Defence Talks

Global defense, aerospace, aviation and military news portal

MQ-9 UAS REAPER

3 Comments

 

English: With smoke from the Lake Arrowhead ar...

English: With smoke from the Lake Arrowhead area fires streaming in the background, NASA’s Ikhana unmanned aircraft heads out on a Southern California wildfires imaging mission. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

 

SAR Baseline (Production Estimate)

FY 2011 President’s Budget dated February 1, 2010

Approved APB

Defense Acquisition Authority (DAE) Approved Acquisition Program Baseline (APB) dated February 12, 2012 MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

Mission and Description

 

Mission:

The MQ-9 Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Reaper is a multi-mission Hunter-Killer and Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) system, which provides the combat commander with a persistent capability to find, fix, track, target, engage and assess Time Sensitive Targets. In the Hunter-Killer mission, the M-Q 9 offers the commander a choice of weapons including the Hellfire Air-to-Ground Missile, Laser Guided Bombs and Joint Direct Attack Munitions.  In the ISR role, the MQ-9’s ability to fly for up to 14 hours at altitudes up to 25,000-30,000 feet while carrying up to 3,000 pounds on the wings make it the platform of choice for a number of ISR and strike missions. This ability to support a wide variety of operations results in a steady stream of requirements to develop new capabilities to support an expanding array of missions. As a result of the combat deployment of the developmental system, the MQ-9 is supported and maintained by contractor logistics support personnel under contract and managed by the MQ-9 Program Office (PO).

Description:

An MQ-9 system consists of four aircraft, a Ground Control Station (GCS), a Satellite Communications terminal, support equipment, maintenance and operations personnel deployed for 24-hour operations. The aircraft is controlled by a pilot who is located in the GCS. Control commands are transmitted from the GCS to the aircraft by a ground based datalink terminal. The GCS incorporates workstations that allow operators to plan missions, control and monitor the aircraft, reconnaissance sensors and weapons and exploit received images. The MQ-9 carries the Multi-spectral Targeting System which integrates electro-optical, infrared, laser designator, and laser illuminator into a single sensor package. The system is composed of four major components which can be deployed for worldwide operations. The MQ-9 aircraft can be disassembled and loaded into a container for travel. The GCS is transportable in a C-130 Hercules (or larger) transport aircraft or installed in a fixed facility. The MQ-9 can operate on a 5,000 by 75 feet (1,524 meters by 23 meters), hard surface runway with clear line-of-sight. The ground data terminal antenna provides line-of-sight communications for takeoff and landing. The satellite communication system provides over-thehorizon control of the aircraft. An alternate method of employment, Remote Split Operations, employs a mobile version of the ground control system for launch and recovery efforts. This system conducts takeoff and landing operations at the forward deployed location while the Continental United States based GCS conducts the mission via extended communication links.

In March 2006, COMACC (Commander of Air Combat Command) directed early fielding to meet operational needs.  To meet the early fielding date, the program was broken into two blocks with Block 1 providing initial capability to meet the early fielding date and Block 5 completing the program to the Increment I requirements as described in the Capability Production Document (CPD).  Consequently, the MQ-9 Increment I program is comprised of Block 1 and Block 5 aircraft. This SAR only includes Increment I requirements.  An Increment II subprogram will be established in the future to incorporate additional capabilities into the MQ-9 Weapon System.  Increment II has a separate Capability Development Document and will have a separate CPD.

The MQ-9’s combat potential and demonstrated combat performance fueled the rapid growth of the program.  By January 2012, the Air Force contracted for a total of 157 MQ-9s which included 58 added by Congress to accelerate fielding in support of the overseas contingency operations. As of February 29, 2012, General Atomics-Aeronautical Systems Inc. (GA-ASI) delivered 93 of the 404 planned aircraft, 53 of which are operationally active.  While the MQ-9 program was initially managed as a Quick Reaction Capability program, a separate program office was established in 2006 to restructure the program to support Air Combat Command’s urgent request to field the system. The MQ-9 has been actively flying combat missions in overseas contingency operations since September 2007.

The program is in concurrent capability development, procurement, combat operations and support.  This situation resulted from the MQ-9’s urgent beginnings in the weeks after September 11, 2001, its growth as a Hunter-Killer to support overseas contingency operations, and the MQ-9’s evolution into the platform of choice for both Intelligence Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) and Hunter-Killer missions.

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

CBP Air and Marine group conduct aerial operat...

CBP Air and Marine group conduct aerial operations with their UAS aircraft over areas affected by Hurricane Ike to help broadly assess damage so as to better deploy rescuers to specific areas with the most need. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Executive Summary

 

Air Combat Command (ACC) stood up six additional MQ-9 Combat Air Patrols (CAPs) since the last SAR, bringing the total number to 22.  This brings the total number of combined MQ-1 Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Predator and MQ-9 CAPs serving US and Allied warfighters to 57.  These CAPs enabled the MQ-9 to accumulate 242,560 cumulative flight hours.  The Program Office (PO) remains on track to support the Air Force required fielding of the required 65 CAPs (MQ-1 and MQ-9) by 3Q FY 2014.

Since the last SAR, the MQ-9, along with the MQ-1, achieved the requirement to provide 50 CAPs.  This was completed on April 2, 2011, nearly six months ahead of schedule.  The PO is on schedule to meet the June 2012 Required Assets Available (RAA) date with only one remaining item; Block 1 integration of electronic technical manuals.  The decision was made to postpone the Milestone C from June 2011 to June 2012 to allow additional time to revise the test strategy; conduct first flight of a modified Block 1 aircraft with 904.6 Rev A software, and complete the required Milestone C program documentation.  The first modified Block 1 aircraft was delivered to Gray Butte, CA on January 11, 2012, approximately six months ahead of schedule.  Ground testing is in progress.

On February 12, 2012 the PO received the signed Acquisition Program Baseline (APB).

The PO initiated a Business Case Analysis (BCA) in November 2009 for the purpose of determining the “best value” long term sustainment strategy.  The expected outcome of the BCA is a Performance Based Logistics approach which embraces public and private partnership arrangements.  The BCA schedule was accelerated and the final report is due in June 2012 with coordination to follow.

There are no significant software-related issues with this program at this time.

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

Threshold Breaches

 

APB Breaches

Schedule

Performance

Cost    RDT&E

Procurement

MILCON

Acq O&M

Unit Cost        PAUC

APUC

Nunn-McCurdy Breaches

Current UCR Baseline

PAUC None
APUCOriginal UCR Baseline None
PAUC None
APUC None

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

Schedule

)

Milestones

SAR Baseline Prod Est

Current APB

Production

Objective/Threshold

Current Estimate

Milestone B ACAT II FEB 2004 FEB 2004 FEB 2004 FEB 2004
Milestone C ACAT II Block 1 FEB 2008 FEB 2008 FEB 2008 FEB 2008
IOT&E for Block 1 MAY 2008 MAY 2008 MAY 2008 MAY 2008
RAA SEP 2010 DEC 2011 JUN 2012 JUN 2012
Milestone C ACAT ID Increment 1, Block 5 MAR 2011 JUN 2012 MAY 2013 JUN 2012
FOT&E for Increment I Block 5 NOV 2012 NOV 2013 OCT 2014 NOV 2013
FRP Decision for Increment I Block 1 and 5 MAR 2013 JUL 2014 JUN 2015 JUL 2014

Acronyms And Abbreviations

ACAT – Acquisition Category

FOT&E – Follow-On Test and Evaluation

FRP – Full Rate Production

IOT&E – Initial Operational Test and Evaluation RAA – Required Assets Available

Change Explanations

(Ch-1) The current estimates for RAA and Milestone C ACAT ID Inc 1, Block 5, changed from Jul 2011 to Jun 2012 due to timelines required to complete Milestone C documentation, testing associated with Block 5 capabilities, and reliability metrics/growth program improvements. Due to the delay in Milestone C, FOT&E for Increment I Block 5 changed from Apr 2013 to Nov 2013 and FRP Decision for Increment I Block 1 and 5 changed from Sep 2013 to Jul 2014.

Memo

RAA includes two fixed Ground Control Stations (GCS), two mobile GCSs, six Primary Mission Aircraft Inventory MQ-9 UAS REAPER         December 31, 2011 SAR

(PMAI) Block 1 aircraft, technical orders, support equipment, initial and readiness spares packages, and logistics support.

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

Performance

 

Characteristics

SAR Baseline Prod Est

Current APB

Production

Objective/Threshold

Demonstrated Performance

Current Estimate

Hunter The system’s capability must allow a targeting solution at the weapon’s maximum range. The system’s capability must allow a targeting solution at a direct attack weapon’s maximum range The system’s capability must allow a targeting solution at a direct attack weapon’s maximum range DT ongoing for KPP;AFOTEC

IOT&E did not evaluate KPP due to system

availability;

Full KPP evaluation deferred to future

FOT&E

The system’s capability must allow a targeting solution at the weapon’s maximum range.
Killer System must be capable of computing a weapon’s release point, passing required information, at the required accuracy, to the weapon and reliably releasing the weapon upon command. System must be capable of computing a weapon’s release point, passing required information, at the required accuracy, to the weapon and reliably releasing the weapon upon command. System must be capable of computing a weapon’s release point, passing required information, at the required accuracy, to the weapon and reliably releasing the weapon upon command. AFOTECIOT&E found KPP

operationally effective and suitable

System must be capable of computing a weapon’s release point, passing required information, at the required accuracy, to the weapon and reliably releasing the weapon upon command.
Net Ready: The system must support Net-Centric military operations. The system must be able to enter and be managed in the network, and exchange data in a secure manner to enhance mission effectiveness. The system must continuously provide survivable,interoperable, secure, The Systemmust fully support

execution of

all

operational activities identified in the applicable joint and system integrated architectures and the system must

The Systemmust fully support

execution of

all

operational activities identified in the applicable joint and system integrated architectures and the system must

The Systemmust fully support execution of joint critical operational activities identified in the applicable joint and system integrated architectures and the system must JITCcertified

KPP; JITC

certification is renewed for each software update

The Systemmust fully support execution of all operational activities identified in the applicable joint and system integrated architectures and the system must

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

and operationally effective information exchanges to enable a Net-Centric military capability. satisfy the technical requirements for NetCentric military operationsto include 1)

DISR mandated

GIG IT standards and profiles identified in

the TV-1, 2)

DISR mandated GIG KIPs

identified in the KIP declaration table, 3)

NCOW-RM

Enterprise

Services 4)

IA requirements including availability, integrity, authentication, confidentiality, and nonrepudiation, and issuance of an ATO by the DAA, and 5) Operationally effective information exchanges; and mission

critical

performance and information

assurance

attributes, data correctness, data

satisfy the technical requirements for NetCentric military operationsto include 1)

DISR mandated

GIG IT standards and profiles identified in

the TV-1, 2)

DISR mandated GIG KIPs

identified in the KIP declaration table, 3)

NCOW-RM

Enterprise

Services 4)

IA requirements including availability, integrity, authentication, confidentiality, and nonrepudiation, and issuance of an ATO by the DAA, and 5) Operationally effective information exchanges; and mission

critical

performance and IA

attributes, data correctness, data

availability, and

satisfy the technicalrequirements for transition to NetCentric military operations

to include 1)

DISR mandated

GIG IT standards and profiles identified in

the TV-1, 2)

DISR mandated GIG KIPs

identified in the KIP declaration table, 3)

NCOW-RM

Enterprise

Services 4)

IA requirements including availability, integrity, authentication, confidentiality, and nonrepudiation, and issuance of an IATO by the DAA, and 5) Operationally effective information exchanges; and mission

critical

performance and IA

attributes, data correctness, data

availability,

satisfy the technical requirements for Net-Centric military operationsto include 1)

DISR mandated

GIG IT standards and profiles identified in

the TV-1, 2)

DISR mandated GIG KIPs

identified in the KIP declaration table, 3)

NCOW-RM

Enterprise

Services 4)

IA requirements including availability, integrity, authentication,

confiden-

tiality, and nonrepudiation, and issuanceof an ATO by the DAA, and 5) Operationally effective information exchanges; and mission

critical

performance and information

assurance

attributes, data correctness, data

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

availability, and consistent data processing specified in the applicable joint and system integrated architecture views. consistent data processing specified in the applicable joint and system integrated architecture views. and consistent data processing specified in the applicable joint and system integrated architecture views. availability, and consistent data processing specified in the applicable joint and system integrated architecture views.

Requirements Source:

Air Force Requirements for Operational Capabilities Council (AFROCC) Capability Production Document (CPD), dated August 8, 2006, validated by Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) on January 29,2007. AFROC Memo 07-11-01 dated July 21, 2011.

Acronyms And Abbreviations

AFOTEC – Air Force Operational Test and Evaluation Center

ATO – Approval to Operate

DAA – Designated Approval Authority

DISR – Department of Defense Information Technology Standards Registry

DT – Developmental Testing

FOT&E – Follow-On Operational Test and Evaluation

GIG – Global Information Grid

IA – Information Assurance

IATO – Interim Approval to Operate

IOT&E – Initial Operational Test and Evaluation

IT – Information Technology

JITC – Joint Interoperability Test Command

KIP – Key Interface Profile

KPP – Key Performance Parameter

NCOW-RM – Net-Centric Operations and Warfare Reference Model TV-1 – Technical Standards Profile

Change Explanations

None

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

Track To Budget

 

English: An MQ-9 Reaper takes off on a mission...

English: An MQ-9 Reaper takes off on a mission in Afghanistan Oct. 1. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

General Memo

RDT&E Program Element (PE) 0305205F was shared by the MQ-1 Predator, MQ-9  Reaper and Global Hawk program offices from FY 2002 – FY 2004.

RDT&E PE 0305219F were shared by the MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper program office from FY 2005 – FY 2007.

Procurement ICN’s PRDTA1 and PRDT01 were shared by the MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper program office from FY 2002 – FY 2007.

RDT&E
APPN 3600

 

BA 07 PE 0205219F (Air Force)
  Project 5246 MQ-9 Development andFielding (Shared)
APPN 3600  BA 07 PE 0305205F (Air Force)
  Project 4755 (Shared) (Sunk)
APPN 3600  BA 07 PE 0305219F (Air Force)
  Project 5143 (Shared) (Sunk)
Procurement
APPN 3010  BA 07 PE 0205219F (Air Force)
  ICN 000075 Organic Depot Activation (Shared)
APPN 3010  BA 06 PE 0205219F (Air Force)
  ICN 000999 Initial Spares (Shared)
APPN 3010  BA 05 PE 0305205F (Air Force)
  ICN PRDT01 Aircraft Modification (Shared) (Sunk)
APPN 3010  BA 04 PE 0305205F (Air Force)
  ICN PRDTA1 Aircraft Procurement (Shared) (Sunk)
APPN 3010 BA 04 PE 0205219F (Air Force)
MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR
  ICN PRDTB1 Aircraft Procurement
APPN 3010  BA 05 PE 0205219F (Air Force)
MILCON

 

ICN PRDTB2 Aircraft Modification
APPN 3300  BA 01 PE 0205219F (Air Force)
Project BHD000 MQ-9 Operations

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

Cost and Funding

 

Cost Summary

 

TY $M

SAR

Baseline

Prod Est

Current

APB

Production

Objective

Current Estimate

Total Acquisition Cost and Quantity

RDT&E          778.8   1005.7 1106.3 1004.1 809.9   1063.2 1063.2

8038.7

7905.7 8943.4 9059.0

8038.7

7905.7 8943.4 9059.0

0.0

0.0 0.0

0.0

1785.3

2493.2 1922.6 2812.3

1109.0

997.0 1202.4 1121.8

676.3

1496.2 720.2 1690.5

Procurement  9824.0 10402.1           11442.3           10398.9           10866.0           11871.3           11871.3

Flyaway

Recurring

Non Recurring

Support

Other Support

Initial Spares

MILCON        148.5   133.5   146.9   133.5   158.9   153.4   153.4

Acq O&M        0.0       0.0       —          0.0       0.0       0.0       0.0

Total   10751.3           11541.3           N/A      11536.5           11834.8           13087.9           13087.9

Confidence Level for Current APB Cost 50% – This APB reflects cost and funding data based on the MQ-9 Reaper’s April 2011 cost estimate briefed through ASC/FM and SAF/FMC. This cost estimate was quantified at a 50% confidence level. A draft Service Cost Position (SCP) in support of a June 2011 Milestone C was created; however, not formalized due to a delay of Milestone C.

Quantity

SAR Baseline Prod Est

Current APB Production

Current Estimate

RDT&E          3          3          3

Procurement  388      401      401

Total   391      404      404

Procurement quantity is the number of MQ-9 aircraft.  Ground Control Stations and other equipment costs are included, but not used as a unit of measure.

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

Cost and Funding

 

Funding Summary

 

Appropriation and Quantity Summary

FY2013 President’s Budget / December 2011 SAR (TY$ M)

Appropriation

Prior

FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017

To Complete

Total

RDT&E

477.5

126.7

148.0

147.0

110.6

34.7

0.0

18.7

1063.2

Procurement

2831.6

1058.1

920.0 1007.6

1015.8

799.7

783.7

3454.8 11871.3
MILCON

55.6

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

97.8

153.4

Acq O&M

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

PB 2013 Total

3364.7

1184.8

1068.0 1154.6

1126.4

834.4

783.7

3571.3 13087.9
PB 2012 Total

3867.6

1317.9

1531.6 1275.7

1246.7

1051.4

836.0

1369.7 12496.6
Delta 

-502.9

-133.1

-463.6

-121.1

-120.3

-217.0

-52.3

2201.6

591.3

Quantity Undistributed Prior FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017

To Complete

Total
Development

3

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

3

Production

0

156 48 24 24 24 24 24 77 401
PB 2013 Total

3

156 48 24 24 24 24 24 77 404
PB 2012 Total

3

156 48 48 48 48 48 0 0 399
Delta

0

0 0 -24 -24 -24 -24 24 77

5

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

Cost and Funding

 

Annual Funding By Appropriation

 

Annual Funding TY$

3600 | RDT&E | Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force

Fiscal Year Quantity End Item Recurring

Flyaway 

TY $M

Non End

Item

Recurring

Flyaway 

TY $M

Non

Recurring

Flyaway  TY $M

Total

Flyaway  TY $M

Total

Support  TY $M

Total

Program 

TY $M

2002

7.8

2003

12.8

2004

20.9

2005

56.8

2006

10.1

2007

34.0

2008

55.9

2009

39.7

2010

102.8

2011

136.7

2012

126.7

2013

148.0

2014

147.0

2015

110.6

2016

34.7

2017

2018

18.7

Subtotal

3

1063.2

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

Annual Funding BY$

3600 | RDT&E | Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Air Force

Fiscal Year Quantity End Item Recurring

Flyaway 

BY 2008 $M

Non End

Item

Recurring

Flyaway 

BY 2008 $M

Non

Recurring

Flyaway 

BY 2008 $M

Total

Flyaway 

BY 2008 $M

Total

Support 

BY 2008 $M

Total

Program 

BY 2008 $M

2002

8.9

2003

14.4

2004

22.9

2005

60.7

2006

10.5

2007

34.4

2008

55.4

2009

38.9

2010

99.3

2011 129.5
2012 117.9
2013 135.4
2014 132.3
2015

97.8

2016

30.1

2017

2018

15.7

Subtotal

3

1004.1

FY 2002 RDT&E includes $7.8M (TY$) of Defense Emergency Response Funds (DERF).

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

Annual Funding TY$

3010 | Procurement | Aircraft Procurement, Air Force

Fiscal Year Quantity End Item Recurring

Flyaway 

TY $M

Non End

Item

Recurring

Flyaway 

TY $M

Non

Recurring

Flyaway 

TY $M

Total

Flyaway 

TY $M

Total

Support 

TY $M

Total

Program 

TY $M

2002                       4          60.4     —          —          60.4     —          60.4

2003                       4 36.8 — — 36.8 — 36.8 2004 5 67.7 — — 67.7 2.8 70.5 2005 5 85.8 2.2 — 88.0 5.3 93.3 2006 2 72.1 33.0 — 105.1 4.8 109.9 2007 12 109.4 50.6 — 160.0 151.6 311.6 2008 28 214.2 51.1 — 265.3 81.0 346.3 2009 24 225.0 133.3 — 358.3 168.6 526.9

2010                    24          262.2   105.5   —          367.7   171.6   539.3

2011                    48          504.5   101.5   —          606.0   130.6   736.6 2012      48        621.4   106.9  —          728.3   329.8   1058.1 2013    24        417.7   218.1   —          635.8   284.2  920.0 2014      24        405.2   253.5   —          658.7   348.9   1007.6

2015     24        417.0   295.9   —          712.9   302.9   1015.8 2016    24        427.4   208.8   — 636.2   163.5   799.7

2017     24        436.9   226.5   —          663.4   120.3   783.7 2018      24        526.4   377.7   — 904.1   162.2   1066.3 2019    24        556.9   197.0   —          753.9   186.5   940.4 2020      24 580.2   72.8     —          653.0   150.4   803.4 2021      5          250.1   26.7     —          276.8   33.7 310.5

2022                       —          141.4   16.9     —          158.3   6.0       164.3

2023                       — 106.9 12.8 — 119.7 4.7 124.4 2024 — 16.1 6.2 — 22.3 1.3 23.6 2025 — 1.3 4.2 — 5.5 1.1 6.6 2026 — — 3.6 — 3.6 0.5 4.1

2027                       —          5.3       0.3       —          5.6       —          5.6

2028                       —          5.3       0.3       —          5.6       —          5.6

Subtotal

401

6553.6

2505.4

9059.0

2812.3

11871.3

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

Annual Funding BY$

3010 | Procurement | Aircraft Procurement, Air Force

Fiscal Year Quantity End Item Recurring

Flyaway 

BY 2008 $M

Non End

Item

Recurring

Flyaway 

BY 2008 $M

Non

Recurring

Flyaway 

BY 2008 $M

Total

Flyaway 

BY 2008 $M

Total

Support 

BY 2008 $M

Total

Program 

BY 2008 $M

2002                   4     68.0     —          —          68.0     —          68.0

2003                   4 40.8 — — 40.8 — 40.8 2004 5 73.1 — — 73.1 3.0 76.1 2005 5 90.0 2.3 — 92.3 5.6 97.9 2006 2 73.7 33.7 — 107.4 4.9 112.3 2007 12 108.9 50.4 — 159.3 150.8 310.1 2008 28 209.8 50.1 — 259.9 79.3 339.2 2009 24 216.6 128.4 — 345.0 162.3 507.3 2010 24 247.5 99.6 — 347.1 162.1 509.2

2011                48     468.1   94.2     —          562.3   121.2   683.5

2012                48     566.9   97.5     —          664.4   300.9   965.3 2013      24        374.6   195.7   —         570.3   254.9   825.2

2014                24     357.1   223.3   —          580.4   307.5   887.9

2015                24     361.0   256.1   —          617.1   262.2   879.3

2016                24     363.4   177.6   —          541.0   139.0   680.0

2017                24     364.9   189.3   —          554.2   100.4   654.6

2018                24     431.9   309.9   —          741.8   133.1   874.9

2019                24 448.9 158.8 — 607.7 150.3 758.0 2020 24 459.4 57.6 — 517.0 119.1 636.1 2021 5 194.5 20.7 — 215.2 26.3 241.5

2022 — 108.0 12.9 — 120.9 4.6 125.5 2023 — 80.2 9.7 — 89.9 3.5 93.4

2024 — 11.9 4.5 — 16.4 1.0 17.4 2025 — 0.9 3.1 — 4.0 0.8 4.8 2026 — — 2.5 — 2.5 0.4 2.9

2027                  —    3.7       0.2       —          3.9       —          3.9

2028                  —    3.6       0.2       —          3.8       —          3.8

Subtotal

401

5727.4

2178.3

7905.7

2493.2

10398.9

FY 2002 Procurement includes $29.1M (TY$) of Defense Emergency Response Funds (DERF).

End-item related costs include aircraft, Multi-spectral Targeting System-B (MTS-B) and government furnished equipment, as well as retrofit costs associated with aircraft and MTS-B.

Non-end item recurring flyaway costs include retrofit, Ground Control Stations (GCS), communications and Airborne Signals Intelligence Payload 2C (ASIP-2C) sensors requirements.  Retrofits include GCS and other miscellaneous communications and sensor retrofits.

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

Cost Quantity Information

3010 | Procurement | Aircraft Procurement, Air Force

Fiscal Year Quantity End Item Recurring

Flyaway

(Aligned with

Quantity)

BY 2008

$M

2002

4

68.0

2003

4

40.8

2004

5

91.2

2005

5

120.2

2006

2

85.8

2007

12

181.5

2008

28

379.3

2009

24

361.9

2010

24

372.6

2011

48

712.4

2012

48

741.1

2013

24

310.1

2014

24

286.2

2015

24

300.4

2016

24

303.6

2017

24

306.9

2018

24

321.9

2019

24

330.6

2020

24

339.6

2021

5

73.3

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2027

2028

Subtotal

401

5727.4

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

Annual Funding TY$

3300 | MILCON | Military Construction, Air Force

Fiscal Year

Total

Program 

TY $M

2009

44.5

2010

2.7

2011

8.4

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

97.8

Subtotal

153.4

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

Annual Funding BY$

3300 | MILCON | Military Construction, Air Force

Fiscal Year

Total

Program 

BY 2008 $M

2009

42.9

2010

2.6

2011

7.8

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

80.2

Subtotal

133.5

Low Rate Initial Production

 

There is no LRIP quantity for this program at this time.

First MQ-9 Reaper makes its home on Nevada fli...

First MQ-9 Reaper makes its home on Nevada flightline: The MQ-9 Reaper Unmanned Aerial Vehicle taxis into Creech Air Force Base, Nevada, March 13 marking the first operational airframe of its kind to land here. This Reaper is the first of many soon to be assigned to the 42nd Attack Squadron. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

Foreign Military Sales

 

Country

Date of Sale

Quantity

Total

Cost $M

Memo

Italy 11/20/2008

6

175.3 Purchase of six aircraft, three Mobile Ground Control Stations, and assorted support equipment.
United Kingdom 10/4/2007

4

62.8 Purchase of four aircraft, one Mobile Ground Control Station, and spares.
United Kingdom 2/14/2007

2

184.7 Purchase of two aircraft, two Mobile Ground

Control Stations, and assorted support equipment.

As noted in the table above, Italy’s Letter of Offer and Acceptance (LOA), dated November 20, 2008, is a Foreign Military Sales (FMS) transaction, agreement number IT-DSAG, and will be in the operations and sustainment phase in July 2012 after aircraft #5 and #6 deliver.  The Italian Air Force deployed two MQ-9s, one Ground Control Station and associated spares to Sigonella, Sicily supporting North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) operations.

As noted in the table above, the United Kingdom LOA, dated February 14, 2007, is an FMS transaction, agreement number UK-D-SMI, and is in the operations and sustainment phase.  The United Kingdom LOA, dated October 4, 2007, is an FMS transaction, agreement number UK-D-SMJ, and is in the operations and sustainment phase.  United Kingdom signed another LOA, on November 10, 2011, to acquire five additional MQ-9s and four additional Mobile Ground Control Stations; however, these are not on contract and therefore not included in the table above.

The Program Office (PO) is responding to a Letter of Request (LOR) from Australia for pricing and availability for MQ-9 capability.  In addition, the PO received an official LOR from Germany for three MQ-9s and four Mobile Ground Control Stations with a June 2014 operational need date.

The PO received a request to validate or update the previously submitted pricing for MQ-1 and MQ-9 capability for Turkey. At this time this request is not an indication of forward movement of Turkey’s draft LOA.

Nuclear Cost

 

None

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

Unit Cost

 

Unit Cost Report

 

BY2008 $M

BY2008 $M

Unit Cost

Current UCR

Baseline

(FEB 2012 APB)

Current Estimate (DEC 2011 SAR)

BY % Change

Program Acquisition Unit Cost (PAUC)

Cost 11541.3 11536.5
Quantity 404

404

Unit Cost

Average Procurement Unit Cost (APUC)28.568

28.556

-0.04

Cost10402.110398.9 Quantity401

401

 Unit Cost25.940

25.932

-0.03

 

BY2008 $M

BY2008 $M

Unit Cost

Original UCR

Baseline

(FEB 2012 APB)

Current Estimate (DEC 2011 SAR)

BY % Change

Program Acquisition Unit Cost (PAUC)

Cost 11541.3 11536.5
Quantity

404

404

Unit Cost

Average Procurement Unit Cost (APUC)28.568

28.556

-0.04

Cost10402.110398.9 Quantity

401

401

 Unit Cost25.940

25.932

-0.03

 

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

Unit Cost History

SAR Unit Cost History

Current SAR Baseline to Current Estimate (TY $M)

Initial PAUC Prod Est

Changes

PAUC

Current Est

Econ

Qty

Sch Eng

Est

Oth

Spt

Total

30.268

 

0.328

-0.473  0.181   0.219   -0.261  0.000   2.134   2.128

Current SAR Baseline to Current Estimate (TY $M)

32.396

Initial APUC Prod Est

Changes

APUC

Current Est

Econ

Qty

Sch Eng

Est

Oth

Spt

Total

28.005      0.307   -0.403  0.182   0.000   -0.637  0.000   2.150   1.599   29.604

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

SAR Baseline History

Item/Event

SAR

Planning

Estimate (PE)

SAR

Development

Estimate (DE)

SAR

Production

Estimate (PdE)

Current Estimate

Milestone A N/A N/A

N/A

N/A

Milestone B N/A N/A FEB 2004 FEB 2004
Milestone C N/A N/A FEB 2008 FEB 2008
IOC N/A N/A

N/A

JUN 2012
Total Cost (TY $M) N/A N/A 11834.8

13087.9

Total Quantity N/A N/A 391

404

Prog. Acq. Unit Cost (PAUC) N/A N/A 30.268

32.396

Schedule Milestone C above reflects the ACAT II Block 1 Milestone C decision.  The ACAT ID Increment 1, Block 5 Milestone C is scheduled for June 2012.

Schedule Milestone Required Assets Available (RAA) is used in lieu of Initial Operating Capability (IOC).

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

Cost Variance

 

Cost Variance Summary

 

Summary Then Year $M

RDT&E

Proc

MILCON

Total

SAR Baseline (Prod Est)

Previous Changes809.910866.0158.911834.8 Economic-0.6-18.6+0.3

-18.9

 Quantity–+119.6–+119.6 Schedule—14.9–

-14.9

 Engineering+23.3—-

+23.3

 Estimating+71.4-198.6-2.5-129.7 Other——

 Support–+682.4–+682.4 Subtotal+94.1+569.9-2.2+661.8 Current Changes     Economic+7.7+141.7+1.9+151.3 Quantity–+82.7–

+82.7

 Schedule–+88.0–

+88.0

 Engineering+65.2—-

+65.2

 Estimating+86.3-56.8-5.2

+24.3

 Other——

 Support–+179.8–+179.8 Subtotal+159.2+435.4-3.3+591.3 Total Changes

+253.3

+1005.3

-5.5

+1253.1

  CE – Cost Variance

1063.2

11871.3

153.4

13087.9

  CE – Cost & Funding

1063.2

11871.3

153.4

13087.9

 

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

Summary Base Year 2008 $

M

RDT&E

Proc

MILCON

Total

SAR Baseline (Prod Est)

Previous Changes778.89824.0148.510751.3 Economic——

 Quantity–+103.2–+103.2 Schedule——

 Engineering+21.7—-

+21.7

 Estimating+65.4-213.6-5.8-154.0 Other——

 Support–+593.1–+593.1 Subtotal+87.1+482.7-5.8+564.0 Current Changes     Economic——

 Quantity–+64.3–

+64.3

 Schedule—0.7—0.7 Engineering+59.7—-

+59.7

 Estimating+78.5-86.2-9.2

-16.9

 Other——

 Support–+114.8–+114.8 Subtotal+138.2+92.2-9.2+221.2 Total Changes

+225.3

+574.9

-15.0

+785.2

  CE – Cost Variance

1004.1

10398.9

133.5

11536.5

  CE – Cost & Funding

1004.1

10398.9

133.5

11536.5

 

Previous Estimate: December 2010

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

RDT&E

$M

Current Change Explanations

Base Year

Then Year
Revised escalation indices. (Economic)

N/A

+7.7

Adjustment for current and prior escalation. (Estimating)

-3.2

-3.4

Increase due to System Development and Demonstration Increment I Bridge contract and additional requirements for reliability and maintainability. (Engineering)

+59.7

+65.2

Increase due to Air Force funding Counter Improvised Explosive Device (IED) and Unmanned Air Vehicle Command and Control Initiative. (Estimating)

+28.2

+30.5

Revised estimate for Ka band Migration. (Estimating)

+33.1

+36.4

Increase due to additional funding for other government costs associated with extended development period of performance. (Estimating)

+20.4

+22.8

RDT&E Subtotal

 

+138.2

+159.2Procurement

$M

 Current Change Explanations

Base Year

 Then YearRevised escalation indices. (Economic)

N/A

+141.7Total Quantity variance resulting from an increase of 5 aircraft from 396 to 401. (Subtotal)

+53.8

+69.2

Quantity variance resulting from an increase of 5 aircraft from 396 to 401. (Quantity)

(+64.3)

(+82.7)Allocation to Schedule resulting from Quantity change. (Schedule) (QR)

(-0.7)

(-0.9)

Allocation to Estimating resulting from Quantity change. (Estimating) (QR)

(-9.8)

(-12.6)Increase due to stretch-out of procurement buy profile from FY 2002 – FY 2017 to FY 2002 – FY 2021. (Schedule)

0.0

+88.9

Adjustment for current and prior escalation. (Estimating)

-23.6

-25.3

Refined estimate to incorporate change to the projected learning curve. (Estimating)

-52.8

-18.9

Adjustment for current and prior escalation. (Support)

-10.5

-11.5

Increase in Other Support due to funding for organic depot activation. (Support)

+227.1

+276.7Decrease in Initial Spares due to Congressional reduction in FY 2011. (Support)

-101.8

-85.4

Procurement Subtotal

 

(QR) Quantity Related

 

+92.2

+435.4MILCON

$M

 Current Change Explanations

Base Year

 Then YearRevised escalation indices. (Economic)N/A

+1.9

Adjustment for current and prior escalation. (Estimating)-0.4

-0.4

Adjustment to reflect the application of new out year escalation indices. (Estimating)-5.8

-1.5

Decrease due to Congressional Marks. (Estimating) -3.0

-3.3

MILCON Subtotal-9.2

-3.3

 

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

Contracts

 

Appropriation: RDT&E
Contract Name Block 50 Ground Control Station (GCS) Modernization
Contractor General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc.
Contractor Location San Diego, CA 92065
Contract Number, Type

FA8620-05-G-3028/30,  CPFF

Award Date March 25, 2010
Definitization Date

March 25, 2010

Initial Contract Price ($M)

Current Contract Price ($M)

 Estimated Price At Completion ($M)

Target

Ceiling

Qty

Target

Ceiling

Qty  Contractor

Program Manager

17.2     N/A      N/A      83.7     N/A      N/A

 

 

88.8     88.1

Variance

Cost Variance

 

Schedule Variance

Cumulative Variances To Date

-7.7      -8.1

Previous Cumulative Variances

-3.1      -2.4

Net Change

-4.6      -5.7

Cost And Schedule Variance Explanations

 

The unfavorable net change in the cost variance is due to engineering analysis associated with the Critical Design Review (CDR); delays in information assurance certification and accreditation causing additional design iterations, and design efforts for the System Requirements Review (SRR), Preliminary Design Review (PDR), and CDR.

The unfavorable net change in the schedule variance is due to delayed subcontractor efforts on Auxiliary Software Design; delays in approval of the Modified Airworthiness Certification criteria, and delays in receiving subcontractor invoices. Additional delays are due to lack of information assurance requirements needed to build rule sets for the cross domain solution.

Contract Comments

The difference between the initial contract price target and the current contract price target is due to content changes i.e. engineering change orders and contract modifications.

The current contracted completion date ofJuly 2012 is expected to extend to December 2012.

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

Appropriation: RDT&E
Contract Name MQ-9 System Development and Demonstration Bridge DO 49
Contractor General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc
Contractor Location

San Diego, CA 92127-1713

Contract Number, Type

FA8620-05-G-3028/49,  CPIF

Award Date July 17, 2009
Definitization Date

July 17, 2009

Initial Contract Price ($M)

Current Contract Price ($M)

 Estimated Price At Completion ($M)

Target

Ceiling

Qty

Target

Ceiling

Qty  Contractor

Program Manager

39.3     N/A      N/A      62.3     N/A      N/A

 

 

80.0     83.3

Variance

Cost Variance

 

Schedule Variance

Cumulative Variances To Date

-5.2      -4.5

Previous Cumulative Variances

-0.1      -5.3

Net Change

-5.1      +0.8

Cost And Schedule Variance Explanations

 

The unfavorable net change in the cost variance is due to the decision to accelerate activities associated with the retrofit of a first article Block 5 MQ-9. In addition, upfront costs required to re-align environmental testing activities under the prime contractor versus current arrangement with a subcontractor caused a short-term unfavorable cost variance. The remaining unfavorable cost variance is attributed to an updated forecast of the required iterations needed to complete activities on the Block 5 MQ-9 forward avionics bay redesign.

The favorable net change in the schedule variance is due to the decision to accelerate activities associated with the retrofit of a first article Block 5 MQ-9.

Contract Comments

The difference between the initial contract price target and the current contract price target is due to contract overruns and rebaselining.

MQ-9 UAS REAPER

Appropriation: Procurement  December 31, 2011 SARContract NameGWOT Aircraft  ContractorGeneral Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc Contractor LocationSan Diego, CA 92064 Contract Number, TypeFA8620-05-G-3028/50,  FFP Award DateNovember 26, 2008 Definitization DateJanuary 04, 2010

Initial Contract Price ($M)

Current Contract Price ($M)

Estimated Price At Completion ($M)

Target

Ceiling

Qty

Target

Ceiling

Qty

Contractor

Program Manager

115.2   N/A      16        315.7   N/A      52        315.7   315.7

Cost And Schedule Variance Explanations

Cost and Schedule variance reporting is not required on this FFP contract.

Contract Comments

The difference between the initial contract price target and the current contract price target is due to contract definitization, award of various contract options for additional requirements, and a change in quantity.

This contract is 90% complete and will no longer be reported.

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

Appropriation: Procurement
Contract Name Multi-spectral Targeting System Production and Modification
Contractor Raytheon Company
Contractor Location McKinney, TX 75069
Contract Number, Type

FA8620-06-G-4041/10,  FFP/CPFF

Award Date July 23, 2009
Definitization Date

October 07, 2010

Initial Contract Price ($M)

Current Contract Price ($M)

 Estimated Price At Completion ($M)

Target

Ceiling

Qty

Target

Ceiling

Qty  Contractor

Program Manager

87.3     N/A      N/A      128.1   N/A      N/A

 

 

128.1   128.1

Variance

Cost Variance

 

Schedule Variance

Cumulative Variances To Date

0.0       0.0

Previous Cumulative Variances

—          —

Net Change

+0.0     +0.0

Cost And Schedule Variance Explanations  None Contract Comments

 

The difference between the initial contract price target and the current contract price target is due to quantity increases as the result of exercising contract options in support of Overseas Contingency Operation requirements.

This contract is more than 90% complete; therefore, this is the final report for this contract.

Cost and Schedule reporting is not required on the FFP portion of this contract. The value of the CPFF portion of the contract is below the $20M threshold for Earned Value Management (EVM) reporting. In lieu of EVM, the Program Office is using a Performance Cost Report to monitor contract expenditures against the budget.

MQ-9 UAS REAPER

Appropriation: Procurement  December 31, 2011 SARContract NameMQ-9 FY10 Production Effort  ContractorGeneral Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. Contractor LocationSan Diego, CA 92064 Contract Number, TypeFA8620-10-G-3038/28,  FFP Award DateFebruary 03, 2011 Definitization DateFebruary 03, 2011

Initial Contract Price ($M)

Current Contract Price ($M)

Estimated Price At Completion ($M)

Target

Ceiling

Qty

Target

Ceiling

Qty

Contractor

Program Manager

148.3   N/A      24        198.4   N/A      32        198.4   198.4

Cost And Schedule Variance Explanations

Cost and Schedule variance reporting is not required on this FFP contract.

Contract Comments

The difference between the initial contract price target and the current contract price target is due to exercise of contract options for additional units.

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

Appropriation: Procurement
Contract Name MQ-9 FY09/10 Spares and Support Equipment
Contractor General Atomics – Aeronautical Systems Inc.
Contractor Location San Diego, CA 92127
Contract Number, Type FA8620-10-G-3038/35,  FFP
Award Date September 27, 2011
Definitization Date

September 27, 2011

Initial Contract Price ($M)

Current Contract Price ($M)

Estimated Price At Completion ($M)

Target

Ceiling

Qty

Target

Ceiling

Qty

Contractor

Program Manager

120.6   N/A      N/A

 

120.6 N/A N/A 120.6 120.6Cost And Schedule Variance Explanations

 

Cost and Schedule variance reporting is not required on this FFP contract.

Contract Comments

This is the first time this contract is being reported.

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

Deliveries and Expenditures

 

Deliveries To Date

Plan To Date Actual To Date Total Quantity

Percent Delivered

Development 3   3

3

 100.00%
Production       92   90   401   22.44%
Total Program Quantities Delivered 95

93 404  23.02%Expenditures and Appropriations (TY $M)    Total Acquisition Cost13087.9Years Appropriated

11

 Expenditures To Date

1865.0

Percent Years Appropriated

40.74%

 Percent Expended

14.25%

Appropriated to Date

4549.5

 Total Funding Years

27

Percent Appropriated

34.76%

 

As of February 29, 2012, actual production deliveries were less than planned due to production process issues.  Issues have been corrected and deliveries are expected to be back on track by March 2012.

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

Operating and Support Cost

 

Assumptions And Ground Rules

The Operating and Support (O&S) costs are from the Program Office (PO) estimate dated November 2011. The Contractor Logistics Support (CLS) costs are based upon approximately nine years of actual cost history.

The O&S estimate includes all Cost Analysis Improvement Group elements – Unit Personnel, Unit Operations, Maintenance, Sustaining Support, Continuing System Improvements, and Indirect Support. The MQ-9 UAS Reaper has been flying operations since 2002. Historical costs are attained from monthly CLS cost reports, Air Force Total Ownership Cost (AFTOC) actuals, and other data sources. Future costs are based on flying hour projects, manpower projections, the number of operating locations, and applicable rates and factors. Flying hours are based on the number of anticipated Combat Air Patrols (CAPs). Air Combat Command (ACC) defines a range of 5,840 – 8,760 flying hours per year per CAP.  The attrition rate is based upon the official Air Force Studies and Analysis MQ-9 UAS Reaper attrition model.  Quantity of aircraft per CAP will continue to vary based on mission requirements and future operations.

Unit Personnel costs are derived using the AFTOC database to determine an average cost per flying hour for operations, maintenance, and support personnel. Unit Operations cost factors include fuel, training munitions, and temporary duty costs. Maintenance costs include Operational-level (O-level), Depot-level (D-level), and Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) repair. Sustaining Support included D-level sustaining engineering and program management and system specific training derived from actual costs from previous years captured from the AFTOC database, and converted to a cost per flying hour. Continuing System Improvements costs include Reliability & Maintainability (R&M) Enhancements and Software Maintenance supported via the CLS contract. Indirect Support costs are based on factors from Air Force Instruction (AFI) 65-503 table A56-1, which were applied against manpower projections provided by Air Combat Command. Based on this information, the average cost per flying hour for an MQ-9 UAS Reaper is $3.253K and the average number of flying hours per tail per year is 918.7.  In order to convert to a cost per tail the PO multiplied the cost per flying hour by the average number of flying hours per tail per year, totaling $2.988M.

The cost per flying hour increased from the December 2010 SAR due to increases in CLS infrastructure, mishap repair, and projected Block 5 aircraft depot repair costs.  The increase in infrastructure costs is a result of increased field engineering support requests, technical order maintenance changes, software maintenance, and other support activities resulting from the planned fielding of additional aircraft and ground control station configurations.  The mishap repair costs were omitted from last year’s SAR.  The mishap repair costs are required to support continental United States and outside continental United States aircraft incidents.  The increase in depot repair costs results from the projected additional cost of the Block 5 aircraft configuration.

The PO received the MQ-9 Manpower Estimate Report (MER) and updated the O&S estimate with the Air Force Cost Analysis Agency and Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation. The O&S estimate will be updated as the program proceeds to the milestone C decision.

The total Operating and Support cost was derived by multiplying the average cost per flying hour for each cost element category (totaling $3.253K) by the total flying hours of the program (15,960,264 hours).   The expected operational life of the MQ-9 system is 43 years.

Disposal costs for the MQ-9 UAS Reaper are not known at this time.

MQ-9 UAS REAPER December 31, 2011 SAR

Costs BY2008 $M

Cost Element

MQ-9 UAS REAPER

Avg Annual Cost per Aircraft

MQ-1 Predator Avg Annual Cost per Aircraft

Unit-Level Manpower 0.712 0.293
Unit Operations 0.199 0.050
Maintenance 0.931 0.511
Sustaining Support 0.770 0.053
Continuing System Improvements 0.062 0.000
Indirect Support 0.314 0.303
Other

Total Unitized Cost (Base Year 2008 $)

2.988 1.210

Total O&S Costs $M

MQ-9 UAS REAPER MQ-1 Predator

 

Base Year       51920.9 7793.7

Then Year       77048.6 8448.6

By Sanindu Fonseka

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “MQ-9 UAS REAPER

  1. Información muy útil. Esperamos ver más artículos pronto!

  2. When I need to think about these things I will definitely come back here

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s