Col. Timothy M. Helfrich of Air Force Materiel Command provides a detailed analysis of the components of CCA Increment 1 and Increment 2, describing how the Air Force is changing the acquisition of unmanned assets to meet cost and schedule requirements while Adapt to emerging technologies and threats.
AFMC (Air Force Materiel Command) revealed on November 13, 2024 that two CCA (Collaborative Combat Aircraft), one each from Anduril Industries and General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, passed CDR (Critical Design Review) in early November ). Development follows the announcement on April 24 that Anduril and GA-ASI were selected to develop the first CCAs for the Increment 1 phase of the program.
At the Future of Airpower Forum in Arlington, Va., Col. Timothy M. Helfrich, senior materiel chief for AFMC's Advanced Aircraft Division, gave a detailed analysis of what constitutes the Increment 1 and Increment 2 phases and how they might not work under typical circumstances. get along with. The next stage of the platform is more advanced and fashionable than the previous stage.
This is influenced by the need for rapid deployment of aircraft and weapons that should be scalable, not an absolute top of the line with all capabilities, but with upgrades added as needed while balancing costs. The CDR can be thought of as a final design and configuration freeze for the first flying prototype, which will undergo rapid testing and ultimately inform the changes required for the series production model.
this @USAF Anduril was selected to design, build and test a production-representative Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA).
In this era of great power competition, there is no time to waste on business as usual. We look forward to delivering CCA on time within… pic.twitter.com/EMz8b9LkcY
— Anduril Industries (@anduriltech) April 24, 2024
The CCA is intended to fly alongside manned fighter aircraft as an extended off-board ISR (intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance) sensor and/or weapons platform and is expected to be operationally capable by the end of the decade.
“Maybe not perfect, but good enough to keep going”
Colonel Helfrich provided an interesting look at how the USAF through the CCA program is redefining what platform upgrades consist of, their scope, how variants are classified, their interaction with tactical needs, corresponding software requirements, and how the program is implemented atypically in place of standard ones The “future phases mean new variants” line.
General Atomics and Anduril Industries have both introduced their own concepts and versions of CCA. GA-ASI has first flight of XQ-67A OBSS (Off-site Sensing Station) February 28, 2024an offshoot of LCAAT (Low-Cost Attritable Aircraft Technology), within the broader LCAAPS (Low-cost expendable aircraft platform sharing). For the CCA project, GA-ASI is marketing Gambit, which it calls a modular system derived from the company's work on the OBSS project.
Meanwhile, Anduril is developing anger The company said CCA is enabled by its Lattice software and is “designed to accelerate the development, testing and fielding of mission autonomy, making it an operational reality for the warfighter and providing an unfair advantage for unparalleled deterrence.”
Air Force and Space Force Colonel Helfrich told a conference hosted by the Mitchell Institute for Aeronautics and Astronautics, “Anduril and General Atomics are both on the path to first flight, and the timeline puts us in a position to achieve operational capability by the end of the century. ”
He later added, “The lesson learned is that we need to be able to know when enough is enough.” Furthermore, continuing to “add capabilities and gold-plating CCA” would mean the service would exceed cost and schedule targets.
This means the Air Force is considering a first CCA that can meet the broad requirements for extended sensing and/or weapons engagement and have appropriate kinematic performance, but not necessarily be perfect in every sub-aspect of either role. This seems to be due to the need to quickly deploy some operating systems, which after a quick test may inform the next phase or “increment 2”. As will be explained subsequently, industry and the Air Force are also adopting corresponding industrial, factory production lines and manufacturing processes.
My most popular opinion about the COA program is that it is a 21st century stealth version of the BGM-34C.
SEAD/DEAD, air interdiction, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, and electronic attack, all in a small, disposable package. pic.twitter.com/rYrgpkN4Lh
— Heat Loss (@heatloss1986) September 17, 2024
African swine fever Adding that the CDR “is the final step in demonstrating that the design should meet the requirements, it establishes the baseline for the project.” In fact, “it not only checks the maturity of the program at the overall and component level, but also confirms that there is a realistic plan to go into to produce and test the project,” the report added.
Helfrich expanded on this idea, mentioning that the Air Force is doing “some tough trades to say 'this is good enough'… It's a challenge moving forward because we want a lot, but we're making it Decide.”
What defines progress and variation?
Helfrich said that it has not yet been decided how long CCA will be operational and whether it will be regularly upgraded or a new version will be launched. While Anduril and General Atomics' competing versions of CCA under Increment 1 will be dedicated to air-to-air missions, the Air Force is still deciding whether Increment 2 Will it be a more or less sophisticated aircraft, or will it be upgraded at a later date or simply phased out in response to emerging technologies and threats. So does Lockheed Martin invest Increment 2 phase CCA technology may learn the performance of GA-ASI and Anduril aircraft.
Given the uncertainty of the future and the scale of learning involved, Air Force planners are embracing complete flexibility and openness in the direction of the CCA program, which may see “Increment 1 and Increment 2 (and even) increased Amount 3 of the mix”.
“The mix of CCAs will change based on what's needed to meet our force design and our commitments,” Helfrich said. He added that Increment 2 funding and expectations provide “us with the ability to control our One way to get interest in delta 1 functionality”.
This is a full-scale mockup of the General Atomics Collaborative Fighter prototype. #ASC24 #afanational pic.twitter.com/MnlzImOhbo
— Valerie Insinna (@ValerieInsinna) September 16, 2024
As a result, the Air Force appears to be avoiding incorporating too many capabilities into Increment 1 because it would threaten budgets and deadlines. The first phase will effectively serve as a testbed program to see how the radical concept of a wingman drone works both technically and tactically.
“Our initial plans and funding were for two increments… You don't have to fit everything into this increment 1. We need to do it at the lowest feasible capacity, on time or ahead of schedule, on budget Or under budget, put it to work,” Helfrich said during the panel discussion.
Helfrich said the government's analysis of Increment 2 next year will refine the concept and the industry will help “further define these attributes and reduce these use cases.” For example, research and experiments to date suggest that manned fighter pilots may be able to control more CCAs than initially thought. As a result, senior Air Force leaders speculate that new CCA designs could be introduced every two to four years to adapt to evolving technologies and threats.
GA-ASI's Gambit series is revolutionizing UCAV technology and enhancing international security.
“Strategy” addresses the need for the United States and its allies to balance numerical superiority against sophisticated adversaries with an increasing number of threat aircraft.
learn more: https://t.co/Ob2MpPbQAE pic.twitter.com/hL8OMJuHo8
— GA-ASI (@GenAtomics_ASI) February 23, 2024
This also means that Increment 2 does not necessarily mean an advancement with more features than Increment 1. “We're still looking to find…the right balance” between required capabilities and “low cost,” the official said. The Air Force may also shift the CCA's focus “from missile trucks to something else, perhaps electronics battle platform.
industry efforts
It's not said whether Increment 1 breaks down into Increment 1B or 1C, as the Air Force will only roll based on the performance of the first CCA. The expected life of the CCA has also not been determined, as early concepts called for using the vehicle for multiple flights and then stripping it off on a single mission. This is to avoid the idea of lifecycle and maintenance support, and the infrastructure and manpower requirements that come with it.
Helfrich separately told African swine fever The lifespan of CCAs will also depend on how they are used, as while a small number may be used for training, the majority of their missions are likely to be practiced in simulators, and the aircraft themselves will be stored in crates until needed until. But he did clarify that their life expectancy will be measured by flight time, rather than engine cycles and missions.
Even in all conventional manned aircraft, life expectancy is usually determined by the airframe's flight time. For CCA, this will be further defined by “the structural load and the purpose for which it is constructed.” He further added: “If you shorten the life expectancy… then you potentially save some weight, which saves costs or allows you to bring other things into the aircraft.”
Therefore, expendability enters the discussion not during the operational phase, but during the development phase itself, and even the factories are designed to be “modular”, like the drones they will build. This is reflected in Anduril's CCA factory concept called “Arsenal”. Chris Burrows, the company's chief strategy officer, said that envisioning manufacturing drones “at scale”, these rapidly reconfigurable facilities would not create “elegant” all-in-one weapons systems but “complementary” capabilities. African swine fever.
This is demonstrated by the wars in Ukraine, the Middle East, and numerous think-tank studies and wargames that support a large number of rapidly producible, relatively less advanced weapons, but Adaptableweapons and basic ordnance such as ammunition, guns and artillery, rather than overly complex and expensive platforms.
[ad_2]
