27 avril 2020 | International, Aérospatial

Hypersonics: DoD Wants ‘Hundreds of Weapons’ ASAP

“We want to deliver hypersonics at scale,” said R&D director Mark Lewis, from air-breathing cruise missiles to rocket-boosted gliders that fly through space.

By

WASHINGTON: The Pentagon has created a “war room” to ramp up production of hypersonic weapons from a handful of prototypes over the last decade to “hundreds of weapons” in the near future, a senior official said Wednesday. Those weapons will range from huge rocket-powered boost-glide missiles, fired from Army trucks and Navy submarines at more than Mach 10, to more compact and affordable air-breathing cruise missiles, fired from aircraft at a relatively modest Mach 5-plus.

“It isn't an either-or,” said Mark Lewis, modernization director for Pentagon R&D chief Mike Griffin. “It isn't rocket-boost or air-breathing, we actually want both, because those systems do different things.”

Right now, however, US combat units have neither. Inconsistent focus and funding over the years means that “we had a number of programs in the department that were very solid technology development programs, but at the end of those programs, we would have prototypes and we'd have weapons in the single-digit counts,” Lewis said during a webcast with the Air Force Association's Mitchell Institute. “If you've got a program that delivers eight missiles and then stops, well, which of the thousand targets in our target set are we going to use those eight missiles against?”

With hypersonics now a top priority for both Undersecretary Griffin and Defense Secretary Mark Esper, the Pentagon is trying to improve that stop-and-go track record with a new “hypersonic acceleration plan” – no pun intended, Lewis said. Griffin likes to compare the effort to the Cold War, when the US had a massive nuclear weapons infrastructure capable of building complex components by the tens of thousands.

“We want to deliver hypersonics at scale,” Lewis said. “That means hundreds of weapons in a short period of time in the hands of the warfighter.”

Mass-production, in turn, requires production facilities – but today hypersonic prototypes are basically hand-crafted by R&D labs like Sandia. Lewis and his counterpart in the Pentagon's acquisition & sustainment directorate, Kevin Fahey, are “co-chairing what we're were calling a war room ... looking at the hypersonic industrial base,” he said. “That's not just the primes, but the entire industrial base” down to small, specialized suppliers.

Controlling cost is both essential to large-scale production and a huge challenge, Lewis acknowledged. “We don't know what these things cost yet,” he said. “We've asked the primes to consider costs as they're developing.”

Which hypersonic weapons the Pentagon buys also makes a major difference. “There are some technology choices we can make that lead us to more cost-effective systems,” he said. “I'm especially enthusiastic about hypersonic weapons that come off the wings of airplanes and come out of bomb bays, [because] I think those are some of the keys to delivering hypersonic capabilities at scale and moderate cost.”

Likewise, “[there's] larger investment now in the rocket boost systems,” Lewis said, “[but] one of the reasons I'm so enthusiastic about scramjet-powered systems, air-breathing systems is I think that, fundamentally, they can be lower-cost than their rocket-boosted alternatives.”

Why is that? Understanding the policy, it turns out, requires a basic understanding of the physics.

Sydney J. Freedberg Jr. graphic from DoD data

Breaking Defense graphic from DoD data

Four Types of Hypersonics

Hypersonics isn't a single thing,” Lewis said. “It's a range of applications, a range of attributes, [defined by] the combination of speed and maneuverability and trajectory.”

To put it in simple terms – and I'll beg the forgiveness of any aerospace engineers reading this – there are two kinds of hypersonic projectile, based on how they fly: one is an air-breathing engine flying through the atmosphere, like a jet plane or cruise missile; the other is a rocket booster arcing to the edge of space, like an ICBM. There are also two kinds of platform you can launch from: an aircraft in flight high and fast above the earth, or a relatively slow-moving vehicle on or below the surface, like an Army truck, Navy warship or submarine.

Combine these and you get four types. Lewis thinks all four could be worth pursuing, although the Pentagon currently has programs – that we know about – for only three:

  • Air-launched boost-glide: Air Force ARRW (Air-launched Rapid Response Weapon). The Air Force also had another program in this category, HCSW (Hypersonic Conventional Strike Weapon), but they canceled it to focus on ARRW, which the service considers more innovative and promising.
  • Surface-launched boost-glide: Army LRHW (Long Range Hypersonic Weapon) and Navy CPS (Conventional Prompt Strike). Both weapons share the same rocket booster, built by the Navy, and the same Common Hypersonic Glide Body, built by the Army, but one tailors the package to launch from a wheeled vehicle and the other from a submarine.
  • Air-launched air-breathing: HAWC (Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapons Concept) and HSW-ab (Hypersonic Strike Weapon-air breathing). Arguably the most challenging and cutting-edge technology, these programs are both currently run by DARPA, which specializes in high-risk, high-return research, but they'll be handed over to the Air Force when they mature.
  • Surface-launched air-breathing: This is the one category not in development – at least not in the unclassified world. But Lewis said, “eventually, you could see some ground-launched air breathers as well. I personally think those are very promising.”

Each of these has its own advantages and disadvantages, Lewis explained.

Rocket boosters are proven technology, offering tremendous speed and range. The Minuteman III ICBM, introduced in 1970, can travel over 6,000 miles at Mach 23. Their one drawback is that ICBMs can't steer. Once launched, they follow a predictable course like a cannon ball, which is why they're called ballistic missiles. The big innovation of boost-glide weaponry is that it replaces the traditional warhead with an agile glider. Once the rocket booster burns out, the glide body detaches and coasts the rest of the way, skipping nimbly across the upper layers of the atmosphere like a stone across the pond.

But boost-glide has some big limitations. First, once the rocket booster detaches, the glide body has no engine of its own so it just coasts, losing speed throughout its flight. Second, precisely because the rocket launch is so powerful, it puts tremendous strain on the weapon, whose delicate electronics must be hardened against shock and heat. Third, the booster is big, because a rocket not only has to carry fuel, it has to carry tanks of oxygen to burn the fuel.

Sydney J. Freedberg Jr. graphic from DoD data

Breaking Defense graphic from DoD data

An air-breathing engine, by contrast, can be significantly smaller. It just has to carry the fuel, because it can scoop up all the oxygen it needs from the atmosphere. That means the whole weapon can be smaller, making it much easier to fit on an aircraft, and that it can accelerate freely during flight instead of just coasting, making it more maneuverable.

But while conventional jet engines are well-proven technology, they don't function at hypersonic speeds, because the airflow pours their intakes far too fast. So you need a sophisticated alternative such as a scramjet, a complex, costly technology so far found only on experimental vehicles, like the Air Force's revolutionary Boeing X-51.

Even with a scramjet, you can't fly too high because the air doesn't provide the needed oxygen. That means air-breathing weapons can't reach the same near-space altitudes as boost-glide missiles. They also can't fly nearly as fast. Lewis expects air-breathers will probably top out around Mach 7, half or less the peak speed of a boost-glide weapon. (That said, remember the glider will have slowed down somewhat by the time it reaches the target).

Sandia National Laboratories graphic

Sandia National Laboratories glide vehicle, the ancestor of the Army-built Common Hypersonic Glide Body

The platform you launch from also has a major impact on performance. Warships, submarines, and long-bodied heavy trucks can carry bigger weapons than aircraft, but the weapons they carry need to be bigger because they have to start from low altitude and low speed and go all the way to high-altitude hypersonic flight. By contrast, an air-launched weapon doesn't need to be as big, because it's already flying high and fast even before it turns on its motor.

All these factors suggest that the big boost-glide weapons are probably best launched from land or sea, the smaller air-breathing ones from aircraft in flight. But since boost-gliders go farther and faster than air-breathers, you still want them as an option for your bombers for certain targets. On the flipside, while a naval vessel or ground vehicle has plenty of room to carry boost-glide weapons for ultra-long-range strikes, it can also use the same space to carry a larger number of the smaller air-breathers for closer targets.

“We're interested in basically the full range,” Lewis said. “We've got some ideas of things we want to put into play quickly, but we're also extremely open-minded about future applications, future technologies.”

https://breakingdefense.com/2020/04/hypersonics-dod-wants-hundreds-of-weapons-asap/

Sur le même sujet

  • Raytheon-FlexRadio team to develop airborne high-frequency radio

    5 septembre 2019 | International, C4ISR

    Raytheon-FlexRadio team to develop airborne high-frequency radio

    FORT WAYNE, Ind., Sep. 4, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- Raytheon (NYSE: RTN) will develop and qualify a high-frequency radio under a $36 million Project Agreement through an Other Transaction Agreement with Consortium Management Group. The OTA is on behalf of Consortium for Command, Control and Communications in Cyberspace, in support of requirements from the U.S. Air Force Life Cycle Management Center. The new radio will provide beyond line-of-sight, long distance communications for aircrews. "High-frequency radios provide the military with secure communications in an increasingly complex and congested threat environment," said Barbara Borgonovi, vice president of Integrated Communication Systems. "Raytheon's partnership with FlexRadio combines commercial innovation with advanced military hardening techniques to rapidly deliver a next-generation operational capability that supports strategic and tactical missions." The Raytheon-FlexRadio team is one of two recipients for this development program. After the 31-month period of performance, one team will be named to move on to production. "Worldwide high-frequency communications is what our commercial customers do every day using virtually every mode of operation and type of propagation," said Gerald Youngblood, CEO of FlexRadio. "Our partnership brings together the vast resources and experience of Raytheon in airborne tactical communications systems with FlexRadio's commercial off-the-shelf high-frequency Software Defined Radios to deliver a modular, extensible, and flexible communications platform for the warfighter." About CMG The mission of Consortium Management Group, Inc. on behalf of Consortium for Command, Control, and Communications in Cyberspace (C5) is to speed development of technologies to improve U.S. Government capabilities required to sustain U.S. military supremacy in weapon systems information technologies. For more information on CMG and its uniquely rapid, cost-effective and collaborative acquisition vehicle for companies, nonprofits and academic organizations seeking to do business with the Federal Government, contact Mary Reinecke at mary@cmgcorp.org, 202-466-4211 About FlexRadio FlexRadio Systems is a leader in technologically advanced software defined radio systems for the consumer, commercial and government markets. Founded in 2003, FlexRadio has customers in more than 30 countries with a wide range of products spanning consumer HF radio systems, government geolocation sensors and signals intelligence platforms. FlexRadio Systems is headquartered in Austin, Texas. For more information, please visit www.flexradio.com. About Raytheon Raytheon Company, with 2018 sales of $27 billion and 67,000 employees, is a technology and innovation leader specializing in defense, civil government and cybersecurity solutions. With a history of innovation spanning 97 years, Raytheon provides state-of-the-art electronics, mission systems integration, C5ITM products and services, sensing, effects and mission support for customers in more than 80 countries. Raytheon is headquartered in Waltham, Massachusetts. Follow us on Twitter. Media Contact B.J. Boling +1.972.952.4761 saspr@raytheon.com http://raytheon.mediaroom.com/2019-09-04-Raytheon-FlexRadio-team-to-develop-airborne-high-frequency-radio

  • How the Office of Naval Research hopes to revolutionize manufacturing

    16 octobre 2018 | International, Naval

    How the Office of Naval Research hopes to revolutionize manufacturing

    By: Daniel Cebul WASHINGTON — The Office of Naval Research awarded Lockheed Martin Oct. 1 a two-year, $5.8 million contract to explore how machine learning and artificial intelligence can make complex 3-D printing more reliable and save hours of tedious post-production inspections. In today's factories, 3-D printing parts requires persistent monitoring by specialists to ensure intricate parts are produced without impurities and imperfections that can compromise the integrity of the part overall. To improve this laborious process, the Navy is tasking Lockheed Martin with developing multi-axis robots that use lasers to deposit material and oversee the printing of parts. Lockheed Martin has multiple partners on the contract including Carnegie Mellon University, Iowa State University, Colorado School of Mines, America Makes, GKN and Wolf Robotics and Oak Ridge National Laboratory. The contract covers what Glynn Adams, a senior engineer with Lockheed Martin, describes as the pre-flight model of the program's development. Initial work will focus on developing computer models that can predict the microstructures and mechanical properties of 3-D printed materials to generate simulation data to train with. Adams said the Carnegie Mellon team will look at variables such as, “the spot size of the laser beam, the rate of feed of the titanium wire [and]the total amount energy density input into the material while it is being manufactured.” This information helps the team predict the microstructure, or organizational structure of a material on a very small scale, that influences the physical properties of the additive manufactured part. This data will then be shared with Iowa State, who will plug the information into a model that predicts the mechanical properties of the printed component. By taking temperature and spot size measurements, the team can also ensure they are, “accurately controlling energy density, the power of both the laser and the hot wire that goes into the process,” Adams said.. “All of that is happening before you actually try to do any kind of machine learning or artificial neural networks with the robot itself. That's just to try to train the models to the point where we have confidence in the models,” Adams said. Sounds easy, right? But one key problem could come in cleaning up the data and removing excess noise from the measurements. “Thermal measurements are pretty easy and not data intensive, but when you start looking at optical measurements you can collect just an enormous amount of data that is difficult to manage,” Adams explained. Lockheed Martin wants to learn how shrink the size of that dataset without sacrificing key parameters. The Colorado School of Mines and America Makes will tackle the problem of compressing and manipulating this data to extract the key information needed to train the algorithms. After this work has been completed, the algorithms then will be sent to Oak Ridge National Laboratory, where robots will begin producing 3-D titanium parts and learn how to reliably construct geometrically and structurally sound parts. This portion of the program will confront challenges from the additive manufacturing and AI components of the project. On the additive manufacturing side, the team will work with new manufacturing process, “trying to understand exactly what the primary, secondary and tertiary interactions are between all those different process parameters,” Adams said. “If you think about it, as you are building the part depending on the geometric complexity, now those interactions change based on the path the robot has to take to manufacture that part. One of the biggest challenges is going to be to understand exactly which of those parameters are the primary, which are the tertiary and to what level of control we need to be able to manipulate or control those process parameters in order to generate the confidence in the parts that we want.” At the same time, researchers also will tackle AI machine learning challenges. Like with other AI programs, it's crucial the algorithm is learning the right information, the right way. The models will give the algorithms a good starting point, but Adams said this will be an iterative process that depends on the algorithm's ability to self-correct. “At some point, there are some inaccuracies that could come into that model,” Adams explained. “So now, the system itself has to understand it may be getting into a regime that is not going to produce the mechanical properties or microstructures that you want, and be able to self-correct to make certain that instead of going into that regime it goes into a regime that produces the geometric part that you want.” With a complete algorithm that can be trusted to produce structurally sound 3-D printed parts, time-consuming post-production inspections will become a thing of the past. Instead of nondestructive inspections and evaluations, if you “have enough control on the process, enough in situ measurements, enough models to show that that process and the robot performed exactly as you thought it would, and produced a part that you know what its capabilities are going to be, you can immediately deploy that part,” said Adams. “That's the end game, that's what we're trying to get to, is to build the quality into the part instead of inspecting it in afterwards." Confidence in 3-D printed parts could have dramatic consequences for soldiers are across the services. As opposed to waiting for replacement parts, service members could readily search a database of components, find the part they need and have a replacement they can trust in hours rather than days or weeks. “When you can trust a robotic system to make a quality part, that opens the door to who can build usable parts and where you build them,” said Zach Loftus, Lockheed Martin Fellow for additive manufacturing. “Think about sustainment and how a maintainer can print a replacement part at sea, or a mechanic print a replacement part for a truck deep in the desert. This takes 3-D printing to the next, big step of deployment.” https://www.c4isrnet.com/industry/2018/10/15/how-the-office-of-naval-research-hopes-to-revolutionize-manufacturing

  • Navy Orders Two Hellfire SSMM Systems for LCS

    24 novembre 2020 | International, Naval

    Navy Orders Two Hellfire SSMM Systems for LCS

    Posted on November 23, 2020 by Richard R. Burgess, Senior Editor ARLINGTON, Va. — The U.S. Navy has ordered two more Surface-to-Surface Missile Modules (SSMMs) for integration into the Surface Warfare Mission Package of the littoral combat ships, bring to four the number of SSMMs on order. The Naval Sea Systems Command awarded Northrop Grumman Systems Corp. a 10.7 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for two additional SSMM systems for delivery by November 2022, a Nov. 20 Defense Department contract announcement said. The SSMM is a modular weapons system that fires Lockheed Martin-built AGM-114L Longbow Hellfire missiles from launchers built by Teledyne Brown Engineering. Each launcher houses a total of 24 missiles. A prototype launcher has demonstrated the capability to defend against multiple swarming Fast Attack Craft/Fast Inshore Attack Craft (FAC/FIAC). During one test, a volley of six missiles were launched in rapid succession from an LCS, successfully destroying a swarm of six high-speed targets. More than 100 missiles have been fired to date with a greater than 90% successful engagement rate. The SSMM achieved Initial Operational Capability on the Freedom-variant LCS in February 2019 and was deployed on USS Detroit in November 2019. Northrop Grumman is under contract to build four SSMM systems so far. The Navy has a requirement for 12 SSMM systems. https://seapowermagazine.org/navy-orders-two-hellfire-ssmm-systems-for-lcs/

Toutes les nouvelles