers were given in Parliament yesterday, 10 July 2012, regarding Apache and the Smart Defence initiative launched by NATO. Let’s seethem:

Alison Seabeck: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what multinational projects the UK will be leading under the Smart defence umbrella following the Chicago Summit. [114421]

Mr Gerald Howarth: The UK will be leading two projects under the Smart defence umbrella. These are the Immersive Training Environments project, which seeks to enhance NATO's training and education capability through the development of synthetic systems, and the Theatre Opening Capability project which seeks to develop a multinational capability for expeditionary operations to establish a port of debarkation and conduct cargo handling and movement operations.

Mr Ellwood: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) when he plans that the Apache helicopter will be upgraded to utilise the Brimstone missile system; [116028]

(2) what plans he has to marinise the Apache helicopter; [116029]

(3) what the total number of Apaches in use is; and how many are earmarked for upgrade. [116030]

Peter Luff: The Army Air Corps currently operates a fleet of 67 Apache helicopters. The number of aircraft to be upgraded through the Capability Sustainment Programme will be decided at the main investment decision, which is currently planned for 2014.

While not originally designed as a maritime helicopter, the Ministry of Defence (MOD) has modified and cleared the Apache to support operations from the maritime environment as demonstrated from HMS Ocean on Operation Ellamy. The modifications included wet-sealing the aircraft to resist corrosion and modifying the windscreen wipers to include a solution to disperse sea spray. We are also currently in an assessment phase to fit flotation equipment to increase safety when operating over water.

The Apache is currently armed with variants of the Hellfire missile which are due to go out of service in 2021-22. The MOD will look at various options as a replacement to this capability. The successor to Brimstone, the 50kg class Spear Capability 2 Block 3 missile, will be one of the options considered as a replacement.

The two Defence Initiatives that the UK will lead under the Smart Defence agreement are both very interesting. Synthetic training and simulators are something that the british armed forces have been adopting on a large and ever expanding scale. Simulators of various nature and ambition level have been introduced into service for training soldiers prior to deployment, to train Royal Marines how to escape from a sinking Viking vehicles, to train personnel in how to evacuate a vehicle overturned by a mine blast, to train in the use of parachutes and firearms, to prepare crews for the AS90 self-propelled howitzer and so along. The UK is particularly sensible to synthetic training systems, and it is a good choice to have it leading the multinational effort in this direction.

But people will pardon me for being particularly interested in the second Capability, that of Theatre Opening. The scope of this initiative is potentially very ample, depending on the level of ambition that will be set. We are looking, potentially, at a true re-edition, in modern key, of the Mulberry Harbour pre-fabricated port of D-Day memory, depending on the level of existing infrastructure envisaged as requisite for “establishing a port of debarkation”.

For the UK, this multinational capability investment might be a way to remedy to the pretty certain loss of the 3 Joint Sea Based Logistic ships which were once planned as part of the original, very ambitious Military Afloat Reach and Sustainability (MARS) project. These three vessels were intended as deployable floating support bases carrying supplies for land forces and the means to disembark and distribute said supplies in absence of port facilities to support the operations of 3^rd Commando Brigade and/or of army forces deployed abroad. The JSBL was also meant to have rather extensive workshop and support facilities, where helicopters and vehicles could be maintained and serviced, close to the frontline, even in absence of suitable equipment and installations on land, limiting the number of vehicles and items of kit that have to be returned all the way back to the UK for being serviced.

It is now expected that the JSBL vessel will not be funded. Secured the 4 Fleet Tankers with the recent contract announced with South Korean shipyards, the Royal Navy’s new main target within MARS is the Fleet Stores Replenishment requirement: 3 vessels are envisaged, to transport and distribute solid stores to the ships of the fleet, including everything from food to gun shells to replacement F35 engines and aviation weaponry for the aircraft carrier’s wing.

The FSS vessels are meant to replace Fort Victoria, Fort Austin and Fort Rosalie in the early 2020s, and the 10-years budget contains allocation of money for initial activities connected to this requirement. The ships will almost certainly be fitted with the new Rolls Royce replenishment at sea (RAS) equipment, which can transfer pallets waiting 5 tons, against the current 2 tons, solving also an emerging problem of weight connected to the F35 (an F135 engine in its transport case is currently too heavy for the existing RAS rigs and is even creating problems to the US Navy for aerial transport, as it is incompatible with the Carrier On Board delivery plane, the Greyhound).

The Royal Navy is aware that there won’t be money for a further three ships in MARS, and they are also aware that, by the late 2020s, the new urgency will be delivering a replacement for RFA Diligence and RFA Argus, effectively killing pretty much any chance of financing the JSBL.

So they are hoping to incorporate some JSBL solutions for the delivery of stores to the shore within the FSS design. Among other capabilities that arguably FSS should try to deliver I’ll add the possibility of resupplying an SSN at sea with torpedoes and Tomahawk missiles, and the capability of replenishing at sea the missile cells of Type 45 and Type 26.

Currently, the RN has no capability to reload the missile cells at sea, and Tomahawk missiles can only be embarked on a submarine within a protected bay and with very calm sea. Expanding the capabilities in these two sectors would be a major improvement, no doubt.

The RFA Diligence’s replacement could take on some other characteristics of JSBL, if economically and technically feasible, by providing some workshop space and equipment compatible not just with the support to ships and submarine, but to land vehicles and helicopters as well. The Forward Repair Ship would be particularly useful if able to provide such comprehensive service. Of course, providing maintenance on helicopters would be relatively simple, while providing vehicle workshops and “fitter section” spaces would be more challenging, as vehicles would need suitable arrangements in the design of the ship for driving in and out, and in absence of a port, this means bringing the vehicle to be serviced to the Repair ship either via helicopter or, more feasible, via landing craft: a stern ramp allowing vehicles to board the landing crafts would be a possible solution, but this adds cost and complexity to the design, and the Royal Navy will be dealing with tight budgets and competing demands. A RFA Diligence replacement must come cheap, first of all.

Even assuming that workshops could be provided, and that the FSS vessels will have a decent capability for sending ashore supplies even in absence of a port, there would still not be that degree of independence from shore installations that is desirable.

In this optic, the outcome of the Theatre Opening Capability initiative will be very important, and potentially game-changing, if the ambition is that of enabling a large scale deployment in absence of suitable ports. The solution could be somewhat similar to the US Marines Mobile Landing Platform, but with a greater attention placed on the logistic aspect. The MLP itself is currently being built in a very basic configuration, but the design can be significantly enhanced by fitting ramps, already tested and validated, that allow vehicle transfer between ship and platform even in Sea State 4. Such Self-Deploying Ramps were tested in prototype form (produced by Cargotec this was named Test Article Vehicle Transfer System’ (TAVTS)) to the FLO-FLO ship MV Mighty Servant 3 in February 2010, and demonstrated at sea by the USMC with the successful transfer of personnel and vehicles from a Large Medium-Speed Roll-on/Roll-off (LMSR) vessel to the Mighty Servant in high sea state 3 and low sea state 4 over multiple days of testing in the Gulf of Mexico. Vehicles transferred included HMWVVs, HMWVVs with trailers, MTVR medium trucks, LVS wreckers, amphibious assault vehicles, M88 tank recovery vehicles, and M1A1 main battle tanks.

The capability is thus at a very high readiness level. Ideally, though, the design should be further refined, so to be able to work with different and unmodified Ro-Ro ships, without having to fit the vessels with their own part of the TAVTS ramp system. 

The TAVTS being trialed in the Gulf of Mexico, with its launch tower assembly well visible on the huge open deck of the civilian FLO-FLO ship Mighty Servant 3. The Theatre Opening vessel could be a FLO-FLO vessel, or a large barge deployed from a FLO-FLO vessel, acting as a firm "port" for dembarkation. From the barge, vehicles and supplies could drive ashore on floating causeways, or be brought onto the beach via landing craft and/or mexeflote.

A container crane can also be added, making it possible to bring huge amounts of supplies forwards using civilian or military container vessels.

Cranes of various design and capacity can of course be added, and connection to the shore can be achieved via landing crafts or via floating causeways of various design, effectively creating a port of entry: Ro-Ro ships loaded with vehicles and troops can connect to the MLP and transfer vehicles and men onto it, and from the MLP the vehicles can be driven ashore down the causeways or shipped with landing crafts. Container ships can berth alongside the platform and be unloaded by the crane, which might put the container directly down on the back of a truck ready to drive towards the shore or onto a winched sled connecting the platform to the beach and specifically thought to move containers back and forth. 

Thanks to US Marines studies and trials, many of the most complex problems have alreadybeen overcome, leaving the money aspect as perhaps the worst of all issues to be tackled. A multinational, collaborative approach might be the solution to the problem. 

I put together a proposal for such a "Theatre Opening" capability already long time ago, as my personal take on the JSBL ship, and i'm gonna put it forwards again as an example of what can realistically be achieved with the right effort.  

I am wary of such multinational plans, since results could never arrive for lack of funding and committment from this or that nation, delays could be caused by countless reasons and we might not see results for years, but at the same time i welcome the news of this Smart Defense plan, and i keep some hopes alive: i've just read the Army's Agile Warrior 2012 report (i'll write about it in the coming weeks) and they are saying that they "won't be able to avoid being dragged in battle in two particular environments being the Urban Areas and the Littoral, where most of the world's population and wealth is and will be concentrated. 

When even the Army start to admit that operations in the Littoral and amphibiosity are going to be more frequently needed, it is time for your hopes to grow at least a little.

Theatre Entry from the sea: my take on the JSBL/Mobile Landing Platform at full capability, including extensive workshops for maintenance of helicopters and land vehicles.

Regarding the Apache, it is interesting to hear that an emergency flotation device is being assessed for possible fitting onto the helicopter. The Army Air Corps had evidenced a list of improvements that the Apache needed to operate effectively and safely at sea in the future, right after the somewhat pioneer operations in Libya concluded. A flotation device was among the requirements deemed more urgent, since the crew of a current Apache which was to crash at sea during operations from a ship would have very little chances to get out in time to survive. It is good to see that some proper reflection and action is going into completing the “navalization” of the mighty Apache. Personally, I’ve long been saying that the cost of the folding blades and other “naval” features included in the UK Apaches is little thing when compared to the flexibility it offers. Purchasing “naval” Apaches was as smart a decision as it was stupid to buy Merlin helicopters deprived of their naval traits for the utility role.

The unpleasant note is the unwillingness to promise that all Apaches will be upgraded and life-extended out to 2040, but we can hope that, when the Main Gate point is reached, the right decision is taken. For sure, after all, Apache is, at the moment, a "must-stay" capability, which has been ringfenced from any hypothesis of cut. This is at least promising.

It is interesting to hear that the MOD plans to retire Hellfire by 2022. Currently, the Hellfire missile is employed by the Army on the attack helicopter and by the RAF on the Reaper drones, despite the current Brimstone missile having the capability to be employed from drones and helicopters without any issue.

The Reaper, of course, was procured for an Urgent Operational Requirement, so integration and validation of new, national and sovereign weaponry was a no-no as it would have required more money and, critically, more time, delaying the fielding of the drone in theatre.

The Apache was purchased along with its typical weapon, the Hellfire, and Brimstone, anyway, was not yet mature back then, and only entered service on Tornado in 2005, meaning that Hellfire was, if not the only choice for the Apache, surely a sensible one, in the optic of achieving IOC in 2000, even if the Apache Full Operating Capability was only declared in 2007. 

Hellfire also has the advantage of having been acquired in tens of thousands of rounds by the US, and by many export customers, so that its cost is also remarkably competitive. The US backing has also meant the timely development of upgrades, alternative warheads and other improvements that have kept Hellfire up to date and made it suitable for new roles and employment methods as time and events moved onwards.

At the same time, Apache started deploying on operations with the British Army as soon as it entered service, and is still going full strength to this day, so the appetite for devoting money, time and airframes to the integration effort required by a passage to Brimstone never developed.

But with combat operations in Afghanistan to end in 2014, with a mid-life upgrade to Apache to follow and with a new MALE drone to come into service in 2020 in place of Reaper, times are more than mature for nationalization and standardization of this particular area. By the early 2020s, it make a lot of sense to envisage the gradual retirement of Hellfire and the passage to Brimstone 2, also known as SPEAR Capability 2 (block 3?). 

For some clarity, it should be noted that SPEAR is a multi-capability programme, and each capability is divided in blocks. It does not make it very easy to keep track from the outside of exactly what is going on. Anyway, the Selective Precision Effects At Range (SPEAR) programme includes: 

SPEAR Capability 1 - Improvements to the Paveway IV bomb, new warhead options, potentially new seekers and guidance methods.  

Paveway IV is the british answer to the USAF’s JDAM, and it undoubtedly built on American experience with the Joint Direct Attack Munition: while the USAF first focused on a bomb guided on its targets by the GPS and then found out that a secondary laser-targeting mode was desirable, the Paveway IV was immediately conceived as a combined guidance weapon, using GPS and Laser, depending on the situation. The weapon is a guidance kit based on the existing Enhanced Paveway II Enhanced Computer Control Group (ECCG) added to a modified Mk 82 general-purpose bomb with increased penetration performance. The new ECCG contains a Height of Burst (HOB) sensor enabling air burst fusing options, and a SAASM (Selective Availability Anti Spoofing Module) compliant GPS receiver. It can be launched either IMU (Inertial Measurement Unit) only, given sufficiently good Transfer Alignment, or using GPS guidance. Terminal laser guidance is available in either navigation mode. The bomb displayed amazing accuracy, and can be detonated at impact, with delay to exploit penetration against protected, buried targets, or it can detonate in the air for air-burst effect. The Paveway IV guidance kits can also be modified to fit other sized warheads, but for now it is being used only for 227 kg warheads. Its stand-off range is significantly greater than any other precision guided bomb. Paveway IV's unique manoeuvrability means that, if necessary, following launch it can turn and attack a target behind the delivery aircraft. The availability of dual-mode laser/GPS guidance within a single weapon also means that air forces do not have to incur the expense of maintaining two separate (laser and GPS) weapon stockpiles.

As part of SPEAR Capability 1, a series of enhancements to the Paveway IV are to be pursued:

-          Low Yeld Warhead for reduced collateral damage in urban environment

-          Enhanced Penetrating Warhead for engagement of deeply-buried reinforced targets

-          Extended Range with wing-kit

-          Improvements to the GPS signals security

In particular, point 4 is already being undertaken by Raytheon, while point 3 should be the easier of all to fulfill, because the Paveway IV system is already compatible with the addition of wing-kits, and many such systems are already available, with an obvious leading contender in the form of the MBDA’s Diamond Back wing-kit, which would allow the bomb to glide for tens of miles to strike targets while keeping the launcher aircraft as far away as possible for enemy air defence weaponry.

Point two, perhaps the most interesting, would fill in a gap of capability of the RAF, which is currently not well equipped for the destruction of deeply-buried targets, which can range from caves where talibans hide to modern bunkers and underground facilities which have never passed out of fashion and remain common throughout the world. Most likely aimed to an upgrade of the Paveway IV and AASM respectively, the joint UK-France development programme through MBDA of the bunker-buster Hardbut warhead is the most probable answer to this requirement.

The second test firing of the Hard and Deeply Buried Target (HARDBUT) Next Generation Multiple Warhead System (NGMWS) was carried out successfully at the Biscarrosse test range of DGA Essais de Missiles on 14th September 2010. The HARDBUT Technology Demonstration Programme (TDP) is a successful warhead research programme jointly funded by the UK MoD and French Direction Générale de l’Armement (DGA) with MBDA UK as the Prime Contractor. The NGMWS is designed to defeat a wide range of targets such as command and control facilities, infrastructure and underground facilities including caves, reflecting current and potential future operations.

The recent orders for new Paveway IV (one worth 60 million pounds, and another one for less than 20 millions announced even more recently) reportedly included money to continue development of incremental improvements for the bomb under SPEAR arrangements. 

Paveway IV is on Saudi Arabia's shopping list since 2010, but the UK has been unable so far to ink the deal due to US opposition under ITAR regulations. Quite a low blow of the USA, considering that they do sell everything and more to Saudi Arabia themselves.  

SPEAR Capability 2

Capability 2 is about developing improvements / new variants of weapons in the 50 Kg class, mainly Brimstone. In fact, the "Brimstone 2" was recently unveiled by MBDA, and should enter service next year with the RAF, replacing the earlier Brimstone and the Brimstone Dual Mode which was, effectively, a UOR upgrade to the original missile. Brimstone 2 includes several improvements, including Insensitive Munition compliance for improved safety of handling and storage. It will have a multi-mission warhead and multi-mode seeker and will be launched from the typical triple rail (for fast jets and UAVs), from a readily available twin rail (UAVs) and in future from the quadruple rack currently used for Hellfire. Launch of Brimstone from the ground was tested and validated already in the late 90s, and launch from boats as small as 15 meters long has been validated literally in the last few days.

SPEAR Capability 3  

Development of a new 100 kg-class weapon, specifically for use on the F35 first of all, and on other platforms later. This new weapon system has been presented in these days. It is a multi-mission stand-off missile with a range of over 100 km, network-enabled, subsonic in speed and fitted with multi-role warhead. Its multi-mode seeker makes it suitable for engagement of mobile targets, even if they are maneuvering at high speed. 

The missile is effective as anti-ship weapon as well, and will be carried on a quadruple rack that will fit into the F35's weapon bays, alongside with a Meteor air-air missile. 

SPEAR 3 as shown by MBDA: the Typhoon is carrying 16 such missiles, a formidable firepower. The F35 can carry 8 internally, and could carry at least as many externally if integration went ahead.

 

SPEAR Capability 4  

MBDA-Led, joint anglo-french upgrade and sustainment programme for the Storm Shadow missile. Italy, being the third major user of the missile, could likely participate to the upgrade programme, while Saudi Arabia is unlikely to collaborate, save probably having its missiles later updated by BAE.

Not much is really known and firm about these future upgrades, but a two-way datalink is almost certainly going to figure, to allow re-targeting and increasing the control over the missile post-launch, just as with the latest Tomahawk IV. Other improvements are likely to include an increase of the range of the missile, particularly since the upgrade will build upon experience matured with the SCALP Navale with its 1000+ km range.

It is to be noted that the 250 km range figure for Storm Shadow is the range for a low-flight profile engagement from launch to hit. If the missile could do at least part of the cruise at altitude, efficiency of the propulsion would be much higher, allowing for a much longer range. 

The Lancaster House agreements signed in 2010 for collaboration between France and UK include a committment to joint Storm Shadow upgrades for the 2020s. 

Indeed, joint work is ongoing from long time in this area: an upgrade considered for Storm Shadow was the DUMAS, for which development started in 2006 in a collaborative programme with France. 

DUMAS technology combines an active infrared scanning laser and a passive infrared detector which, used in conjunction with sophisticated algorithms, detects, images and identifies targets. 

DUMAS improves existing and new missile systems by increasing target search areas and by providing powerful automated target identification capabilities. It was meant to  demonstrate a new seeker capable to guide the missile on moving, difficult targets, while also providing before-strike enhanced imagery, valid also to conduct a first mission-effect estimate.

The DUMAS is believed to have informed subsequent developments and researches tied not just to the Storm Shadow but also other elements of SPEAR.  

SPEAR Capability Block 5

Rumours about this last touted development went as far as to suggest a 600+ km supersonic cruise missile, possibly a replacement for Storm Shadow in the long term.

Blocks internal to the various Capabilities probably denote the various stages of improvement. The Capability 2 Block 3 might be a further enhancement of the Brimstone 2 entering service next year, since anyway the answer is relative to the 2020s period. 

By then, with some determination and investment, the Brimstone might finally fully mature, and meet its intended mission: become the common, multi-platform weapon of choice of the british Armed Forces, used on drones, attack helicopters, fast jets and, perhaps one day, on ships and land platforms as well. 

Already years ago, Brimstone was envisaged as Swingfire AT missile replacement in the missile Overwatch vehicle variant of the Tracer reconnaissance vehicle, which was then cancelled as we know. 

The army would still like to have an overwatch capability back in the future as part of FRES, though... who knows what might happen.