This one has always confused me. It is a good read on the status of the JASSM program. You see, if some of the test missiles were only 200 feet off target, why didn’t the scene matching imager in the nose that is used in terminal phase, pick up the slack? Yet many faults were claimed to have been caused by “GPS drop-out”. Also interesting because INS kits for the day are pretty good and only need routine and not continuous GPS updating.
In test flights during April and May 2007, the program experienced four of four test failures, producing an overall missile reliability rate of less than 60 percent. During tests on 30 April and 01 May 2007, three of the missiles missed by up to 200 feet, and a fourth failed to detonate on impact, a repeat of a previously-experienced fuze failure. Developers blamed the misses on “GPS dropout” that compromised the missile’s navigation system. The GPS receiver works with a very weak signal from fast-moving distant satellites, and some such dropouts are unavoidable. GPS dropout conditions may occur because of moving into an area with terrain blockage. At times there may be interference from other radio sources or even sunspot activity. When a GPS dropout does occur, navigation systems can give bad track. Following a GPS dropout, a receiver can require several seconds for reacquisition lock.
The program office developed a plan to solve the reliability problems by: (1) implementing a software change to the GPS receiver, (2) correcting a design flaw by moving a cable associated with the weapon’s anti-spoofing capability farther away from the engine, and (3) reworking the software code for a key data processor. The program office planned a minimum of nine ground tests in late 2007 and early 2008 as well as a 16-shot test-flight program in the February through mid-March 2008 time frame. These tests were expected to verify the planned improvements to JASSM’s reliability. The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics would evaluate the test results.
Following the test failures, the Air Force officially halted procurement of JASSM missiles in July 2007. No additional procurement would occur until the reliability improvements had been demonstrated. Of the 942 missiles on contract as of March 2008 (Lots 1-6) from the total planned buy of 4,900 baseline and ER variants, 611 have been delivered. According to program officials, if the planned tests validated JASSM’s reliability, the Air Force expected to restart procurement by renegotiating the Lot 7 buy.
The Government Accountability Office reported in a March 2008 assessment that the JASSM design was still not stable. The program office was not acquiring drawings, a measure of design stability, because the contractor had Total System Performance Responsibility wherein, according to program officials, the contractor guarantees the missile performance. Component problems supplied by sub-contractors include the missile’s electrical systems, warhead, and power system, as well as its guidance kit and engine components.
Warts and all, like Obi-won, it may be our only hope in the coming years—because of not enough F-22s—to hit important targets that are well defended by modern integrated air defenses. It is gold plated—as opposed to its “affordable” marketing spin—and the target better be worth the cost. This weapon is important in other ways because it can be carried by our long range bombers and get somewhere quicker than a Navy ship or sub with Tomahawk. While there is all of the this-waritis waste in the FY2010 and FY2011 budgets, there is a healthy amount of spending on this weapon. It will be a crutch for the USAF when no other resource is available in the coming years.
RAAF [again] is the sole foreign operator of JASSM. Meanwhile, DuAF is considering whether to adapt the type.
Oddly enough, another fine Lockheed product!
Another PowerPoint engineering marvel that our future air posture will have to depend in the coming years. We can thank the Gates inspired political witch hunt that killed production of our only functioning 5th gen fighter.
And equally not operational anytime soon (like the JSF), thanks LM.
What’s wrong with the JASSM now? They’ve re-worked the system, and by all accounts the current production model works perfectly well.
Really, the JASSM was going to be necessary, even if the F-22 was in full production. Given the density of air defenses over China or Russia, the AF would need the JASSM to thin out the opposition before it moved in fighters closer.
If the AF paired the JASSM with the JSOW-ER as the low end weapon, that would be a powerful stand off system. The JASSM for the first shots against Radars or missile sites, then the JSOW – ER for lower value targerts / higher volume attacks.
Finally, Stand-Off weapons are the future, the sheer range of air combat dictates that. The JASSM had design problems, they’re fixed now, and it will be a useful tool. Though, the USAF should work on something a bit faster, and a short range, around 30 – 50 mi, lighter weight weapon.
Which sounds good after the 3rd failure event since the program started. They still have to fix all of those previously delivered Lots. Oh… and fuse issues still have to be worked out.
Sending the JASSM after SEAD/DEAD can be done but not if the target in question is something like a mobile SAM which can be way down the road by the time it shows up.
I think it will show value in combat. Just that the path we used to get to this point is pretty bad…. and expensive. It is obvious that the intial tests of this weapon were pencil-whipped to get it into production.
Regardless what I think, it will be used with some good (if gold-plated) effects.
Still wondering how in the terminal phase the IIR sensor didn’t pick up the slack from a 200ft navigation error. Interesting.
ArkadyRenko:
The six successful tests of the JASSM-ER are a good start, but don’t make up for the huge waste of funds, and dismal testing earlier in the program. All along the LM spin machine was making it seem like this missile was the greatest thing since sliced bread.
I agree it’s a great weapon to have in our inventory IF it works as advertised.
It should be pointed out that the JASSM which Australia is purchasing, is not the JASSM-ER which racked up the 90% record in testing that LM is crowing about. At this point the ER variant is not being exported and is intended primarily for the US strategic bomber fleet.
For Australia there are two other missiles that are operational now, and could be purchased that have similar capabilities. The EU Storm Shadow, and the German/Swedish Taurus KEPD 350 (which can be used by the Hornet/Super Hornet).
Break! Break!
Australia selected the JASSM-ER a while back. Even contributing some funds for testing efforts.
I stand corrected Sir!
The JASSM/JASSM-ER became a running joke down at my 21M1A (aka AMMO officer) tech school…I was supposed to brief everyone every week or so about what was going on in the munitions world. School was last fall, right around the time when they had a few unsuccessful tests and the AF announced there was going to be a production gap pending further testing. Every week I’d come back with the latest news of how much the JASSM sucked.
So many parrallels between this program and the F-35 that it is not funny.
Origanal Cost: JASSM $400K, F-35A $60M
Current Costs JASSM $1.2M, F-35A $100M+
Both prgrams were plauged by tremendous schedule delays and development cost growth. Both resulted in Nunn-McCurdy breaches (F-35 will on 15 MAR) JASSM’s was ignored of course and so will F-35′s.
Glad both of them are “On Track”.