USAF considers scrapping Lockheed Martin JASSM

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/JASSM060707.xml&headline=LM%20Must%20Fix%20JASSM%20This%20Month

LM Must Fix JASSM This Month

Jun 7, 2007
Amy Butler/Aerospace Daily & Defense Report

Lockheed Martin has until the end of June to negotiate a get-well plan with the U.S. Air Force for its $5.8 billion stealthy cruise missile program or face full termination.

The Pentagon is already exploring alternatives that include the U.S. Navy’s Tactical Tomahawk – arguably an expensive option – and the Standoff Land Attack Missile Expanded Response (SLAM-ER). Foreign options are not off the table, according to Diane Wright, the Pentagon acquisition office’s deputy director of air warfare. That could leave the door open to MBDA’s Storm Shadow cruise missile.

The Lockheed Martin Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM) was the only one of five Pentagon programs that had recently breached cost by more than 25 percent not to be approved for continued work. Work will proceed on restructured versions of the C-130 Avionics Modernization Program, the Joint Primary Aircraft Trainer effort, the Marine Corps’ Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle and the Army’s Warfighter Information-Tactical program.

A stop-work order for JASSM has not been issued to the contractor, though in accordance with the Nunn-McCurdy law that governs programs with major overruns, the Air Force cannot obligate further funds until the Pentagon approves a program replan.

But that is by no means a certainty. Citing what she labels as philosophical problems with Lockheed Martin’s management of ongoing JASSM issues, Air Force acquisition executive Sue Payton says that “We are not proud – and neither is Lockheed Martin – of the status of this program. We can’t just fix one thing at a time.”

Payton added that Lockheed Martin has seemingly not taken a holistic view of JASSM’s problems.

Critics say the Pentagon rushed JASSM into production too early in 2004, and now 600 missiles are fielded. Wright says the missile is providing a 58 percent reliability rate – meaning at least two missiles would be required by planners should they be needed for targets before fixes can be implemented. Restrictions have not been placed on those missiles, though Payton says that is an option

JASSM began as an effort to field 2,400 low-cost stealthy cruise missiles with a 200 nautical-mile range. The Air Force, however, bears some of the responsibility for JASSM’s problems. The service added 2,500 extended range variants – increasing to 500 nautical miles the missile’s range. The total buy is expected to be 4,900 missiles.

Also added were a Selective Availability Anti-Spoofing Module (SAASM), which protects the Global Positioning System (GPS) signal emitted to the weapons, made by Rockwell Collins.

Work on a maritime JASSM variant and a related datalink has been halted pending the outcome of this month’s program review.

Of primary concern to the Air Force is the missile’s low reliability. Payton says efforts to integrate SAASM onto the cruise missile may be at the root of a recurring “GPS dropout” problem that has resulted in multiple missiles missing their target in recent tests (DAILY, May 10).

SASSM, which is used to protect the GPS signal for weapons, is also on other Pentagon systems, including the Joint Standoff Weapon, Small-Diameter Bomb, Joint Direct Attack Munition and others. Payton says the Air Force’s Air Armament Center at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla., is exploring whether GPS dropout is occurring on other SASSM-equipped weapons.

But other technical problems have not been ruled out. During the April tests, one of the missiles did not achieve its goals due to a fuzing problem.

The Defense Acquisition Board will decide whether to restructure JASSM and move ahead or terminate the effort on June 27.

Or get the Taurus instead!

Both Scalp Shadow and Taurus currently don’t have a bi-directional datalink, something JASSM would have.

Wonder if they’d go ahead with scrapping AGM-129 if JASSM goes nowhere …

You’d think they’d at least do something like CALCM rather than just chucking them. Of course it could just be that they don’t want to be shooting off hundreds of crashed F-117 windfalls if you know what I mean.

Or get the Taurus instead!

Both Scalp Shadow and Taurus currently don’t have a bi-directional datalink, something JASSM would have.

Wonder if they’d go ahead with scrapping AGM-129 if JASSM goes nowhere …

Why? RATTLRS uses a turbine engine. Other than the engine there’s nothing revolutionary about it. And HyFly? Maybe. Thing is if either of them fly 300-500 miles in a test why would it take 10 or 20 years to make a weapon out of them? The hard part would be done already.

Beouce you are talking about turning a mach-3 missile demonstrator into a truly cost effective weapon. With the current DoD budget issues I find it highly unlikely that it will deployed any time in the near future. Even JASSM should have been low cost and low risk by comparison. Its the fiscal rather than technical issues that I think would hold back RATTLRS and HyFly rather than the technical.

Well JSOW-ER has a reported range of some 300NM (about 580KM) on paper it probably is not going to match the JASSM or any improved variants but at least it might work!

I would be surprised to see RATTLRS or HyFly produce viable affordable weapons systems for an incredibly long time- potentially decades.

Why? RATTLRS uses a turbine engine. Other than the engine there’s nothing revolutionary about it. And HyFly? Maybe. Thing is if either of them fly 300-500 miles in a test why would it take 10 or 20 years to make a weapon out of them? The hard part would be done already.

I don’t know. JSOW definitely isn’t in the class of a *working* JASSM let alone a JASSM-EX and I still think it would be far cheaper to fix JASSM (since Lockheed is the one that should be footing the bill) than to start from scratch. On the other hand if RATTLRs comes to anything (and it’s got competion there from HyFly) maybe JASSM will die a deserved death.

Well JSOW-ER has a reported range of some 300NM (about 580KM) on paper it probably is not going to match the JASSM or any improved variants but at least it might work!

I would be surprised to see RATTLRS or HyFly produce viable affordable weapons systems for an incredibly long time- potentially decades.

I don’t know. JSOW definitely isn’t in the class of a *working* JASSM let alone a JASSM-EX and I still think it would be far cheaper to fix JASSM (since Lockheed is the one that should be footing the bill) than to start from scratch. On the other hand if RATTLRs comes to anything (and it’s got competion there from HyFly) maybe JASSM will die a deserved death.

I don’t know, it doesn’t seem like anybody learned anything from TSSAM. Then again they were (apparently) able to turn THAAD around. I think LM ought to be given the chance to turn it around and make everything right at their own expense. I also think whoever negotiated the contract for the USAF ought to be fired. There should have been launguage in there that explicitly states what the USAF expects re: reliability and that the contractor is REQUIRED to deliver that with no additional money added even if they have to pay for it themselves. That’s the way the rest of the world operates.

Agree. My comments were not to make light of the situation. However I think LM, given all of the other continuous sad stories surrounding JASSM needs a dose of reality. We are flat out of money to waste on lame horses. There are tons of other programs out there that could use that money without screwing up. We can still break an IADS without JASSM. And as Sealord mentioned, JSOW-ER, while no JASSM has some potential. Other programs out there would get an extra benefit of seeing JASSM killed by the object lesson of “this could be you if you don’t perform”. Also Sferrin I agree with your point on accountability. It isn’t always just the contractor but the contractor and government procurement teams together or in part that can sink a program. My opinion is that there is no way JASSM can pull a rabbit out of it’s hat in 30 days. And given the fact they had all of this time to fix previous failures from years ago, they need to be cut off from the gravy train for good. And then let the lawyers drag it out like A-12 for years and bury it. Again we are so flat broke on money in current budgets we don’t have the money, time, blood or jet fuel to bet on known losers.

In the long run it would be a good thing if JASSM was taken out back and beaten to death and cancelled. A good object lesson for everyone else to consider. LM should eat the cost of JASSMs already delivered.

I second that, this has gone to far and gone on too long. It might be time for the powered version of the JSOW to see the light of day.:mad:

In the long run it would be a good thing if JASSM was taken out back and beaten to death and cancelled. A good object lesson for everyone else to consider. LM should eat the cost of JASSMs already delivered.

I don’t know, it doesn’t seem like anybody learned anything from TSSAM. Then again they were (apparently) able to turn THAAD around. I think LM ought to be given the chance to turn it around and make everything right at their own expense. I also think whoever negotiated the contract for the USAF ought to be fired. There should have been language in there that explicitly states what the USAF expects re: reliability and that the contractor is REQUIRED to deliver that with no additional money added even if they have to pay for it themselves. That’s the way the rest of the world operates.

In the long run it would be a good thing if JASSM was taken out back and beaten to death and cancelled. A good object lesson for everyone else to consider. LM should eat the cost of JASSMs already delivered.

I don’t see them purchasing the Storm Shadow.

But 25 failures out of 64 launches is pretty stunning!

Nic

I don’t either. The navy is probably laughing and asking the USAF “hey, you want some SLAM-EX?” 😀 TSSAM, JASSM, what next? Seriously though I’d be curious as to the cause of all those failures as JASSM is just not that bleeding edge.

I don’t see them purchasing the Storm Shadow.

But 25 failures out of 64 launches is pretty stunning!

Nic