September 28, 2020 | International, C4ISR
General Atomics says that it has conducted captive carry tests of its Sparrowhawk, a new small drone that will be able to be launched and recovered in flight. The company says that Sparrowhawk is a demonstrator and was developed specifically to work with other larger unmanned aircraft that it builds, such as the MQ-9 Reaper and MQ-1C Gray Eagle, offering an important stepping stone to all-new capabilities on those existing designs, as well as future ones.
The California-based drone's maker said the captive carry tests, in which the drone was carried aloft by an MQ-9, but was not launched, took place between Sept. 16 and 17, 2020. This kind of testing is done to gather data on how a system, as well as the launch platform in many cases, handles the stress of flight.
A picture of Sparrowhawk that General Atomics released to The War Zone shows that the drone features a large main wing that is stowed parallel with the main fuselage before launch, after which is swings 90 degrees into a deployed position. The drone also has a v-tail and there appears to be at least one air intake for the propulsion system on the right side. It's unclear what type of powerplant powers the air-launched drone.
Sparrowhawk concept art that General Atomics posted on Twitter earlier in September showed a similar configuration, but with two fans at the rear of the fuselage. The company has said that the small drone will offer a reduced acoustic signature, as well as a visual one, compared to its larger designs, such as the MQ-9.
It's not clear yet how General Atomics is planning to recover Sparrowhawk in flight and whether unmanned platforms, such as the MQ-9, will be able to carry out this task. "Sparrowhawk iterates on the DARPA Gremlins Program," according to the company. Dynetics, now a subsidiary of Leidos, beat out General Atomics, among others, to build the experimental Gremlins drone, now also designed the X-61A, as well as the airborne recovery system, which is presently mounted on a C-130 Hercules transport aircraft. You can read more about Gremlins and the recovery concept, which includes the drone catching the end of a cable in flight and then being reeled in, in these past War Zone pieces.
It's hard overstate how significant Sparrowhawk, and any further developments it spurs, could be for both General Atomics existing product lines and future unmanned designs. The ability of a large drone to launch smaller ones, all potentially working together semi-autonomously or even as part of a fully-autonomous swarm, could open the door to all kinds of new capabilities, while reducing the risk to the launch platform.
“Sparrowhawk extends and multiplies MQ-9-based sensors, reduces manpower and increases ISR [intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance] coverage,” David Alexander, President of General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. (GA-ASI), said in a statement. Beyond providing far more flexible ISR over a larger geographical area, Sparrowhawks may also provide valuable stand-in electronic warfare jamming or even act as decoys to blind and confuse enemy
integrated air defenses, which could drastically increase the survivability of the launch platform and even help clear a path for other manned and unmanned aircraft, as well as stand-off missile strikes.
Sparrowhawks could potentially carry out their own kinetic strikes if they can be equipped with traditional explosive warheads, although there is no official information yet if arming these unmanned aircraft is a possibility. If it is indeed the case, these drones might able to act as loitering munitions, which would be able to conduct persistent surveillance of designated areas before then carrying out strikes on targets of opportunity or return for recovery and re-launch.
General Atomics says that Sparrowhawk is intended to be an attritable platform, as well, despite being designed to be recovered and reused. Attritable designs are those that are low cost enough that commanders can employ them in higher-risk environments that would be off-limits to more expensive exquisite types.
“With attritableONE technology that is survivable and precise, Sparrowhawk is a true game changer,” GS-ASI's President Alexander said. This program is part of the U.S. Air Force's expansive Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS) program, which is seeking to develop a host of new highly-networked technologies that will expand the service's ability to gather information and then rapidly analyze and disseminate it, including targeting data that can then be passed to other U.S. military units in the air, on the ground, and at sea.
As the name implies, attritableONE is focused on developing new attritable unmanned aircraft. In a recent major demonstration of various ABMS capabilities and associated technologies, an MQ-1C Gray Eagle launched an Area-I Air-Launched, Tube-Integrated, Unmanned System 600 (ALTIUS 600) small drone, acting as an attritableONE testbed. The ALTIUS 600 then positively identified a target that the MQ-1C's onboard sensors had first identified.
The U.S. Army has also been experimenting with the ALTIUS 600 as part of its Air Launch Effects (ALE) effort, which also envisions fleets of small drones performing various ISR, deception, and other tasks, which you can read about in more detail in this past War Zone piece.
During the recent ABMS demonstration, a General Atomics MQ-9 also carried a Rosetta Echo Advanced Payload (REAP) communications and datalink pod, which includes technology developed under gatewayONE and meshONE, which are also part of the broader ABMS effort. "The REAP pod has been developed under contract from the Air National Guard and demonstrated a communications relay capability for both Link-16 and the Silvus meshONE network providing seamless connectivity between air and ground participants in the demonstration area," according to General Atomics.
All told, the Sparrowhawk looks to be an extremely exciting development. It also comes at a time when the U.S. Air Force, the largest operator of MQ-9s, is looking to stop buying those drones due to concerns that they are simply too vulnerable to be useful during a high-end conflict. The ability of Reapers to launch and recover smaller, attritable drones and, by extension, perform a wider array of tasks over a larger geographical area, even in contested environments, could breathe new life into that design.
We at The War Zone are very eager to learn more about Sparrowhawk and what it can do.
May 25, 2021 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security
Details of President Joe Biden’s first defense budget won’t be out until Friday, but lawmakers on the left and right have already drawn out their lines for the battle ahead.
August 20, 2020 | International, Aerospace
By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — The Missile Defense Agency is planning to develop a layered homeland intercontinental ballistic missile defense architecture, but it must clear a range of hurdles to get after an approach that addresses emerging threats and fills a gap while a next-generation interceptor is developed, according to the agency's director. The agency unveiled plans in its fiscal 2021 budget request in February to create a more layered homeland defense system that would include regional missile defense capability already resident with the Navy and Army to bolster homeland defense against ICBMs. The plan would include establishing layers of defensive capability relying on the Aegis Weapon System, particularly the SM-3 Block IIA missiles used in the system, and a possible Aegis Ashore system in Hawaii. The underlay would also include the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system. The Army is already operating a THAAD battery in South Korea and Guam. The layered approach would buy time while the Pentagon scrambles to field a new interceptor to replace older ground-based interceptors — after canceling its effort to redesign the kill vehicle for the GBIs — in its Ground-based Midcourse Defense system located primarily at Fort Greely, Alaska. With little detail conveyed in MDA's budget request for a layered homeland missile defense plan, Congress is pressuring the agency to come up with a strategy and approach to putting the architecture in place in both the House and Senate passed FY21 defense authorization bills. Much is riding on the success of an upcoming test of the SM-3 Block IIA missile, Vice Adm. Jon Hill said during a Heritage Foundation virtual event on Aug. 18. The missile has seen several test failures in the recent past. “We're going to really stress the SM-3 Block IIA outside its design space,” Hill said. “It was designed for medium and intermediate range. Now we're going against long-range intercontinental ballistic missiles. The analysis says we'll be successful, but nothing is real to any of us until we actually get the empirical data from being out in the flight range.” The test will involve several time zones on several different ranges and the same ICBM target used in the most recent GMD test, Hill said. And while the test is still on track to happen by the end of the year, Hill said, challenges in coordination and travel due to the coronavirus pandemic could possibly have an impact on schedule. When the pandemic hit, “we were ready and postured to go to the Pacific to execute” Flight Test Maritime-44, Hill said, “so we did get the target on station. So the target's out there in the Pacific and it's ready to roll.” Following FTM-44, the agency would like to execute another test against a very complex ICBM target unlike the “simple” one being used in the upcoming test. That target will have “a lot of separation debris and that has a lot of countermeasures,” Hill said. “We want to make sure that the system in total, from the space assets to the radar to the engage-on-remote capability that passes that information to the ship, that ship can actually sift through all that and say, ‘That's the [reentry vehicle] and that's the where the missile's going to go,‘” he added. Success in the upcoming test doesn't mean the agency's work is done, Hill said. Upgrades will be required based on threats, combat system certifications will need to be conducted and work with the Navy to determine where Aegis ships would deploy will have to occur. The agency will also have to determine how quickly it can ramp up its production line for SM-3 Block IIA missiles. Then “if we succeed with Aegis, then we'll go right down the path with THAAD,” Hill said. The second big challenge, after ensuring all the parts work to provide layered coverage, is developing engagement coordination between the different layers, according to Hill. “Let's just say that step one is a ship off the coast as a complement to GMD. Those systems today talk already, but they're not talking in terms of being layered defenders,” Hill said. “So if GMD, for example, decides he's going to wait this first shot out and let the ship take it, we have to have the communication network to go do that. We have to have the technical architecture with the Command and Control Battle Management system, but in that context of layered defense and engagement coordination.” Aegis ships are already able to do engagement coordination among each other and the work the Pentagon is doing to get THAAD and the Patriot air-and-missile defense system to coordinate are “extensible to that problem,” Hill said, “but we still need to do that kind of engineering and that sort of architecture work.” And while a layered missile defense architecture for the homeland is an intricate one, “you don't have to solve the whole problem” at once, Rebecca Heinrichs, a missile defense analyst at the Hudson Institute, said during the Heritage Foundation event. But she cautioned that she did foresee challenges in establishing such an architecture on the political front rather than on the technical side. “Congress always wants to vet these kinds of things, so even though it is Congress that wanted the SM-3 Block IIA test, whenever you start talking about which district it is going to be in, where it's going to go and that kind of thing, that is a political challenge that takes a lot of debate and conversation.” https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/2020/08/18/missile-defense-agency-director-lays-out-hurdles-in-path-to-layered-homeland-missile-defense/
April 2, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security
Byron Callan The coronavirus pandemic is going to be as consequential for defense and security as were the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the U.S. For the defense sector, there are multiple implications to ponder and possibly to begin to position for as these play out in 2021 and beyond. Large contractors should fare relatively well in 2020, compared to other sectors. They will not see the demand destruction that is ripping through commercial aerospace and therefore are unlikely to experience financial duress. That alone may enable them to act strategically and aggressively in 2020 and beyond, although there are risks to weigh as well. Here are six changes to ponder: First, a crisis the size of the COVID-19 pandemic is bound to spawn new government investment and organization to address future outbreaks. The Sept. 11, 2001, attacks led to the formation of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and creation of the position of director of national intelligence. It's fair to assume there will be changes in the wake of the current pandemic. Some contractors already have federal services segments that address U.S. health care. Core skills they can bring are dealing with bureaucracies, technology and regulations. There should be new opportunities in 2021 and beyond from whatever changes are made to improve the national resilience and response to future pandemics. Second, small and medium-size businesses are being stressed. The CARES Act in the U.S. may help somewhat, and changes in Defense Department progress payment rates could be another short-term relief. Large contractors might choose to vertically integrate to improve their fortitude against future shocks. Or there could be further consolidation, particularly of distressed suppliers. A reintegration of defense and commercial aerospace is a third change that might emerge. The Raytheon-United Technologies merger may be a harbinger of this shift. The ramifications of the coronavirus crisis on the air transport and commercial aerospace sectors could lead to structural changes and a need for capital, particularly in commercial aerospace. If valuations remain depressed in 2020-21 in commercial aerospace, there could be more opportunity for defense contractors to reintegrate. A fourth change could be to expectations for contractors. The model for U.S. defense since 1945 has largely been that the Pentagon pays for the bulk of research and development, and contractors can reclaim most of their own research and development as an allowable cost for which they are reimbursed. Operating margins have generally risen, compared to levels evidenced in the 1980s and before, and large contractors have in the last 15-20 years allocated most free cash flow to shareholders. It is conceivable that this model will change in the 2020s. Operating margins may appear to be ho-hum compared to other sectors, but returns on invested capital are attractive. If there is a greater squeeze on the Pentagon budget and demand for security remains steady or increases, this could compel the Pentagon to change expectations for contractor behavior. Could they be expected to take on more contract risk? Will they need to step up their own independent research and development funding or find more creative ways to access and apply technology to national security needs? On the flip side, could there be more emphasis on dual-use technology investment, as occurred in the 1990s, where research and development for defense should have commercial/civil benefits as well? A fifth potential change is in security threats and national defense strategies. Some governments and regimes might come through this crisis with their positions enhanced, having overseen relatively mild disruptions and having been able to achieve quick economic bounce-backs. Others, however, will have failed this test, and they could see new political challengers (in democracies) or be overthrown or consumed by internal unrest from competing forces or mass movements that are emboldened by recent failures. The Middle East remains a likely place for these sorts of changes; Venezuela is another. The civil war in Syria and the fighting in Libya are current examples of how state collapse and regime challenge can drag in outside interests. The U.S. National Defense Strategy that reoriented the Pentagon and contractors toward “great power” competition could be pulled in different directions depending on where fragilities emerge. Some allies may be significantly weakened, and that could bear on U.S. defense planning and export sales. It is not just the coronavirus that matters in this regard; the crash in oil prices is also a factor to weigh. Finally, the coronavirus has turbocharged federal deficits and is sending federal debt to record levels. It may take weeks or months to assess just how much is going to be added, but there will be a fourth and possibly a fifth stimulus package in the U.S. Ultralow interest rates and the urgency of limiting social and economic damage and keeping the health care system functioning make this tolerable. But higher debt raises the risk in the 2020s that if rates increase, interest outlays could weigh on defense. https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/opinion-six-ways-covid-19-could-change-defense-sector