A sophisticated air combat maneuvering instrumentation system is
expected to arrive on the Navy’s USS Kitty Hawk aircraft carrier
next summer, despite recent difficulties in the program, including
delays and cost overruns.
The prototype system is part of a Navy-Air Force program called
the Joint Tactical Combat Training System (JTCTS). The Navy originally
sought this technology for tactical combat training, to replace
older Top Gun-type ranges. The goal was to develop a range system
that could be used at sea, where both the aircraft and the ships
would be instrumented. A Navy-only program was cancelled in 1992.
In 1995, the Defense Department mandated that the program become
a joint effort with the Air Force, which was seeking a similar capability
for its combat ranges.
Air combat maneuvering instrumentation consists of sensor-equipped
pods, carried under the wings of aircraft used in training. They
contain electronics that record and calculate simulated firings
of weapons and “kill” messages. The information, which
relies on Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) data, is viewed in
real time via a computer data link to ground-based monitors.
“The Navy and the Air Force have unique tactical training
requirements,” said William V. McCanless, program manager
for JTCTS at the Naval Air Systems Command. The Navy’s existing
tactical aircrew combat training system (TACTS) and the Air Force’s
air combat training systems (ACTS) have been in use for many years.
“To take advantage of recent technologies and replace our
legacy training systems, a determination was made [by the Pentagon]
to create a joint acquisition with the Navy as the lead service,”
McCanless told National Defense.
A contract for the JTCTS was awarded in 1995, to the Raytheon Company
Naval and Maritime Systems, in Portsmouth, R.I. It was a five-year
contract with production options, said Joseph Ricci Jr., the company’s
technical director for training systems.
JTCTS can be described as a range-less instrumented training network
of ships and aircraft that rely on GPS satellites and simulation
technology to create a “synthetic environment overlaid on
real world participants,” said Ricci in an interview. Simulated
weapon and radar threats also are part of JTCTS. The air maneuvers
can be monitored in real time on ground- or ship-based stations
or can be recorded for future after-action review.
The instrumentation would monitor aircraft position and record
combat actions. The instrumentation also would simulate threats
and stimulate aircraft sensors with threat data. A JTCTS game area
would cover a 400-nautical mile radius from the monitoring site,
or 150 nautical miles, line of sight, for range-less operations.
One hundred instrumented aircraft would “play” in an
exercise with about 600 simulated entities.
The technology, said Ricci, provides a “deployable training
system, interfacing with, but not dependent upon dockside facilities,
shore-based training sites, or fixed ranges.”
Raytheon is expected to deliver a mobile JTCTS to the USS Kitty
Hawk, in July 2001, said McCanless. “Initial delivery of the
system will include instrumentation for 12 aircraft (F-14s and F-18s),
a central core, and a display and debriefing system.”
The next phase, said Ricci, will be “to take the hardware
and integrate it into fixed ranges,” at Oceana, Va., Cherry
Point, N.C., Fallon, Nev., and others. “The last phase will
be a full battle-group training capability for use on aircraft and
ships.”
The system is designed for real-time monitoring, similar to what
is done at current ranges, Ricci said. It also can operate in a
range-less mode, such as when an aircraft takes off from a carrier
and flies beyond the line of sight, so it can’t be monitored.
The simulated weapon engagements “will run inside the instrumentation
and keep track of what is going on,” he explained. If a radar
signal hits the aircraft, the effect is simulated to the radar-warning
receiver. “The pilot will know he is being tracked by enemy
radar, and will anticipate a weapon being fired. If the simulated
weapon hits him, he will know. When he returns to the carrier, all
the recorded mission data will be downloaded so there can be a debrief.”
The instrumentation pod that goes on an aircraft looks like a missile.
“It has the same weight and balance of a missile so it does
not disrupt the aerodynamics aspects of the aircraft,” said
Ricci. The electronics are packed in small boxes. “The goal
for both services would be to have the system inside the aircraft
entirely. The Navy already has moved in that direction with the
F/A-18. The electronics go inside the instrumentation package, instead
of an outside tube.”
The system for the Kitty Hawk has instrumentation for 12 aircraft,
“but you could have as many as 100 aircraft,” he said.
Out of the 12, four will have pod-based systems and the other eight
will have internal electronics packages.
Risk in the Program
The JTCTS program has been criticized for being overly complex and
too expensive. Development costs since 1995 have topped $100 million,
Ricci said. A senior Navy officer who asked to not be named said
JTCTS has “some risk in it right now [but] we think it’s
the right thing to do.”
Cost overruns were experienced in 1999, said McCanless. As a result,
the contract with Raytheon was re-negotiated from a “cost-plus”
to a “fixed price” arrangement. The schedule, therefore,
slipped by one year, McCanless said. “Primary causes of the
JTCTS schedule delay were assessed as software development issues,
inadequate management and key personnel turnover.”
Ricci conceded that staffing problems were a factor in the delays.
“The amount of software that had to be developed was more
than we had anticipated. We needed more people,” he said.
“Getting qualified software developers for real-time development
was a strain.”
The company also made “some management changes,” Ricci
said. “We have a different management team, more experienced
in integration and testing.”
To address the Navy’s complaints about cost overruns, he
said, “Raytheon took the position that it would take this
[as a] fixed price [project] to mitigate this concern.”
If the deployment on the Kitty Hawk is successful, Raytheon expects
to receive a production contract for JTCTS next year. That agreement
also may be on a fixed-price basis, said Ricci. “When the
production contract is issued, we will provide production unit costs,
depending on the production run. We don’t know their production
strategy yet. ... There will be a production decision for the Air
Force and for the Navy. We don’t know the number of systems.”
In the future, Ricci said, JTCTS will be compatible with Army ground
range instrumentation. “Ultimately JTCTS will be used as the
air portion of a joint war game.”
The next-generation Joint Strike Fighter, he said, has a requirement
to be JTCTS compatible. “All new aircraft will have to meet
that requirement, so you don’t have different developments
and support systems.”
One of the JTCTS subcontractors, Cubic Defense Systems, in San
Diego, has been one of the dominant players in the range instrumentation
industry. The company ended up on the JTCTS team after acquiring
Applied Data Technology Inc., which had been a subcontractor to
Raytheon since the beginning of the program.
Cubic has been in the air combat maneuvering instrumentation business
since the early 1970s. The company was awarded a $3 million contract
earlier this year by the U.S. Air Force to expand air combat training
capabilities at the Air National Guard’s Combat Readiness
Training Center at Alpena, Mich. The first range-less air training
technology was deployed at the Kadena Instrumented Training System
(KITS) in 1997, at Kadena Air Force Base in Okinawa, Japan.
“At this time, Raytheon does not plan to use any of the KITS
technology in the JTCTS program,” said Ricci. “We will
look at what they have done for KITS,” such as the magnetic
devices used to record the training missions.
Rick Dickson, Cubic’s director of air range systems, said
the company will focus on the displays. He noted that JTCTS has
“very demanding requirements” because it is a joint
program. “It’s more stringent than just a single-service
system.”
Cubic’s range-less systems cost anywhere from $5 million
to $10 million, depending on the requirements, said Dickson.
Until JTCTS is completed, the Air Force is using the USAFE (Air
Force Europe) range-less interim training system, or URITS. Cubic
competed for that award, but lost to Metric Systems Corp., in Fort
Walton Beach, Fla. URITS supports F-15, F-16 and A-10 fighter squadrons
in Europe and the Middle East.
Paul W. McGillick, electronic warfare marketing manager for Metric
Systems, said he hoped the Navy would become interested in the URITS
equipment, since JTCTS is behind schedule. “We are trying
very hard to incorporate the Navy into our customer base,”
he told National Defense.
McCanless said the Navy will wait for JTCTS and had no plans to
buy training pods from other vendors.
Metric has built and delivered 88 training pods to USAFE. The systems
are leased over a five-year term, at the end of which they can be
bought or returned to the contractor. “We have to meet an
uptime availability of 85 percent to get paid,” said McGillick.
“These systems have flown 13,000 sorties and we have exceeded
99 percent availability.” The cost of leasing a URITS pod
is between $170,000 and $200,000.