Cost is not going to be that much of a problem for Raytheon given its foundry and the volumes it is either producing or competing to produce. Each TPY-2 is 25,000+ T/R modules and that is what they are delivering this year. If the Saudi order on THAAD comes through they could look to double annual radar production. Even at one TPY-2 a month you are essentially looking at 20-22 airborne fighter radars worth of equivalent capacity at the moment. Add to that their A4 and AMDR competes and the potential to double TPY-2 and you can get a sense of where raytheon is heading in the X-band GaN component world. The problem is to get a new radar through the Navy acquisition system, get it tested, cleared by DOTE and then field it. Someone has to pay for that and it is not a sure thing so it is unlikely to be something the OSD considers. Regardless, keep piling cost on the $77 Million FY16 baseline.

Can they just swap the modules and that’s it?

Not yet but Raytheon has hinted that after the TPY-2 GaN upgrade they will focus on the AN/MPQ-64 A4 since they would want to be ahead of the US Army time-frame by a good 3-4 years given export prospects in Poland and the Middle East (hence we also see the AMRAAM-ER when they could have simply waited for ground launched ESSM Blk. II as they had earlier planned). TPY-2 GaN antenna is currently in production and FY17 radar deliveries will be GaN (and all that follow as well). Beyond this AMDR-X is a competitive program and probably one of the largest X-Band GaN programs. Between these efforts they are likely to create enough capacity to create an AN/APG-79 program but it will add to the cost of the aircraft and won’t provide anything in the short term. Decisions made by the OSD could affect the FY18 or 19 budget and adding cost is unlikely to get Boeing to be competitive to the F-35C since radar performance increase won’t reduce the Super Hornet’s Radar cross section or improve its passive targeting suite etc. The DOT&E won’t allow the hypothetical GaN radar to proceed without an OT&E (they are currently doing this to the AN/TPS-80 adding about 7 months to its IOT&E schedule) which would not be cheap or quick.

Do you think Raytheon could afford the upgrade on its own funding? The navy could be interested in upgading some of the older APG-79s.

You know the answers to these very simple questions are available. You just need to do a simple bit of internet research to get the info…

Huh I didn’t ask any question, what are you talking about?

I am not sure the Navy would bother with stealth pod. I think the centerline pod has to be unmounted to be loaded, they may not like that.

Other than that it’s the engineers’s job to try to find original cost effective ideas that would convince the Navy. I am not saying it’s easy.

Maybe the SH would be cost effective vs the F-35C if it carried a lot of missiles in stealth pods. 4 AMRAAMs in not enough. Try to fit 10 AMRAAMs in 2 wing stealth pods pods while keeing it capable of supersonic speed, like M1.2 with the EPE engines. The pylon that carries the pod has to be designed to be stealthy. 4 pods in subsonic a2g config. That would be the minimum otherwise the F-35 is a better investment.