Technology Today Volumn 3 Issue 1

technologytoday
H IGHLIGHTING R AYTHEON ’ S T ECHNOLOGY
Volume 3 Issue 1
RF TECHNOLOGY
Innovation for Mission Success
A Message from
Greg Shelton
Vice President of Engineering,
Technology, Manufacturing & Quality
As we enter this New Year, I am pleased to bring you the latest issue of technology
today featuring RF technology at Raytheon. RF technology is in our roots beginning
with the production of the magnetron and subsequent ship-based radar systems for
World War II.
Much has changed in the RF systems we develop, design and supply to our war fighters.
The once science-fictional designs of “Star Trek” have now become realities using our
technologies and, today, RF is one of our key technology areas with expertise from
MMIC design and fabrication through large ground-based radars. The depth and
breadth of our expertise is astounding, from active RF sensors for radars, to satellite
sensors for weather monitoring systems, to electronic warfare and signal intelligence for
electronic countermeasures, to RF communications for radios, datalinks and terminals,
and the challenges of GPS and navigation systems. Our future is bright with research
and development in RF components and subsystems, as well as our ongoing, essential
research and development for systems improvements.
We also made significant accomplishments in 2003 on our journey for process excellence as measured through the Capability Maturity Model Integration® (CMMI)
Ask Greg on line
business model. Most of our major engineering sites achieved Level 3 certification for
at: http://www.ray.com/rayeng/
software and systems engineering, and our North Texas sites received CMMI Level 5
certification for software engineering. These successes are in recognition of a high level
of process maturity among various disciplines. I believe it creates a framework for
predictable execution, and predictable performance is one of our most important
objectives in Customer Focused Marketing. Great people supported by predictable
processes create a foundation for customer satisfaction and growth.
I encourage each of you to take the time to read through this issue of technology today
— you will be impressed. Take the initiative to connect with the RF leaders featured in
this magazine — they will share their knowledge and expertise. Share the magazine
with your customers and choice partners so they can learn more about our people, our
processes and the technology expertise that resides within this great company.
Sincerely,
Greg
2
TECHNOLOGY TODAY
INSIDE THIS ISSUE
RF Technology – Innovation for Mission Success
4
Radar – Active RF Sensors
technology today is published
quarterly by the Office of Engineering,
Technology, Manufacturing & Quality
Vice President
Greg Shelton
Engineering, Technology,
Manufacturing & Quality Staff
Peter Boland
George Lynch
Dan Nash
Peter Pao
Jean Scire
Pietro Ventresca
Gerry Zimmerman
Editor
Jean Scire
Satellite Sensors
10
Electronic Warfare and Signal Intelligence
11
Engineering Perspective – Randy Conilogue
12
RF Communications
13
GPS and Navigation Systems
15
The Future of RF Technologies
16
Leadership Perspective – Peter Pao
17
Advanced Tactical Targeting Technology
18
Pioneering Phased Array Systems and Technologies
19
HRL RF Technology
20
Design for Six Sigma
24
CMMI Accomplishments
25
IPDS Best Practices
26
First Annual Technology Day
28
New Global Headquarters Showcases Technology
29
Patent Recognition
30
Future Events
32
EDITOR’S NOTE
Editorial Assistant
Lee Ann Sousa
Raytheon is a technology company; it is something we are very proud of; it
defines who we are and it is a key discriminator. This issue showcases the
depth and breadth of our RF technology capabilities and our expertise,
which resides in our people. Technology plays a major role in Performance
and Solutions in our journey to become a more customer-focused company,
but the Relationships we develop and sustain are what will drive growth.
Graphic Design
Debra Graham
Photography
Jon Black
Fran Brophy
Rob Carlson
Publication Coordinator
Carol Danner
Contributors
Steve Allo
John Bedinger
Eric Boe
Randy Conilogue
Sean Conley
William H. Davis
John Ehlers
John Foell
Mark Hauhe
Debra Herrera
Denny King
Howard Krizek
5
David E. Lewis
Al Nauda
Daniel Pinda
Joseph Preiss
Michael Sarcione
Mardi Scalise
Matthew Smith
William Stanchina
Joel Surfus
Russ Titsworth
Bob R. Wade
Willard Whitaker III
Build and value the relationships with your customers; get to know them
on a personal level; ask about their family, hobbies and even favorite
restaurants. Relationships have to do with a shared mission or passion.
In the words of Jeff Maurer, president and COO of U.S. Trust Corporation,
“There are few people who can get through life based on their brilliance and their top performance that can ignore relationships. And if they do, you don’t wanna know ’em anyway.”
I once read that Nelson Rockefeller kept a Rolodex of all his clients with notes about their children
and personal interests. Each time a connection was made, he would open the conversation with
questions about the client’s family or personal interests. It pays to be personal. In many business
situations where price and performance are equal, it is the strongest relationship that wins.
Several of the features in this issue focus on building and sustaining relationships with our customers, partners and suppliers from our Raytheon technology days, to the opening of our global
headquarters, to the annual technology symposia. I encourage you to read about these successes,
share the magazine with your customers, partners and suppliers. We welcome feedback and
would love to hear about your success stories as well. Enjoy!
Jean Scire, Editor
jtscire@raytheon.com
an
Product
3
Raytheon
Innovation for Mission Success
RF Technology — A Legacy of Innovation
M
ost of us find science
fiction stories developed for television and
movies an exciting interlude from
our normal activities — one that
takes us into a make-believe world
of action-adventure, full of thought
provoking insights into what the
future may hold for us.
Of the science-fiction/outer-space epics
shown on TV and in movies, one of the
most ground-breaking was the Star Trek TV
series. This anthology — which told the
story of space exploration in the distant
future — prefigured many astonishing technological advancements: specifically, the
phaser weapons and photon torpedoes that
protected the ship; the large sensor array
that encased the ship and provided longand short-range sensor data in the form of
screen displays of nearby planets, gas
clouds, and space ships; the ship’s
ability to remotely monitor atmospheric,
environmental and radiation readings and
to send remote probes into hostile environments in order to monitor events; the force
field surrounding the ship that protected it
from hostile attacks and harmful environments; the force fields created within the
ship to isolate and contain alien intruders;
hand-held Tricorders that took local readings on environmental and health conditions are among many such precursors.
Those so-called “science-fiction” technologies, which then seemed impossible, are
today closer than we realize. But what does
Raytheon have to do with these technologies? The common denominator is that they
all involve RF sensors and signal processing,
very similar to current technologies under
development within Raytheon today.
4
For example, phaser weapons and photon
torpedoes are forms of directed-energy
weapons. The Star Trek Enterprise’s Large
Sensor Array is very similar to our passive
and active array antennas (e.g., F18 AESA,
Ground Based Radars, Space Based Radars,
and EW systems), all of which provide target tracking and classification along with
ground SAR mapping. Remote sensing of
atmospheric, environmental and radiation
is similarly done by today’s satellite Multispectral Sensors (some RF and some optical). The Enterprise’s Remote Probe is similar
to today’s Unmanned Air, Ground and
Water Vehicles. The spaceship’s outer force
field and local containment fields are similar
to today’s electromagnetic containment
fields used in fission reactors or high frequency microwave weapons, used to cause
enemies discomfort when in the field.
Finally, the Tricorder is similar to miniature
sensors for detecting poisonous gases,
viruses and biological agents under development today for homeland defense. All
of these “today” technologies are the
forerunners of technologies that some may
have thought didn’t fall within the laws of
Physics. Many other Star Trek technologies
not mentioned here also have sound, nearidentical facsimiles in today’s technologies,
(though we may have to wait to see if
human bodies can actually be transported
through space at the molecular level).
Not all RF waves, however, are propagated
in free space. Other forms of media exist for
electromagnetic propagation, including
copper wires, waveguides, transmission
lines and fiber optics (which are useful in
containing electromagnetic fields in small,
confined regions). Some examples of these
types of RF transmission media include ethernet and coaxial television cables.
So, just what is this thing called RF
Technology? RF — short for Radio
Frequency — is defined as any frequency in
the electromagnetic spectrum associated
with radio wave propagation through freespace. An RF Sensor is an electronic system
that transmits and receives information via
these electromagnetic waves. Thus the term
RF is associated not only with the RF waves
themselves, but also includes other aspects
of RF electromagnetic wave generation and
processing, as well as information coding,
propagation, reflection, detection and, most
importantly, information decoding.
The RF band, occupying the lower frequencies of the electromagnetic spectrum (from
DC to about 300 GHz), is commonly used
for radio communications, radar detection/
target tracking (although visible light is now
being used for these same purposes) and
remote sensing. (Radar is short for Radio
Detection and Ranging.)
The entire electromagnetic spectrum covers
a range from Direct Current (DC), through
microwaves to visible light — and on up
through X-Rays and Gamma Rays.
VLF
3-30 KHz
100-10 km
Very Low
Frequency
LF
30-300 KHz
10-1 km
Low Frequency
MF
300 KHz-3 MHz 1 km-100 m
Medium
Frequency
HF
3-30 MHz
100-10 m
High Frequency
VHF
30-300 MHz
10-1 m
Very High
Frequency
UHF 300-3000 MHz 1 m-10 cm
Ultra High
Frequency
SHF
3-30 GHz
10-1 cm
Super High
Frequency
EHF
30-300 GHz
1 cm-1 mm
Extremely High
Frequency
Microwaves
Sub- 300 GHz-3 THz 1mm-0.1 mm
mm
Wave
Millimeter and
sub millimeter
Wavelength
The older classification for RF band frequencies covered a range of about 10 KHz-1000
MHz, which included radio and television
transmissions, while today’s definition has
expanded to include frequencies from audio
(less than 20 KHz) to visible light (30,000
GHz — or 30 Terahertz).
The wide-ranging variety of functions that
together represent the science of RF signaling include the following:
• RF frequency synthesis and waveform
generation
• RF signal amplification and processing
• Electromagnetic wave radiation and
reception to free-space — via antennas
• Signal and frequency detection
• Information coding and decoding
• Atmospheric propagation and
reflection to/from objects
The range of technologies used to implement and build these functions is broader
still, extending from tubes to exotic semiconductors, antennas to lenses, and waveguides to photonic interconnects. Common
uses of RF Waves include communications,
direction-finding, geo-location, radar, passive signal detection and classification,
remote sensing/radio astronomy, RF heating
and welding.
Raytheon’s range of RF Systems can be
grouped into four basic functional categories as follows (although other specialized uses may also be developed):
• Radars designated for airborne,
missile, ground, space, battlefield,
shipboard, remote sensing and airtraffic-control uses
• Radio communications systems, data
links and satellite terminals
• Electronic Warfare (EW) and Signal
Intelligence and
• GPS and Navigation systems
RADAR —
Active RF Sensors
In the autumn of 1922, the US Naval
Research Laboratory (NRL) first detected a
moving ship using radio waves. Eight years
later, NRL similarly discovered that reflected
radio waves directed at aircraft could be
detected. In 1934, a patent was granted to
Taylor, Young, and Hyland at NRL for a
“System for Detecting Objects By Radio.”
The term given to this new science was
Radar (standing for Radio Detection And
Ranging). In other countries around the
world, similar discoveries and inventions of
radars were occuring. Early radar concepts
and experiments performed at NRL in the
U.S. focused on the detection of ships and,
later, aircraft. Early radars were primarily
used for direction finding via radio-location
(an early name for radar). Later, pulsed CW
techniques were added to perform target
ranging, employing a round polar display
with a rotating arc sweep marker, as popularized in movies and TV.
Since those early days, Raytheon and its
subsidiary companies had a long history in
the ongoing development of radar for military and commercial applications. Founded
in 1922, Raytheon came into prominence
early in the Second World War when Percy
Spencer, a Raytheon engineer, developed a
method for volume production of highquality Magnetron tubes which are critical
to radar operation (and microwave ovens).
Raytheon,and its acquired components
from E-Systems, Hughes Aircraft, Texas
Instruments and General Dynamics all have
a long history in radar sensors which are
currently integrated into nearly every conceivable platform — on land, sea, air and
space — including strike fighters, bombers,
AWACs, Unmanned Air Vehicles (UAVs) and
commercial aircraft. Add to that a long list
of Naval ships and systems, commercial
marine ships/personal watercraft, ballistic
missile defense ground systems, battlefield
defense and targeting systems, missile seekers, automobiles and satellites, etc.
Altimeters and direction finders are also
forms of radar sensors.
Though most radars are active (in that they
send out a signal to illuminate a target and
detect the reflected signal similar to shining
a light on an object in the dark), some
radar sensors are passive (in that they do
not illuminate the targets, but measure the
targets’ natural energy and/orsignal emissions). One of these systems — referred to
as radiometers — are often used on spacecraft to gather information about water, on
and above the Earth, through passive
receivers at various microwave and millimeter wave frequencies. These systems
observe atmospheric, land, oceanic and
cryospheric (or frozen mass) parameters,
including precipitation, sea surface temperatures, ice concentrations, snow water
equivalent, surface wetness, wind speed,
atmospheric cloud water and water vapor.
S h i p b o a rd R a d a r
The days of Navy surface combatants only
patrolling the high seas and engaging
threats at close range are past. Today’s surface combatants perform a variety of missions, operating in both deep water and
the ‘littorals’ (continental shelf), and must
counteract a variety of ever-increasing
threats. Current shipboard radar systems
operating over a wide range of RF frequencies provide the capabilities to successfully
carry out these missions. Because current
radar systems typically perform a single or
limited number of mission functions, the
surface warship is host to a number of
independent shipboard radar systems. This
host of radar systems aboard a single ship
can lead to a significant degree of RF interference between radars, communications
and electronic warfare systems. To reduce
these effects, system and frequency management, filtering and high-linearity
receivers are an integral part of today’s
advanced weapon systems.
The types of radar systems aboard a ship
are strictly a function of the vessel’s class or
category. As an example, a precision
Continued on page 6
5
RADARS
Continued from page 5
approach landing radar on an aircraft
carrier — as compared to a periscope
detection radar on a destroyer. Typically a
surface warship has at least a surveillance/
search radar and an anti-air-defense/firecontrol radar. These two radar systems provide the ship with the ability to detect,
track and engage a variety of threats.
Through means of volume search and longrange detection, shipboard surveillance/
search radars provide a total air picture to
the surface warship. These systems (first
fielded during the Second World War) typically operate at lower frequencies in order
to achieve enhanced search capability at
a lower system cost. Although the basic
function is the same (i.e., detection), these
systems have undergone a significant evolution from their first introduction through
to the next-generation systems that are
currently under development. The requirement to operate in littoral regions, coupled
with significant increases in aircraft speed
and traffic, has effected this steady evolution, which could only have been realized
because of significant advances that took
place within RF technologies. The antennae
used in these radar systems are no longer
mechanically steered, but rather use a
phased array with electronic steering,
which directs the radar beam itself. A
phased-array antenna provides faster beam
switching so the system can track more targets while increasing information update
rates. Individual tube-based transmitters
and receivers are replaced by thousands of
6
solid-state transmit/receive (T/R) modules
embedded in the phased-array antenna,
resulting in greatly improved sensitivity. This
allows the radar system to detect targets at
greater distances. The fidelity of the transmitted and received RF signal is also
improved, allowing the radar system to
detect smaller cross-section targets.
Anti Air Warfare (AAW)/fire-control radars,
operating at higher RF frequencies for
improved angle accuracy, detect and track
low-altitude airborne targets. If the target is
classified as a threat, the radar can be used
to direct naval fire against that target. The
first fire-control radars were fielded during
World War II and were used to direct naval
gunfire against surface and airborne targets. With the advent of missile technology
in the 1970s, fire-control radars moved
from directing gunfire to guiding missiles.
To support this new requirement, a phasedarray antenna replaced the mechanically
steered antenna in the fire-control radar.
Adjunct illuminators, used for missile guidance, were added to the system. With the
ability to track multiple targets and provide
faster update rates, and the ability to guide
missiles against airborne targets, the firecontrol radar steadily evolved into its
current AAW role.
As threats continued to evolve (targets with
smaller radar cross section, increased range
and greater maneuverability/speed),
advanced RF technologies have steadily
made their way into AAW radar systems in
order to effectively counteract these new
threats. Not unlike the next-generation
surveillance radar, the next-generation
AAW shipboard radar system is under
development today with state-of-the-art
RF technology.
The radar systems for tomorrow’s surface
warrior are under development today at
Raytheon. These defense systems rely on
the latest RF technologies to improve radar
performance against an ever-increasing
number of threats occurring in operational
environments. In addition to achieving
improved radar system performance, these
advanced RF technologies are enabling
next-generation radars to perform a host of
multi-function roles. This, in turn, allows
the development of a more capable surface
defender, with improved survivability at a
greatly reduced cost. The multifunctional
capability of these next-generation systems
also reduces RF interference throughout the
ship by sharply reducing the number of
operating systems.
Airborne Radar
Since the third decade of flight, airborne
radars have been providing information to
pilots about the world surrounding the aircraft. This information has enabled pilots to
perform their job better, be that navigation,
weather avoidance, or tasks with direct military application and usefulness. From the
original 1934 patent by Hyland et al.,
Raytheon and its various companies have
been at the forefront of radar technology
development for airborne applications.
In the simplest form, the purpose of a sensor is to provide useful data to the user (for
example, a pilot). Other examples of useable
data are situational awareness, kill-chain
support and intelligence, surveillance and
reconnaissance (ISR). Raytheon’s airborne
radars provide that kind of information
today, better than ever before.
Situational Awareness consists of information about the environment, and the
objects in it, that surround a user. For a
pilot user, many kinds of information about
the pilot’s surroundings are useful as an aid
to navigation. For example, terrain following, terrain avoidance, radar altimetry, precision velocity updating, landing assistance
and weather avoidance all assist the pilot in
flying the aircraft. Additionally, man-made
objects are of primary interest! Raytheon’s
airborne radars provide greater detection
and tracking ranges of a greater number of
targets than ever before achieved.
Kill-chain support is another type of useful
data provided by advanced, multi-mode
Doppler radar systems found on the current
generation of fighter and attack aircraft.
Radars aboard the
F-15, F-14, F/A-18,
AV8B and B2 all provide kill-chain
support in addition to situational awareness. The classical kill chain is denoted as
find, fix, target, track, engage and assess
(referred to as F2T2EA by the user community). The modern multi-mode Raytheon
radar finds and fixes targets on the ground
and in the air by using Doppler search
modes for moving targets, and imaging
modes for fixed targets. Once a target is
located, it is targeted and tracked using
additional waveforms. Targets in track can
be engaged, with radar providing targeting
information and weapons support. Finally,
engagement effectiveness can be assessed
through imaging of a fixed site or termination of the track of a moving target.
A third type of useful information is intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance. The
user of this data is as likely to be a ground
commander as it would be a pilot.
Raytheon’s HISAR, ASARS-2A and Global
Hawk radars provide imaging and movingtarget information of a region of interest
on the ground. Similarly, Raytheon’s APS137 radar on the Navy P-3 Orion, as well as
the international maritime radar, SeaVue,
provide location and tracking information
of maritime targets. All of these modern,
multi-mode ISR radars provide location,
tracking and identification of targets to the
battle field commander or the pilot.
Airborne radars are undergoing several
major, capability-enhancing revolutions. A
simple abstraction of a radar system might
be to view it as an RF transmitter and
receiver, a data processing unit and a
directional antenna. Today’s analog transmitters and receivers are being replaced by
programmable, digital receiver-exciters, similar to those found on the APG-79. These
receiver-exciters offer the ability to support
a wide variety of radar functions, with the
ability to add growth
functions while under
development. In the same way,
the airborne radar data processor is
undergoing a veritable explosion in capability, with the commercial field expanding its
capabilities by 100 percent approximately
every 18 months (a phenomenon referred
to as ‘Moore’s law’). This increase in processing throughput and storage is affording
far more sophisticated radar functionality.
Finally, the radar antenna itself is also
undergoing a major change. Earlier,
mechanically steered arrays are being
replaced by the Active Electronically
Scanned Array (AESA). AESA antennas, as
first deployed on the APG-63(v)2, provided
inertia-less beam pointing, permitting the
radar systems engineer to design functions
that can move the beam more rapidly.
Advantages such as increased sensitivity
and tracking capability result in improved
situational awareness.
to engage the target, some sort of closedloop control of the missile would be needed. The first radar-guided, air-to-air missile
developed (in the 1940s and ’50s) was the
Falcon missile. The Falcon was guided to
the target by ‘homing in’ on RF energy
bounced off the target by the fire control
radar. This type of missile-seeker radar is
referred to as a semi-active radar. The semiactive concept continues to be a valuable
operating mode for a number of presentday missiles. But as technology continued
to develop, more and more capability was
integrated into missiles. Today’s missile
radars are closely related to fire-control
radars. Modern missile radars adapt the
waveform parameters, receiver configuration and signal processing for the mode of
operation in use and the missile’s environment (though it should be noted that no
one missile does everything). Some missile
radars perform air-to-air targeting and others perform air-to-ground.
Predicting the future of airborne radars is
not difficult. As we extrapolate from the
past, the future will require even better
quality user information. Greater tracking
precision and finer imaging resolutions are
currently under development. Larger quantities of hard-to-find targets will populate
future battlefields, and Raytheon’s research
is addressing those needs. Fused sensors
(both Radio Frequency and Electro-Optical,)
will allow for enhanced effectiveness as
recently demonstrated by Global Hawk during Operation Enduring Freedom and
Operation Iraqi Freedom. Additionally, the
lines between RF functions are continually
blurring, with radars providing Electronic
Support Measures and communication
functions. The future holds capabilities not
envisioned by Roddenberry’s Star Trek.
Radar-guided missiles use radar sensors for
detecting and tracking both air and surface
targets. These radar sensors provide specific
target information that is used to guide the
missile. The missiles also employ RF communication links, GPS receivers and RF
proximity fuzes for detonating the warhead
when the missile passes close to the target.
Missile Radar
Missile radar seekers were a natural derivative of radar technology developed for
fighter aircraft. Once radar was incorporated into fighters, it became quite apparent
that the aircraft could locate a target, but it
was virtually impossible to destroy the target at any appreciable standoff range,
using bullets or unguided missiles. In order
Current missile RF-guidance technology
operates primarily at microwave frequencies
(3-30 GHz). For the guidance function, a
forward-looking sensor, employing either
a reflector antenna or a waveguide array
antenna, is mounted on an electromechanical, gimbal-controlled platform. An
aerodynamic nose cone or radome,that is
transparent to RF energy protects the
antenna. The RF signals originate either
from a transmitter on the missile (in an
active system), from an illuminating radar
on the launch ship, ground system or aircraft (in a semi-active system) or, alternatively, from the target itself (in a passive
system). Signals are reflected from the
target (or originate from the target), and
are received via the missile antenna and
Continued on page 8
7
P R O F I L E
Matt Smith is the RF Systems
Technical Area Director for Raytheon
Corporate. This is a one-year rotational
position that identifies common technology
pursuits and coordinates joint technology
development efforts among Raytheon businesses. He acts as a technical liaison to the
Raytheon Technology Networks, facilitating
activities such as technology roadmaps,
competitive assessments, collaborative
workshops and knowledge databases. Matt
also works with universities and other external
research agencies identifying and developing
strategies to exploit
potential disruptive
technologies. He hails
from Raytheon’s
Network Centric
Systems Business in St.
Petersberg where he’s
responsible for technical management of,
and active participation in, research and
design of microwave/millimeter-wave hardware for spaceborne remote sensing and
communications programs. His focus
recently has been on advanced space technology such as Si micromachined K-Band
MMIC Radiometers with integrated antenna arrays. Matt holds four patents (with
three patents pending) and has authored/
co-authored 20 refereed IEEE/SPIE technical
papers. He is a Senior Member of IEEE and
holds a dual degree (BSEE, BSNS & MSEE).
Matt has over twenty years experience in
space and military microwave design on
DMSP, ALR-67, ALQ-131, NESP, CEC,
GEOSAT, FEWS, TIROS-N, MILSTAR, LONGBOW, SEAWINDS and various classified
space programs.
Matt worked as a professional musician
while in engineering school with entertainers such as the Mills Brothers, Bobby
Darren, Rodney Dangerfield and Joe Pesci.
Although his ultimate goal is pursuing a
Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering, he still performs and teaches jazz and woodwinds in
the Tampa Bay area. “It is more evident
each day to me that engineering and music
are not orthogonal; instead they are closely
aligned through math, physics and, most of
all, creativity.”
Matt’s advice to new engineers is,
“Take some time out to publish technical
papers. Start with a survey paper that you
think would be useful to you and your
colleagues. Stay active in Raytheon technical networks, symposiums, lunchtime
seminars and professional societies like
IEEE and AIAA.”
8
RADARS
Continued from page 7
receiver. Passive missile receivers, also
known as Anti-Radiation Homing (ARH)
devices, must adapt to the target’s frequency and waveform characteristics.
Technology exists to include Synthetic
Aperture Radar (SAR) guidance capability in
a missile. SAR generates a high-resolution
image of the target area, just as if a photograph of the target area were taken directly
above the target area. SAR processing provides several performance enhancements
that afford a direct benefit to current
weapon capabilities. First and foremost, a
SAR missile allows the combatant to image,
identify and engage a target in all battlefield
environments including smoke, fog, rain,
snow and blowing sand.
Existing missiles thus typically have three or
more additional, independent RF subsystems,
each operating at a different microwave frequency. These include communication links,
GPS receivers and proximity fuzes.
Communication links are implemented with
antennas on the side or rear of a missile. In
most cases, the links have receivers and
transmitters that are separate from the
guidance radar. These links also have their
own signal processing. The links are used
by the fire-control system to control the
missile — during midcourse flight — in a
command guidance mode, in order to provide target designation updates to the missile
and to monitor missile status during flight.
Global Positioning System (GPS) is becoming the preferred midcourse guidance
mode for missiles. The missile receives RF
signals from the GPS satellites, establishing
the missile’s position and allowing it to
fly to a designated GPS location. The incorporation of a GPS receiver in the missile —
coupled with the communication link — is
used to correct for most alignment errors
between the fire-control radar and missile
coordinate systems.
Missiles also include proximity fuzes. The
proximity fuze is a full radar including a
transmitter, antennas, receivers and the
signal processing.
Future missiles developed by Raytheon will
employ multifunction, electronically steered
array antennas (or ESAs), eliminating the
need for mechanically gimbaled platforms.
The arrays may also conform to the missile
shape rather than being flat. The trend for
guidance and fuzing is to move to higher
frequencies, in the millimeter-wave region.
The shorter wavelengths allow sharper
beams to be formed, resulting in better
angle accuracy. However, it is also desirable
to retain a broad-beam capability for the
initial target acquisition. Multi-band capability is also desirable in order to accommodate multiple functions, including GPS,
communication links, target acquisition,
target track and fuzing, and, to maintain
compatibility with existing ships and aircraft. Active ESAs, with a solid-state transmitter associated with each radiating element or small sub-array, will replace tubebased transmitters. With greater processing
capability, the ESA will have the capability
to be rapidly reconfigured, in order to
switch frequently among targets and
among functions.
G ro u n d a n d B a t t l e f i e l d
Radar
The term “ground-based radar” covers a
broad spectrum of radar systems. These
radar systems are as varied in their operational frequency, capabilities and physical
characteristics as are the missions they’re
designed to perform. Early warning, missile
defense and fire-finder radars are just a few
examples of the many radar systems that
fall under this general heading.
Early warning systems, which typically have
an RF operating frequency in the UHF
range, are designed to detect and track
airborne and space-borne targets at great
distances. Given their low operational RF
frequency and required system sensitivities,
the antennas for these radars are often
close to 100 feet in diameter. With some of
the early warning radar, as is the case with
BMEWS, the antenna is built into the side
of a multi-story building that houses the
radar. Missile defense radars operate at
much higher RF frequencies than early
warning radars. Here the higher operational
frequency affords greater track accuracy
P R O F I L E
and target discrimination, which are
required for intercepts. The size of the
antenna for missile defense radars varies
from a couple of square meters for tactical
defense (such as Patriot) to tens of square
meters for national defense. Firefinders are
battlefield radars that detect and track ballistic shells or artillery. Based on the measured track of each projectile, the system
calculates the launch site. To achieve the
required track accuracy and system mobility, these systems operate at higher RF frequencies. As an example, the AN/TPQ-37
Firefinder operates in the S-band.
Despite the varied characteristics of the systems, RF technologies are at the heart of all
ground-based radar systems. As these technologies have evolved, so too have the corresponding systems’ capabilities. The most
significant advance in radar performance
was realized with the introduction of active,
electronically scanned arrays. Here the
directed RF energy is electronically — not
mechanically — steered, and single transmitters and receivers are replaced by thousands, if not tens of thousands, of solidstate, transmit/receive (T/R) modules
embedded into the antenna. This has
afforded the radar system many key benefits. The beam switching rate of an electronically scanned array is much faster than
that of a mechanically steered array. This
development has allowed the radar system
to simultaneously track multiple targets,
and/or targets with higher dynamics, and
to perform multi-function radar operation.
The improved radar sensitivity realized with
solid state T/R modules permits tracking of
smaller targets at greater ranges.
Currently, Raytheon is in active production
of several ground-based radar systems and
is developing several, next-generation,
ground-based radar systems. These systems
incorporate state-of-the-art RF technologies
in order to achieve the radar performance
required for a multi-function battlefield
radar, cruise missile defense radar,
and theater and national ballistic
missile defense radars.
Mike Sarcione is a Principal
C o m m e rc i a l R a d a rs
As the cost of RF technologies drops, radar
products are finding applications in the
commercial sector. Two examples of this
introduction into the commercial market
are leisure-boat radars and automobile
collision-avoidance radars. Raytheon is
currently engaged in the production of a
product line of leisure-boat radar systems.
These systems, which operate at X-band
frequencies, provide 360° coverage for the
detection and tracking of both stationary
and moving objects. The information is
presented as a two-dimensional image on
a liquid crystal (LCD) display as an aid in
vessel navigation.
The development of an automobile collision-avoidance radar is leveraging missile
seeker technology. This forward-looking
radar is mounted in the automobile’s
bumper in order to detect objects in close
proximity to the automobile. Through electronic switching, the radar covers an angular region in front of and just to the side of
the vehicle. This information, coupled with
the speed of the detected object relative to
the automobile, allows the radar to discriminate between objects. That is to say, the
radar can identify objects that represent a
danger (e.g., a stopped car
in front of the automobile)
vs. others that are nonthreatening, (e.g., a car passing alongside). Using this information, first-generation systems
will function as a warning system
to drivers. In the future, these same
systems could be used to realize automatic speed control and, in all
probability, enable automatic
driving on “smart”
highways. ■
Engineering Fellow in IDS and Raytheon’s
RF Technology Champion. He began his
interest in engineering while working in
high school in the audiovisual department. “I
used to videotape our
sporting events and do
the play-by-play”. Once
he realized that he
couldn’t compete with
Gil Santos (voice of the
New England Patriots) or
John Facenda (voice of
NFL films), his interest focused on how the
video camera, tape machines and electronics systems worked. He continued this
interest working as a videotape engineer
for ABC Television in New York. Mike left
ABC to further his education at the
Rochester Institute of Technology.
Early in his career at Raytheon, Mike
designed a digital processing simulator for
the Patriot Data Link Terminal. In 1980, he
took an educational leave of absence to
attend Worcester Polytechnic Institute to
get his MSEE. When he returned to
Raytheon, he joined the Microwave and
Antenna Department. Throughout his
Raytheon career, Mike has been involved in
virtually every major surface radar antenna
design in the Northeast. He is frequently
asked to participate in our most challenging
design activities. Mike is one of the driving
forces behind the extension of Raytheon’s
phased array technologies and capabilities
into the next generation of Army and Navy
radar and communication systems.
Mike is also diligently working on leveraging
Raytheon’s talent pool into the area of RF
Technology. He explains, “We’ve decided to
focus our enterprise-wide energies in the
areas of AESAs, Digital Receivers, Advanced
MMICs, Flat Panel Arrays and Multifunction
RF Systems.”
For Mike, work and volunteering are similar;
there are problems to be solved: “You roll
up your sleeves and try to help. In some
cases you lead, in others you participate,
but it’s always a team activity. The work
rewards are contributing to program wins,
solving problems, getting colleagues to
work together, watching younger engineers
grow with enthusiasm, taking on more
responsibility and trying to learn something
new every day. In volunteering it’s the
smiles, respect and interest of the students,
in knowing that we may have ignited a
flame or had some influence on motivating
others to think, and to pursue a career in
engineering, science or math.”
9
SATELLITE
S p a c e - b o r n e M i c ro w a v e
Remote Sensing
Microwave remote sensing has evolved into
an important all-weather tool for monitoring the atmosphere and planetary object
surfaces, which emphasizes the characterization of the earth phenomenology. This
type of sensing encompasses the physics of
radio wave propagation and interaction
with material media, including surface and
volume scattering and emissions. “Active”
remote sensors include scatterometers,
Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) and altimeters, whereas “passive” sensors are known
as microwave radiometers. Raytheon has
a 30-plus-year history in space Satellite
Communications (SATCOM) and within the
last decade, has added remote sensing payloads to our repertoire of outstanding
orbital performances.
The SeaWinds remote sensor has a specialized Ku-band radar (scatterometer),
designed to accurately measure the amplitude scattering return from the ocean and
convert the data into global ocean surface
wind speeds and directions. A normalized
radar backscatter coefficient of the ocean
surface is measured at the same point on
the ocean surface at four different incident
angles, and is a function of the angle of
incidence and the sea state. Receive power
is determined by measuring the power in
narrow- and wide-band filters, then solving
two simultaneous equations from the
received power and the ubiquitous receiver
noise. The science community experimentally and analytically established a geophysical model of wind vectors and wind geometry over the last two decades to achieve
this complex indirect measurement from
space. The Scatterometer Electronic
Subsystem (SES) was designed and developed by Raytheon St. Petersberg for the
NASA/JPL program, and is currently on orbit
and fully operational. Examples of previous
wind vector maps of the Atlantic and
Pacific oceans and newly acquired data
from QuikScat’s SeaWinds are shown in the
figure (center column). The radar operates
at a carrier frequency of 13.402 GHz with a
10
Sensors
nominal peak power of 110 watts, pulse
rate of 192 Hz and pulse width of 1.5
m/sec. The highly stable receiver measures
the return echo power from the ocean to a
precision of 0.15 dB. Key measurements
are a 1,800 km swath during each orbit
providing 90 percent coverage of the
Earth’s oceans every day, with wind speed
measurement range from 3 to 30 m/sec
with a 2 m/sec accuracy and wind direction
accuracy of 20 degrees at a vector resolution of 25 km.
Fifteen times a day, the satellite beams
collected science data to NASA ground stations, which relay the data to scientists and
weather forecasters. Winds play a major
role in weather systems and directly affect
the turbulent exchanges of heat, moisture
and greenhouse gases between the Earth’s
atmosphere and the ocean. They also play
a crucial part in the scientific equation for
determining long-term climate change.
Data from SeaWinds’ two-year mission will
greatly improve meteorologists’ ability to
forecast weather and understand longerterm climate change. SeaWinds provides
ocean wind coverage to an international
team of climate specialists, oceanographers
and meteorologists interested in discovering
the secrets of climate patterns and improving the speed with which emergency preparedness agencies can respond to fastmoving weather fronts, floods, hurricanes,
tsunamis and other natural disasters.
Operating as NASA’s next
El Nino watcher,
QuikScat will be
used to better
understand
global El Nino
and La Nina weather abnormalities. A
recent example of the advantages of spaceborne sensing was demonstrated when an
iceberg the size of Rhode Island had elluded ship-borne and airborne surveillance
devices and was drifting undetected off
Antarctica until Quikscat located it and
mapped its location (see figure above).
Another on-orbit remote sensor is the US
Navy GeoSAT Follow-On Ku-Band Radar
Altimeter, designed to maintain continuous
ocean observation from the GFO Exact
Repeat Orbit. This satellite includes all the
capabilities necessary for precise measurement of both mesoscale and basin-scale
oceanography. Data retrieved from this
satellite is useful for ocean research, offshore energy production, ocean circulation
patterns and environmental change. GFO
was launched aboard a TAURUS launch
vehicle on Feb. 10, 1998, from Vandenberg
Air Force Base in California and still provides valuable data sets for the U.S. Navy
today. The radar uses co-boresighted
radiometers, a Raytheon design, for water
vapor correction. Radiometer calibration
has become a niche area of research, and
Raytheon holds several patents in calibrating
radiometers using variable Cold Noise
Sources based on MHEMT technology that
have been validated at NIST.
S p a c e - b o r n e S AT C O M
Pa y l o a d s
From Iridium to MILSTAR to FLTSATCOM,
Raytheon has played a key role in the
development of commercial military space
satellite communications. Raytheon is the
major supplier of UHF SATCOM products
and services to the warfighter, including
space and ground hardware, software,
Continued on page 30
ELECTRONIC WARFARE
and Signal Intelligence
Historically, Electronic Warfare (EW) has
been referred to as Electronic Countermeasures
(ECM) — jamming, pure and simple. As the
electronic battlefield became more sophisticated, EW has included Electronic Attack
(EA), Electronic Protect (EP) and Electronic
Support (ES). Technological advances have
contributed to larger roles for EW, for
example, Situational Awareness, Passive
Counter Targeting and Precision Emitter
Identification. Since EW
has come to be used universally, it has become a
necessary and integral part
of both mission planning
and campaign strategy.
Radar and Electronic
Countermeasures have
similarly evolved together
over the years as another
facet of the arms and
armament race. By today’s
standards, the early radars
were quite unsophisticated. Operation could be
disrupted simply by transmitting more noise
within the radar bandwidth than was
returned from the target echo. Jamming
was relatively easy to carry out, because
substantial losses were sustained in the bidirectional path from radar to target and
back, compared to the one-way transmission associated with the jamming method.
Radar designers responded with transmitters having more and more power and
antennas having higher gain in order to
increase the radar’s Effective Radiated Power
(ERP). In addition, jammers also became
more powerful. The measure of performance of EW systems was based almost
entirely upon the Jam-to-Signal Ratio (J/S).
Radars got the task of not only detecting
threats, but also tracking and targeting
them. Chaff, bunched as bundles of tinfoil
strips which were cut to the resonant
length of the radar, burst into clouds when
dispensed from an aircraft, with the result
that alternative targets were offered to the
enemy radar to track. Tracking algorithms
for the radars improved from conical scan
to scan-on-receive-only to obscure scanning
from EW jammers. Jammers could jam
scanning radars generating false scanning
signals by slowly varying scanning modulation through a range of potential values.
The base measure of performance for EW
systems continued to be J/S.
Radars having a monopulse tracking capability were soon invented. By having several,
independent receive channels, detection,
ranging and tracking could all be done
using a single received pulse. Since only a
single pulse was needed for tracking, jamming modulations became ineffective. A
number of new jamming techniques were
devised to defeat monopulse tracking
radars. For example, during the Cold War,
war plans included having aircraft enter
and exit the target area at very low altitudes, allowing the aircraft to hide in the
radar clutter. Raytheon EW invented the
Terrain Bounce technique in case an interceptor acquired target lock. The Terrain
Bounce technique simply received the radar
signal, amplified it and retransmitted it in a
narrow beam in front of the entering aircraft. The bounce off the ground technique, while experiencing a degree of signal loss, nevertheless provided a true false
angle that the monopulse-tracking radar
would follow. Other techniques, such as
cross-polarization and cross-eye, provided
false angle information to monopulsetracking radars at the expense of severe
loss of coupling into the radar information
bandwidth. As a result, jammers continued
to have a high power requirement.
Raytheon EW has produced a number of
high-power radar jammers over the years.
For example, Raytheon has supplied almost
all the transmitters for the
EF-111 and EA-6B standoff jammers. The very
high-powered SLQ-32
provided protection for
the Navy’s Cruisers,
Battleships and Carriers.
The ALQ-184 jamming
pod provided self-protection for tactical aircraft like
the A-10 and F-16. The
SLQ-32 and ALQ-184
produced high ERP using
novel Rotman Lenses. The
Rotman lens enabled high
ALE-50
gain retrodirective jamming on a pulse-by-pulse basis, without the
need of computing an angle of arrival of
the radar signal.
Radars have basically won the RF Power
arms race against jammers, because it
became increasingly difficult to provide high
power jammers with robust techniques that
would be effective against a wide variety of
radars. Not only could radars generate high
ERP efficiently, but digital technology vastly
improved their processing gain by using
post-detection integration, pulse coding
and Doppler filtering.
EW has continued to exploit radar vulnerabilities throughout the kill chain of
weapons systems. For example, Raytheon’s
ALE-50 is a small repeater/transmitter
towed behind the protected aircraft. The
ALE-50 transmits a stronger signal than the
echo bounced off the protected aircraft
Continued on page 12
11
Engineering
Perspective
Randy Conilogue
Engineering Fellow
and Chairman RFSTN
Upon joining Hughes
Aircraft in 1976, my job
was to design a Microwave
Integrated Circuit (MIC)
amplifier using a single
GaAs FET transistor manufactured by Hughes Research Laboratories (now HRL).
Our CAD design tool for simulating these early RF
MICs was a Teletype machine with an acoustic
modem tied to a mainframe, running S-Parameter
simulations. My desktop design tool was a Smith
chart on a piece of plywood with a floating mylar disk
pinned to the plywood with a push pin. I used a pencil to mark the S-parameters on the mylar, rotate the
mylar around the Smith Chart, and apply parallel and
series components to match the transistors to 50
ohms. I cut my circuits on Rubylith, etched my own
MIC circuits, put the parts down with eutectic solder
and did my own wire-bonding. Next I tuned up the
circuits, tested and moved on to the next iteration of
the circuit.
It’s a different RF world out there today. Detailed simulations can be run on a desktop with electromagnetic simulations of circuit elements, parasitics, transitions and interactions. MICs on Alumina Substrates
have been replaced by Monolithic Microwave
Integrated Circuits (MMICs) that can be placed directly on Printed Wiring Boards (PWB) or packaged with
other MMICs to form Transmit/Receive modules and
other RF subsystems. RF Circuits and CAD Tools
appear to be following Moore’s Law in their exponential growth: Components and packaging are shrinking; integration levels are growing; sophistication of
RF subsystems is rising; and digital content is increasing. Digital speeds are becoming faster with SiGe and
the ever-shrinking MOSFET technologies. Analog-todigital converters are pushing further up the RF processing chain, replacing many of the classical RF/analog circuits with digital equivalents that provide higher accuracy than their RF equivalents — but at what
price? There are difficult tradeoffs between the simple-but-elegant RF or Analog circuit and the more
accurate digital equivalent in terms of size, power and
complexity. These tradeoffs require the RF subsystem
engineer to know more than just RF design. Today’s
RF designers need to have additional skills in analog,
digital, DSP, algorithms, architectures, system performance and customer needs. In other words, today’s RF
designer needs to become more of a systems engineer. Though Raytheon will still build RF components
and RF subsystems, our future lies in our ability to
apply new technologies to new and novel sensors and
platforms for our customers.
The key to unlocking great opportunities for Raytheon
is enterprise-wide collaboration leveraged by
Raytheon Technology Networks. Applying the right
technology to each product is an ongoing effort that
makes steady progress every year.
12
ELECTRONIC WARFARE
Continued from page 11
and therefore becomes a preferential target
to the missile seeker. Thus, the missile is
redirected from tracking the aircraft during
the endgame and instead tracks the towed
decoy. The ALE-50 decoy self-protection
concept has been proven in combat in
Kosovo and Iraq.
Many of the EW Systems being developed
today increase the benefits of stealth technology. Situational Awareness alone can
provide protection simply by avoiding detection by using low observable coatings and
materials most effectively. The new Radar
Warning Receivers (RWRs) — like the Navy’s
ALR-67(V)3 and the USAF’s ALR-69A — are
being designed with channelized digital
receivers using a polyphase architecture.
The digital receivers are smaller and lighter
weight than conventional receivers, thus
better fulfilling the RWR role. In addition,
the linear phase responses permit using
algorithms that exploit situational awareness, passive precision location for countertargeting and specific emitter identification.
Modern EW is not restricted to the RF
spectrum. One of the most significant
threats to aircraft having close
ground engagements for
example, the A-10 and
C-130, is the shoulder-fired
IR missile. Raytheon has
developed the Comet pod,
which dispenses pyrophoric
(heat emitting — that is, igniting
spontaneously on contact with air) foils
that substitute false targets for the IR missile seekers. Pyrophoric material is basically
iron that oxidizes rapidly in order to provide
radiation in the IR spectrum, with the benefit that there is no identifiable signature in
the visible spectrum. Dispensing of
pyrophoric foils, in concert with a missile
warning radar, is being proposed to the
Department of Homeland Security in
response to their initiative to find costeffective means to protect commercial aircraft from IR missiles in proximity to airports.
Today’s technology is being applied to
Electronic Warfare Systems to make them
smaller, faster and more intelligent than the
Weapons Systems that place them under
attack. In their roles of Suppression or
Destruction of Enemy Air Defenses
(SEAD/DEAD), the systems rely more on
finesse rather than raw power. New algorithms and computational power enable
Precision Engagement (PE) and full participation in Network Centric Warfare (NCW).
Additionally, the newly developed digital
receivers also enable an expanded role for
Intelligence Surveillance and
Reconnaissance (ISR).
Future EW systems will incorporate not only
wideband digital receivers, but also transmitter exciters that contain Digital RF
Memory (DRFM). DRFM converts the
received RF signal to a stream of zeros and
ones via high speed sampling and stores
the bitstream in memory for later recall.
The stored bitstream is a high-fidelity replica
of coded pulses, such that pulses transmitted at a later time as jamming signals are
accepted as valid signals by the victim
radar and are passed on with the full processing gain of the radar receiver. This EW
Comet pod
technology is necessary to
keep pace with the future radar systems
that will have electronically steered antenna
arrays, advanced coded signal processing
and pulse-to-pulse agility.
Raytheon is a full participant in modern EW
systems, using the latest in digital receiver,
fiber optic, steerable antenna array and
solid-state technologies. The use of finesse
rather than raw power makes EW a
participant in four strategic initiatives:
the Suppression or Destruction of Enemy
Air Defenses (SEAD/DEAD), Precision
Engagement (PE), Network Centric Warfare
(NCW) and Intelligence Surveillance and
Reconnaissance (ISR). ■
RFRadios,
Communications
Data Links and Terminals
Telegraphy was the first form of electronic
communications developed by Joseph Henry
and Samuel F. B. Morse in the 1830s.
Telegraphy soon evolved to include voice
communication in the 1870s following the
invention of the telephone by Alexander
Graham Bell and Elisha Gray. Guglielmo
Marconi, Reginald Fessenden and other
radio pioneers made wireless communication possible by the end of the 19th
Century, enabling communication between
any two points on the Earth. Throughout
the 20th Century, RF communications technology evolved rapidly. Commercial broadcasting, television, the world-wide telephone network, satellite communications,
the Internet and cellular telephones are
examples of the continuing progression of
RF communication technology. Now in the
21st Century, the continuing development
of communications technology has made it
possible to rapidly communicate events and
information across the world in seconds.
Operating hand-in-hand with the communications network (i.e., the Internet and the
computer), this capability has brought the
world’s population together into what some
refer to as the ‘global village.’ The same
technology has in many ways enhanced the
advancement of other technologies and, for
better or worse, shaped the world in which
we live today.
Raytheon and its acquired business entities
have been involved in military voice communications since the 1920s when a
predecessor company, Magnavox, supplied
noise-canceling microphones for use in aircraft radios. We’ve supplied complete radio
systems in support of national defense since
1950. Raytheon and its acquired companies
have been leaders in both voice and digital
communications development for battlefield
communications, and facilitation of defense
command-and-control operations. These
efforts have led to the development of
radio terminals that relay communication
across the world, provide highly secure,
jam-resistant, encrypted data links, spread
spectrum digital communications and tactical wireless networking.
H F / V H F / U H F Ta c t i c a l
Communications
Historically, radios provided communications
through dedicated waveforms in a specific
frequency band. These radios were implemented using a fixed configuration, and
Communications Security (COMSEC) was
in the development of radios providing
selectable waveform modes and increased
frequency coverage. By the 1980s and
1990s, radios such as the AN/PSC-5
Multi-Band Multi-Mission Manpack Radio
(MBMMR) and AN/ARC-231 airborne radios
were developed. These radios are softwarecontrolled, highly versatile and support
waveforms such as AM, FM, HAVE QUICK,
SINCGARS, SATCOM and DAMA SATCOM
AN/ARC-164 Radio family
employed through
externally mounted
hardware devices, such
as the KY-57. Various
radio products were developed in order to expand the
frequency coverage and address increasing
military demands. By the 1970s, Raytheon
(vis à vis Magnavox) was the leading producer of radio products covering the frequency range from 2 to 400 MHz. Some of
these radios include the AN/ARC-164 (AM
airborne radio), the AN/VRC-12
(primary Combat Net Radio) and the
AN/GRC-106 (HF SSB radio).
Increasingly diverse mission requirements
and difficult operating conditions (for
example, jamming, crowded spectrum, etc.)
resulted in the need for Electronic CounterCounter Measures (ECCM) capability. This
led to the development of more sophisticated waveforms such as ‘HAVE QUICK’ by the
late 1970s. This waveform was implemented into several radios, including the
AN/ARC-164 and the RT-1319 ground manpack. Increasing military demands resulted
in various analog-voice,
digital-voice and data formats,
and include various embedded
COMSEC protocols, eliminating the
need for any external COMSEC device.
Today’s battlefield is more dynamic and
advanced than ever before, with instant
communication of battlefield locations, pictures, voice, data and live video. Firepower
can be precisely directed at target positions
within a moment’s notice. Widely available
and accurate situation-awareness data —
through Raytheon’s SADL and EPLRS networks — prevents fratricide and enables
rapid response and extraction of downed
pilots and wounded personnel. EPLRS and
SADL work across US services to digitally
connect US Army EPLRS equipped ground
forces with USAF SADL aircraft. In addition,
Raytheon continues its leadership in the
communications area with the EPLRS and
MBMMR radios.
Continued on page 14
13
RF COMMUNICATIONS
Continued from page 13
RF Communications —
To d a y
RF Communications —
T h e F u t u re
Raytheon is currently involved in the development of the following systems which
employ RF technologies:
In the future, Network-Centric Battlefield
communications will involve the networking of all radio/comm links in a massive,
interconnected network, similar to the
World Wide Web, except it will be entirely
wireless. This network will be able to
exchange information from a warfighter on
the ground to a satellite, airplane, ship or
sensor. Networks will be ad-hoc and “selfhealing” in the event of node failures.
Raytheon is a major participant in the
definition and development of the
Network-Centric Battlefield through programs such as Netfires and JTRS. We were
the prime contractor in the development
of the Core Framework for the Software
Communications Architecture for the
JTRS program.
• EPLRS
– Secure anti-jam mobile data radio
– Backbone of the Tactical Internet
– Situation Awareness Data Link (SADL)
– Weapon data links (AMSTE, JDAM)
– JTRS Cluster 1 waveform implementation
• Networking Technology
– FCS-Comms
– DARPA research and development
programs
– Directional antennas
– Protocol development
– Information Assurance
– Modeling and Simulation
• Wideband Data Links
– USC-28(V)
– DECS
– Netfires
– Tactical Tomahawk Satellite Data Link
Terminal (SDLT)
• Large Scale System Engineering &
Integration
– DD(X)
– Mobile User Objective System (MUOS)
satellite communication system
– Peace Shield (Saudi Arabia BMC4I system)
– MC2A
– Data fusion
– SLAMRAAM
• Battlespace Digitization
– Force XXI Battle Command Brigade
and Below (FBCB2)
– Army and Marine Tactical Internet
Architecture
– Tactical Routers (MicroRouter)
– Bosnia Defense Initiative
– Operation Enduring Freedom
– Operation Iraqi Freedom
• Radios
– Software Defined Radio
technology (SCA, JTRS)
– EPLRS
– MBMMR
– ARC-231
Increasing mission requirements are putting
additional demands on future military communications, including broader frequency
coverage (2 MHz to greater than 2 GHz)
and broadband transmit and receive chains
with high speed analog to digital converters in the 1 Gsps range and higher, resulting in digital hardware being positioned
closer to the antenna as this technology
matures. Antennas will become arrays in
order to incorporate Space Time Adaptive
Processing (STAP) for nullifying jammers
and interference. Frequencies will move to
the KA band. These new radios will
incorporate frequency-agile waveforms that
will permit operation in dense cosite environments. Radios and datalinks will become
Network-centric battlefield
communications will involve
the networking of all
radio/comm links in a massive,
interconnected network,
similar to the World Wide
Web, except it will be
entirely wireless.
software definable, allowing reconfiguration on the fly and easy upgrades to new
modes and waveforms. JTRS emphasizes an
“open” architecture for easy software
reprogramming, which will allow users to
access newly developed waveforms and
communication protocols without changing
radios. This provides the tactical user with
all essential communications within a
single unit.
In support of the Network-Centric
Battlefield, Raytheon is developing the
technology for including a radio/link on
every platform through the Miniature Low
Cost Data Link (MLCDL) program. Raytheon
builds satellite modems (a form of data
link), voice communication radios and
NetFires Enables NLOS Network Centric Control
of Missiles In-flight
Non-Line-of-Sight Launcher System (NLOS-LS/NetFires) is the Army’s first netcentric weapon system for indirect fires and has the potential to make possible
revolutionary changes in future combat. For the first time, commanders will be
able to deploy a fully networked missile beyond the line of sight and exercise
real-time control over the missile while in flight. The missile — as part of a
communications network — can communicate potential target reports, battle
damage information and target imagery to the net in real-time while in flight
to the target area, loitering over it or when attacking the target. The network
connection allows the warfighter to direct a missile in flight, provide target
location updates for movers or receive a “laser target” command from the missile once it enters the search area, all with minimum latency.
14
remote battlefield sensors to sense troop
movements and relay the information to
central command. In future urban warfare
situations, a network of sensors will be
used to detect and report enemy combatants. This network will relay information
from one sensor to the other to enhance
the sensor coverage area. This will be a
major part of the Network-Centric
Battlefield concept.
Raytheon additionally uses its communications expertise to support products for
gathering signals for intelligence purposes.
Another planned initiative involves the
development of the Future Combat SystemCommunications (FCS-C), designed to
seamlessly integrate ad-hoc mobile networking with adaptive full spectrum, high
data rate low-band (~10 Mbps) and high
data rate high-band (~72 Mbps) communications, with both bands employing adaptive beam-forming antenna technology. The
Raytheon Team’s FCS-C system design will
provide assured, networked high data rate,
low probability of intercept/detection, and
anti-jam (LPI/LPD/AJ) networked communications. This will facilitate on-the-move
communications in restrictive (forested,
mountainous, urban) terrain engagements
for potential use in various types of robotic
and manned FCS vehicles. This is a quantum leap from currently deployed systems
capabilities which:
• Are limited to frequencies well below
1 Mbps,
• Do not employ “smart antenna”
technology, adaptive waveforms, nor
a high-band subsystem that can be
integrated with low band
• Do not have reliable, ad-hoc,
mobile-to-mobile networking.
This communications system will create a
tactical information grid that will support
network-centric operations for all FCS vehicles. By integrating both low- and highband radios with dynamic antenna beamforming technology (in an adaptive ad-hoc
mobile network), the FCS Unit Cell is fully
equipped to demonstrate superior command, control, situational awareness,
mobility, lethality, survivability and supportability for the FCS Objective Force. ■
GPS and Navigation
Systems —
The RF Challenge
Military GPS receiver RF designs have
always presented unique challenges. Early
GPS RF designs relied upon dual and triple
conversion schemes to down-convert the
GPS L1 and L2 signals (1-2 GHz) to either
IF or base band, prior to signal correlation
and demodulation. These designs utilized discrete, off-the-shelf, GaAs
amplifiers and mixers, with custom-built
L-band and IF filters, resulting in large
and costly designs. As digital and
microprocessor technology has
advanced, the size and cost of GPS
receivers related to signal correlation
and processing have diminished.
The RF design has, in fact, begun to
dominate the GPS receiver’s size and
cost. One way to reverse this trend is
through the development and use of RF
ASIC technology. The commercial GPS
manufacturers have been very successful
in developing single-chip GPS receivers
using mixed-mode, SiGe (silicon-germanium) ASIC technology. This commercial technology is specifically designed to support
the L1 frequency (civil) and is inexpensive,
resulting in very low cost and smaller commercial GPS receivers. However, this technology is not applicable to military GPS
receivers due to limited bandwidth and
low dynamic range.
Recently — due to the requirements to
incorporate 911 capabilities into cellular
telephones — a number of RF component
manufacturers have been designing and
manufacturing an expanded line of integrated RF devices that have applicability
to military GPS receiver designs. RF Micro
Devices and Nippon Electric Company have
both developed highly integrated GPS RF
down-converter, ASIC devices that integrate
the synthesizer, RF down converter and A/D
functions into a single ASIC. These devices,
although not specifically designed for military GPS applications, provide performance
characteristics that allow them to be used
in, and adapted to, low-performance
military GPS applications supporting singlefrequency operation. Still, these RF ASIC
designs only marginally live up to military
GPS receiver design requirements and
cannot be used in high performance GPS
applications.
What is needed is a highly integrated RF
ASIC that has widespread applications for
both military and civil GPS use. The RF
design challenge is to use commercially
viable, RF ASIC SiGe technology in the creation of an evolutionary design that provides
the functionality required for both emerging
military anti-jam, multi-channel GPS receiver
designs, as well as offering significant
improvements to standard military and
commercial GPS receivers. Designing for the
commercial market takes advantage of the
higher-volume, commercial applications to
minimize the cost for military applications.
Specifically, the capabilities required for
this highly integrated GPS RF ASICs are as
follows:
• C/A, Y, and M code compatibility
• L1, L2, L2 (civil) and L5 operation
• Multi-channel RF Processing and
down conversion
• Jamming Resistance
• RF, IF and Digital Outputs
Continued on page 17
15
THE
FUTURE
of RF Technology
As shown in the systems described, RF Sensors and RF processing are
key components in a large number of Raytheon’s systems. RF is used to
transmit information via electromagnetic waves through space and
translate these waves into intelligible information. RF components such
as magnetrons, klystrons, amplifiers, semiconductors and MMICs have
been conceived, developed, manufactured and improved ever since
Marconi’s invention of the wireless telegraph in 1896.
Today’s research and development at Raytheon is focused on technology
that will improve the performance and capability of current systems. This
research will afford cost-effective solutions to our customers’ changing
scenarios and challenges related to national defense. New and emerging
threats (such as terrorism and urban warfare) need to be counteracted
with new approaches and quick implementation of RF technology.
Raytheon possesses both the technology and the expertise to mold this
technology into solutions to combat these new threats.
Specific technology directions in research and development related to RF
components and subsystems at Raytheon include:
2003 RF Symposium Provides
Interaction With Customers
“This was one of the best technology forums
that I have participated in,” says Tim Kemerley, Aerospace
Components Division Chief, Air Force Research Laboratory.
He praised the 2003 RF Systems Technology Network (RFSTN)
Symposium at the Don CeSar Resort, April 21-24, 2003,in St.
Petersberg Beach, Fla. “The quality and the breadth of the
technology papers presented were very impressive,” he says.
“I have worked with various components of Raytheon for 30
years. It is amazing to see them coming together in a powerful
way! Thanks for inviting Department of Defense customers.”
The annual Raytheon-wide symposium facilitates exchange
of research results and novel ideas for microwave, millimeterwave and radio-frequency technology. Reflecting this year’s
theme, “Innovative Technology for Customer Success,”
Department of Defense (DoD) participants (Raytheon customers) attended to provide their perspectives. Usually kept
company proprietary, this was the first RF symposium where
customers were invited to participate in all technical sessions,
joining the 390 Raytheon attendees and about 170 others
from across the country who participated via webcast.
• Solid-State Active Electronically Scanned Antennas (AESA)
• High-efficiency power amplifiers
• Directed energy technologies
• New semiconductors, including SiGe, InP and GaN for higher
levels of integration, higher power and higher speed.
• High Density MMICs and TR Modules
• Frequency Agile sources
• Digital receivers and transmitters (signal processing)
• Software Defined Radio Architectures and their implementation
• Higher bandwidth and higher sensitivity RF components
• Radar stealth coatings and materials
• Micro Electro Mechanical Structures (MEMS) Switching
Just as important is Raytheon’s ongoing research and development
related to systems improvements:
• Ka band frequencies for higher resolution and pointing accuracy
• Integrating multiple beams and simultaneous modes into
single systems
• Space-time, adaptive processing (STAP) and jammer-nulling
techniques
• Composite airframes
• Netted Communications across platforms
The Raytheon RF engineering community continues to change along with
changing system requirements by improving collaboration and communication among engineers through symposia and information sharing. In
addition, future RF engineers will be transforming themselves into systems designers as we work to find the best and most cost-effective
solutions to our customers’ continuing needs. ■
16
Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Science and
Technology, Dr. Charles Holland, delivered the keynote
address, stressing how selected RF technologies were
enablers of future critical missions. Dr. Bobby Junker, Head,
Information, Electronics & Information Sciences, Office of
Naval Research, described the importance of advanced multifunction RF technologies to the Navy. Tim Kemmerly,
Aerospace Components Division Chief, Sensors Directorate,
Air Force Research Laboratory, presented an overview of Air
Force sensor technology needs and key technical challenges
for RF components. Dr Robert Leheny, Director of DARPA’s
Microsystems Technology Office, gave his perspectives on
the future of microelectronics for military systems, anticipating the end of Moore’s Law and citing the vital role of
nanotechnology.
Customers had the opportunity to
view over 230 technical papers
presented among the four parallel
tracks. Interaction was encouraged
with two poster sessions, two workshops on RF Filters and Antenna,
Radome, Array Error Analysis and 30
vendor displays.
This was the fifth annual Raytheon RF Symposium. DoD
participation was very well received from Raytheon customers
and participants. It was frequently mentioned that the
interaction was worthwhile and should be encouraged in
future symposia.
Leadership Perspective
Dr. PETER PAO
Vice President
Technology
Yo u r re s p o n s i b i l i t y i n a
C u s t o m e r- Fo c u s e d
Company
Being a customer-focused company is the
foundation of Raytheon’s business strategy. The three pillars of this Customer
Focused Management (CFM) strategy are
Performance, Relationships and Solutions.
But what does this mean to you as a
Raytheon engineer? What is your role in
executing this strategy? I would like to
share some of my thoughts with you.
Performance is about meeting our commitments — providing the best value solutions to our customers. It includes system
performance, reliability, supportability,
cost, schedule, weight, size, power and a
few other critical requirements. We need
to pay attention to all these parameters in
every design phase. For example, not only
does the design have to meet performance
requirements, it must be viable and meet
cost targets. We need to have a cost
model so we can estimate production cost
during system design. We can draw similar
conclusions on reliability and maintainability.
As many of you know, this means balanced design, and Raytheon Six SigmaTM is
the right tool for this purpose. I strongly
encourage you, as engineers, to learn and
practice Raytheon Six Sigma. It is the path
to follow on the journey of meeting our
total commitment.
Relationships are about building positive
and solid connections with our customers.
This can only be accomplished by understanding their challenges, anticipating their
needs, proactively responding to their
requests and following through on our
commitments. Most of our major programs today are built on this kind of customer relationship. It always starts with a
few engineers determined to understand
and solve a customer’s problems. Building
relationships takes time but, if we persist,
customers will realize they can count on us
and our company; that is how we win
their trust and their business. To our customers, we are Raytheon. Our attitudes,
our actions and our outcomes determine
our image. Building customer relationships
is not just for BD or program managers.
It is up to each and every one of us.
Providing solutions is our business, and
innovative technology solutions are what
we sell our customers. We must remember
that the technology is the means, not the
end. We can not “do” technology for
technology’s sake, and we certainly cannot
let our own bias — our love for the technology we develop — restrict or blind us.
It is up to us to apply the most appropriate
technology to provide the best solution to
our customers, regardless of the source of
that technology. This means, one, we need
to work together as One Company to
offer the best to our customers. And, two,
we need to be “lifetime learners” as we
continually track global technology development so we can apply it to solve our
customers’ problems.
Today our customers are facing different
challenges. Their needs are changing, and
our market is transforming at a rate that
has never been experienced before in our
industry. Companies that understand these
changes — and are capable of providing
the best solutions — will be the winners of
this transformation. We have that capability but, now more than ever, this is the
time we need to be customer-focused.
When we connect with our customers,
provide superior performance and solve
their problems, we will grow our company.
For more information about Raytheon Six Sigma,
visit http://homext.ray.com/sixsigma/
GPS
Continued from page 15
To meet the dual requirements for increased
tracking performance and anti-jam, military
GPS receivers require low phase noise, high
dynamic range and precisely matched, RF
down conversion channels. In order to meet
these requirements, RF designers had to
revert back to discrete GaAs amplifiers and
mixers and precisely matched RF and IF filters.
Shown on page 15 is a two-channel RF
design for a high anti-jam GPS system. As
shown, the large, discrete RF and IF filters
dominate the design.
Raytheon is studying ways to reduce the size
and cost of these designs by a factor of 10,
using state-of-the-art SiGe 0.18 CMOS RF
ASIC technology and Thin Film Resonator
(TFR) filters. The requirements for this GPS
down converter include greater than 40 dB of
channel-to-channel isolation, greater than 70
dB of dynamic range and very small channelto-channel differential group delay. It is also a
priority to have more than one down converter channel in an RF ASIC design.
Raytheon is leveraging
state-of-the-art technology to
greatly reduce the size and cost
of RF designs.
TFR filters provide promise, in that they have
very linear phase characteristics over the
required bandwidths and are small and low
cost. However, the TFR manufacturers are
concentrating on commercial applications.
Specific custom filter designs for military GPS
receivers using this new technology should be
developed and tested.
The GPS RF design represents the most difficult technical challenge in meeting future GPS
receiver requirements. Newer, miniaturized
weapon systems will require GPS receivers
that are much smaller and lower in cost than
today’s receivers for applications in projectiles,
mortars, smart munitions, dismounted soldier
and miniature UAVs. ■
17
Advanced Tactical Targeting Technology
Pulling it all together
The Advanced Tactical Targeting
Technology (AT3) program is an example of
integrating a wide range of RF technologies
into a network-centric radar (emitter) targeting system.
technique used in LORAN and GPS. The frequency difference-of-arrival exploits the difference in Doppler frequency among the various collection platforms. These techniques
require precise time and frequency information transfer between collection platforms.
AT3 Sensor System
Function
Key Features
Protect Antennas from weather,
Broad Band
reduce drag on aircraft
Antennas
Transduce RF energy into system
Broad Band, Wide Field of View
RF Down converter Translate RF signals to an Intermediate Frequency Broad Band, Low Noise, Wide IF Bandwidth
Digital Receiver
Extract Signal information from IF
Wide Band, High Speed ADC, High Sensitivity
Local Oscillator
Provide reference signals for
Low Phase Noise, Narrow Phase Lock Bandwidth
system and RF downconversion
GPS
Provide time, frequency and position information All in view receiver
Frequency and
Synchronize AT3 with GPS
System Clock, GPS time and frequency transfer
Time Board
Signal Processing High Sensitivity
High resolution chanelizer, many narrow band
detectors
Precision Time Measurement
Leading edge measurement
Precision Frequency Measurement
Phase measurement
Geolocation
TDOA, FDOA, Hybrid, derivative of GPS equation,
erroneous measurement filtering
Data Link
Exchange Data between aircraft
JTIDS, efficient slot utilization
AT3 Instrumentation System
Cesium Clock
Time and Frequency reference
Primary standard
Time Interval
Time benchmark between System Clock
Analyzer
and Cs Clock
Frequency
Short time frequency measurement
Hybrid phase noise/TIA, short time frequency
Measurement System
benchmark between Reference LO and Cs
Secondary GPS
Time Space Position Information (TSPI)
Commercial survey quality, support kinematic
survey of aircraft
Component
Radome
The AT3 program is a Joint DARPA/AFRL
program established to demonstrate the
long range, precise and rapid geolocation
of radars associated with surface-to-air
missile systems. “Long range” is considered
outside the lethal range of the SAM system. “Precise” is considered accurate
enough to target precision-guided munitions. “Rapid” is considered fast enough to
locate and engage the radar before it can
shut down or relocate. The objective is to
establish a targeting capability that supports the use of precision guided munitions
for the destruction of enemy air defenses.
DARPA had established through earlier studies that the use of time difference-of-arrival
(TDOA) and frequency difference-of-arrival
(FDOA) geolocation techniques were
required in order to support the desired
accuracy and timeline. The time differenceof-arrival geolocation requires multiple collection platforms with reasonable separation
to simultaneously time-tag radar pulses and
merge the data in real time, similar to the
18
A summary of the RF technologies for the
AT3 system
Te c h n o l o g i c a l C h a l l e n g e s
Meeting the long range requirement with
multiple platforms requires an extremely
sensitive receiver. The receiver must be able
to detect weak radar emissions in the back
lobes and side lobes of the radar antenna
pattern at the desired stand off range. The
ability to rapidly detect radar requires a
broad band receiver with a wide, instantaneous-detection bandwidth. To meet
these requirements, a multi-octave (>3
octaves) RF down converter with a low
noise figure was used in conjunction with a
wideband digital receiver. The digital receiver provides additional processing gain to
support the high sensitivity detection.
The wide bandwidth of the digital receiver
required the use of high speed analog-todigital conversion. In a complex radar environment, the ADC must support a wide,
instantaneous dynamic range.
GPS was used to meet precise time and
frequency transfer requirements. A Kalman
Filter was employed to establish the time and
frequency offsets between the GPS onepulse-per-second signal and the reference
oscillator for the AT3 system. Distribution of
time and frequency within the AT3 system
was achieved coherently. This approach
supported the ability to directly align data
samples from the ADC to GPS time. In
addition, this technique continuously calibrated the reference LO to the GPS clock
ensemble. This integrated calibrating operation provided very accurate knowledge of
the reference clock frequency, the tuning
frequency and the sample frequency of the
AT3 system. An innovative frequency and
time board was also developed in order to
support the GPS synchronization.
The precise knowledge of position, velocity
and attitude is a system requirement. For
the TDOA geolocation technique, aircraft
position accuracy is essential. For the FDOA
geolocation technique, the aircraft velocity
vector must also be accurately known.
Typical navigation systems have sufficient
latency to impact the accuracy of the velocity vector. An inertial navigation system
integrated with an embedded GPS receiver
was used. The unit was modified to provide
a data strobe that allowed the latency of the
inertial measurements and the data messages on the aircraft data bus to be accurately characterized. This approach supported accurate determination of the aircraft
state vector at the time of the radar signal
interceptions.
Algorithms to accurately measure the radar
pulse time of arrival and frequency of
arrival were mission-critical. These measurements can be straightforward at high
signal-to-noise ratios (SNR); however, the
long range requirement called for AT3 to
make these measurements at relatively low
SNRs. At lower SNRs the signal amplitude
characteristics can be severely distorted.
The phase information across a pulse is much
Continued on page 30
Pioneering Phased Array
Systems & Technologies
It’s not unusual for Hollywood to push
technology before its time; However, in the
area of electromagnetic antennas they are,
let’s say, still in the 1940s. With the exception of Star Trek, the glitz of science fiction
and adventure movies such as “Star Wars”
have yet to integrate Active Electronically
Steered Arrays (AESAs) — either on the
Millennium Falcon or on giant Battlestars.
Even in the latest James Bond movies,
we still see mechanically rotating reflector
antennas. Yet we know, especially at
Raytheon and across our industry, that
AESAs have revolutionized the ability to
sense and communicate using radio waves.
Our company is fortunate to have pioneered many of the phased array developments, especially AESAs, and has manufactured and deployed more AESAs than any
other company in the world. All four of
the combined companies that now make
up Raytheon (Raytheon Company, Texas
Instruments Defense, Hughes Defense
and E-Systems) played a key role in AESA
development.
The legacy Raytheon company deployed
one of the first AESAs in the mid 1970s
with the first of many Early Warning Radars
(EWRs), PAVE PAWS. This ultra-high-frequency (UHF) active array used bi-polar,
high-power amplifiers together with lownoise amplifiers to form radar beams that
continue to scan the Atlantic Ocean and
space, and that are able to sense an object
the size of a basketball at 2000 miles.
Several EWRs were built in the U.S.,
Greenland and the United Kingdom. One is
presently proposed for Taiwan.
The early AESAs based their RF technology
on silicon (Si) devices. At the time, Si RF
performance was limited to frequencies at
UHF and below. Meanwhile, the Department
of Defense (DoD), and the electronics industry promoted, and invested in, technology
to address higher frequency system needs.
Raytheon and Texas Instruments developed
world-class gallium arsenide (GaAs),
microwave, monolithic integrated circuit
Active Electronically Steered Antennas
(MMIC) foundries in the early 1990s. This
inaugurated the GaAs AESA revolution,
which has continued to this day. As
advancements took place in state-of-the-art
microwave semiconductor technology, the
design approach migrated from silicon,
transmit/receive (T/R) modules to GaAs. The
T/R module is the key building block of the
AESA (see Figure 1). For transmitting operations, it provides signal power amplification,
with the necessary phase at every element
so that the electromagnetic wave propagates in the desired direction. Conversely,
on receive, the module amplifies each
received signal at its element and once
again alters the phase such that the sum-
Figure 1. Principals of Electronic Scan
mation of all the signals generates the maximum signal in the direction of the received
electromagnetic wave.
Beginning in the mid 1960s, the legacy
Texas Instruments (TI) began developing
X-band, solid-state, phased array radar
apertures. This work led to the first production of AESAs for airborne applications,
such as the F-22. The apertures served as
proof-of-concept, reliability and performance demonstration models. The first aperture was developed on the MERA program,
and was completed for array level testing in
late 1968. It consisted of 604 T/R modules.
MERA fully demonstrated the concept of an
electronically scanned, solid-state radar
addressing an airborne application. In 1974,
the Reliable Advanced Solid-State Radar
(RASSR) program followed and demonstrate
that a practical system could be built that
would meet operation requirements and
the reliability improvements promised by
microwave semiconductor technology. The
third demonstration aperture developed
was the Solid-State Phase Array (SSPA)
which completed testing and was delivered
to the USAF in May 1988. The SSPA was
sized to approximate the radiating area of
existing air-to-air fire control radars. As
GaAs microwave device technology
matured, it allowed the SSPA to demonstrate the power efficiency and transmit
duty factors necessary
for existing day
fighter requirements.
Specifically, a module
reliability of greater
than 70,000 hours
was demonstrated
using a hybrid T/R
module. A hybrid
module, however,
was not an affordable
design solution for
airborne AESA applications. The Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF)
Radar Demonstration/Validation program
was initiated in 1987 to make extensive use
of GaAs, MMIC technology in order to
reduce the size and cost of the T/R modules, while substantially improving radar
performance. The initial module approach
was developed on legacy Texas Instruments
Research and Development funding and
represents the hermetic, brick-style metal
package with co-planar ceramic
feedthroughs widely used in modules today.
Components incorporating GaAs MMICs,
silicon control devices and ceramic substrate
RF/DC interconnects are directly attached to
the matched CTE (coefficient of thermal
expansion) housing floor, and are
Continued on page 20
19
PHASED ARRAY SYSTEMS
Continued from page 19
interconnected using high-speed wire
interconnection techniques. The ATF Radar
has approximately 2000 T/R modules per
array, and approximately 20 systems are
now in operation. The radar system
provides long range, multi-target, all
weather, stealth, vehicle detection and
multi-missile engagement capabilities.
Legacy E-Systems engaged in the development of phased array antennas in the
1970s with the development of the
AN/SYR-1 Telemetry Downlink program.
The resulting system and it’s phased array
antennas were an integral part of the
TERRIER and TARTAR missile programs that
remained active until the DD-993 class
ships were retired. Beginning in the 1980s,
E-Systems, in conjunction with The Johns
Hopkins University/Applied Physics Lab
(JHU/APL) and the Navy, initiated development of the Cooperative Engagement
Capability (CEC) program. To achieve the
objectives of the program, high-power
phased arrays were required in order to
meet the dynamic directional beam
communications needed between network
participants, while overcoming significant
levels of jamming and atmospheric fading.
Given the technology constraints of the
period, a circular passive phased array
antenna driven by a large, dual tube,
Traveling-Wave Tube Amplifier (TWTA) was
used to create the required ERP. Beam
steering was accomplished by commutating
columns of radiating elements around the
array for coarse beam steering, and then
fine-steering the beam in azimuth and
elevation using Pin-diode, switched line
lengths to control phase on each transmitting element.
In the mid-1990s, technology had progressed to the point that 13-watt GaAs T/R
modules could be reliably manufactured,
and a circular active, aperture antenna was
built. This iteration incorporated the phase
shifters and receive LNAs within the T/R
module, with each T/R module switched
between one of four elements to allow
commutation around the array. Subsequent
to this antenna iteration, a four-face planar
antenna is being developed. It incorporates
2-watt GaAs transmit modules at each radiating element of the transmit array, with
HRL RF Technology
HRL Laboratories, LLC, in Malibu, California is a shared R&D center for LLC Members Raytheon, Boeing and General Motors.
The LLC Members pool their resources to explore and develop new technologies in the pre-competitive stage and directly fund
specific development activities of their own at HRL. In this arrangement, the investment by each company gains a leverage of
approximately 5-6 times the companies’ annual expenditure.
HRL Laboratories includes four labs: Information Sciences, Sensors & Materials, Communications & Photonics, and
Microelectronics, with approximately 200 researchers encompassing a variety of technical disciplines. The Microelectronics
activity provides a broad spectrum of RF technologies to Raytheon, supplemented by expertise from Sensors & Materials,
Communications & Photonics and Information Sciences.
Mixed Signal integrated circuits is the largest technical area in Microelectronics that is focused on Raytheon’s needs. HRL has a
unique concentration of world-class expertise in the design and fabrication of continuous time, tunable delta-sigma (∆Σ) analog-to-digital converters (A/Ds), spanning not only R&D for future products but also supplying mil-standard components for
today’s needs. These unique A/Ds are capable of real-time reconfiguration from narrow-band to wide-band operation for
direct sampling at frequencies from 60 MHz to above 1 GHz. Other activities in this area are focused on the development of
compact, low-power direct digital synthesizers for potential application to multi-function phased-array systems.
HRL is an experienced source for the development and delivery of microwave technology from the earliest days of GaAs MESFET technology through today’s rapid advances in GaN microwave technology. State-of-the-art GaN devices, both power amplifiers and low noise amplifiers, are being developed at HRL from X-band through Ka-band with state-of-the-art power densities
and noise figures being demonstrated. HRL’s highly regarded InP HEMT MMIC technology has been moving toward higher frequencies (e.g., W- through D-band) where new applications are beginning to emerge to take advantage of these capabilities.
In the rapidly evolving areas of antennas and RF front-ends, HRL is investigating approaches to antennas utilizing frequencyselective surfaces with novel microelectronic devices that lend themselves to simplified (and thus potentially low cost) electronic steered arrays. Complementing this is HRL’s development of miniature tunable filters having dimensions and tunability
consistent with multi-function phased array elements.
HRL has developed significant technologies in RF and analog signal transmission and processing by optical and photonic
methods and optoelectronics components. In a related activity, this capability has been used to examine the enhancement
of A/D converter performance through a combination of photonics and electronics.
Longer-term approaches to miniature, integrated RF subsystems are being investigated through various techniques for heterogeneous integration. Through these techniques, technologies could be chosen for their optimized characteristics and then
ultimately integrated into miniature subsystem components.
20
separate receive elements, employing GaAs
LNAs on each element. Each GaAs transmit
or receive module includes a phase shifter,
which allows individual elements to be
controlled separately.
The key building block and the real work
horse of the AESA, is the T/R Module (a
simplified version is illustrated in Figure 1).
Raytheon’s (Legacy Texas Instruments’
Defense) module factory is now the world’s
premier producer of solid-state gallium
arsenide (GaAs) T/R Modules for the US
defense industry. Modules represent from
30–50 percent of total AESA cost. As such,
T/R modules are many times the greatest
single cost element of a radar or communications system. Within the T/R module,
GaAs MMICs represent the largest cost element, followed by manufacturing assembly,
touch and support labor. From 1982–1986,
Legacy TI won and executed an Air Force
Manufacturing Technology program to
automate T/R Module manufacturing in
order to meet the cost and performance
challenges at frequencies higher than the
UHF range.
There are many factors that require much
tighter control of assembly process parameters and packaging demands. Among these
are: the low fracture toughness of GaAs,
the presence of air bridges, and thinner die
(.05 mm vs .38 mm) — compared to conventional low–frequency, Si dies, and the
high frequency and high packaging density
requirements inherent in microwave, and
millimeter wave products. Control of these
factors requires precise and repeatable
placement and interconnection of components. In addition, the high thermal dissipation requirements for most T/R applications
require void-free solder and epoxy attachment. For cost effective, high volume manufacturing purposes, such rigid requirements can be met only through automation. Raytheon’s T/R module manufacturing
technology currently consists of fully automated work cells, using a common carrier
with multiple modules. The common carrier
format permits modules to be processed
similar to silicon or GaAs wafers, with the
modules — or equivalent die — being
processed in an array format throughout
the assembly and test
phase. Module or subassembly architectures,
using upright and/or flip
chip components, can be
The Patriot Space Fed
processed through any
Phased Array
work cell. Integrated
capacity, cost and scheduling tools allow changing requirements to be
quickly assessed and
F-15
optimized. Automatic
Corporate Fed Array
part pedigree using bar
code scanners allows lot
traceability for all components within a module
down to the individual
die level. In order to
achieve performance and
Figure 2. Corporate and Space Feed Systems
cost goals, this method
of traceability allows staferrite-based phase shifters for beam
tistical analysis, correlation and optimizascanning.
tion of test requirements from the device to
system level. As a result of these improveF ro m Pa s s i v e t o A c t i v e, a
ments, T/R module manufacturing cost has
Sensor Revolution
decreased by an order of magnitude from
The advent of phased arrays began more
the early 90s with tens of thousands of
than 30 years ago, but it was in the early
modules now being processed monthly. In
1990s that AESAs began to thrive and
addition, some future systems are projected
mature. The earliest implementation of
to have their module or T/R element cost
phased array antennas was focused on
reduced by over two orders of magnitude,
radar applications. These initial phased
to less than $50 per T/R channel.
arrays utilized high-power tubes that would
generate the required electromagnetic
Legacy Hughes Aircraft developed the first
energy needed to feed the phased array, so
fielded active array in a fighter aircraft in
that the array could provide enough
the Late 1980s. These arrays used fullyEffective Radiated Power (ERP) to detect
active TR modules, operating at X Band frethe target at the necessary selected range.
quencies. Nineteen units were installed and
Two popular feed approaches were used
fielded in F-15 fighters. Since Fighter airfor these passive, phased arrays: corporate
craft are limited in weight, power and cooland space fed (see Figure 2).
ing, many technological advances in these
areas needed to be made. Hughes developed highly efficient, lightweight power
supplies, X-band GaAs-based MMICs with
a high level of integration through
advanced packaging and liquid flow using
heatsink techniques. These arrays are corporate fed with integrated monopulse networks. In the areas of surveillance and
reconnaissance, passive arrays were
employed to perform Synthetic Aperturemapping Radar, (SAR), terrain guidance and
targeting on high flying U-2s and the B-2
Stealth bomber. This technology incorporated
The space-fed arrays typically used a
cluster of feed horns to illuminate the rear
elements of the array. The Patriot Array is
an example of a space-fed architecture.
Each rear element is connected to the
front element via a transmission line and
phase shifter.
Corporate-fed phased arrays, still currently
popular with AESAs, used a transmission
line media, such as waveguide or stripline,
Continued on page 22
21
PHASED ARRAY SYSTEMS
Continued from page 21
to distribute the energy from the highpower sources to the aperture. The corporate feed, in turn, interconnected with the
phase shifters and corresponding radiating
elements.
Common phase shifters for both corporateand space-fed arrays included ferrite (the
most popular type), and PIN diode. The ferrite phase shifters used the principle of a
variable magnetic field which altered the
wave propagation characteristics to set the
desired phase. PIN diodes were used as RF
switches for combining varying lengths of
transmission lines or as a termination in a
transmission line to alter the phase. Ferrite
phase shifters were most popular at S-band
frequencies and above, since the waveguide
that housed the ferrite was reasonably
sized, provided lower transmission loss,
and was capable of supporting higher
RF power.
Tra n s f o r m a t i o n f ro m
Pa s s i v e t o A c t i v e, S o l i d
State Comes of Age
Passive phased arrays provided new capabilities for radar systems, agile beams and
improved reliability. However, passive
phased array architectures had their problems. They were heavy, due to the need for
a low loss feed structure like a metallic
waveguide, and/or bulky because of the
depth required of the space feed approach.
Furthermore, their reliability was typically at
the mercy of the high power RF transmitter.
The high power transmitter was a singlepoint failure risk. An attempt to improve
the reliability was introduced by using a distributed configuration of lower power
tubes, combined with solid state driver
amplifiers known as Microwave Power
Modules (MPMs). While the MPM
approaches improved reliability, they didn’t
achieve the ultimate goal: an amplifier at
every element of the phased array. Nor did
they afford thinner and lighter-weight
approaches that would have revolutionized
the application of phased arrays to an
unprecedented number of airborne, space
22
and ground platforms. The evolution of solid-state microwave
devices lagged the digital revolution that produced personal computers, and the solid-state transistor radio, primarily due to the
industry’s inability to produce
devices in volume with features
(e.g., circuit line widths and material characteristics) that would provide acceptable performance at
microwave frequencies. Silicon was
the material of choice, as it is today,
for PCs and most consumer electronics.
As previously mentioned, it wasn’t until the
1980s that the U.S. government provided
industry and academia with the funding
needed to develop and mature a technology that revolutionized phased arrays (and
many other commercial telecom applications.) It wasn’t, however, until the early
1990s that visionaries at Raytheon and two
key customers — Strategic Missile Defense
Command (SMDC), now known as the
Missile Defense Agency (MDA) and a commercial venture of Motorola sought ways to
produce (in volume) active, electronically
scanned arrays. SMDC for many years had
been visualizing radar systems in support
of missile defense. In 1992, Raytheon competed for, and won the Ground Based
Radar Program (now know as the Terminal
High Altitude Area Defense, THAAD Radar).
During the next three years, Raytheon
developed the largest and most powerful
solid-state, phased array radar, consisting
of more than 25,000 T/R modules.
AESAs — particularly at L-band and above
— were enabled by GaAs technology. With
this development each radiating element of
the array had its own power and low-noise,
amplifiers, digital phase and attenuation
controls. This new generation of phased
arrays were highly reliable now that the RF,
Power and Control subsystems were all distributed, i.e., eliminating single point failures. That is, performance would degrade
gracefully as the element level electronics
began to fail. AESAs allowed unprecedented capabilities in beam pointing, sidelobe
control, polarization versatility, multiple
The GBR/THAAD AESA.
beams, instantaneous bandwidth and
packaging, just to name a few. Today,
platforms — especially in the air and in
space — could benefit from the features
that phased arrays afforded.
A r ra y Pa c k a g i n g :
B r i c k v s. T i l e
The first evolution of AESAs used what is
commonly referred to as a “brick” style
packaging. Brick packaging arranges the
active electronics (and some of the beamforming) in the plane orthogonal to the
aperture surface (see Figure 3).
Figure 3. Brick and Tile Packaging Architectures
Examples of brick style packaging include
THAAD, SPY-3, GBR-P, F-15, etc. For example, most of the ground/shipboard and earlier versions of the airborne-style radar
AESAs use the brick package. Brick packaging methods yield a higher RF power-perradiating-element capability, since the
dimension of depth can be used for larger
devices and thermal spreading. Tile packaging places the active electronics in a plane
parallel with the aperture. Examples of tile
packaging include Iridium®, F/A-18 and
newer, F-15 AESAs. Tile packages are limited to power levels that are consistent with
being able to package RF power amplifiers
within the unit cell area of the array radiating element.
The migration from a brick-style packaging
concept to a tile configuration has enabled
AESAs to be installed on a wider variety of
platforms that have strict weight and volume limitations, such as high performance
aircraft, space-based systems and
unmanned vehicles.
AESAs have been in production for nearly
10 years, but still face a significant challenge...cost. They are still too expensive to
achieve a broader incorporation into other
applications. The near term challenges
toward reducing cost are focused on: minimizing the amount of MMIC area, more
highly integrated interconnects and packaging, and more automation in assembly.
Another thrust is focused on the ability to
cool the AESA electronics with air. Most
AESAs today are liquid cooled, which limits
the types of platforms that may accommodate an AESA.
T h e F u t u re o f A E S A s, a
Multifunction and Digital
Revolution?
What’s in store for the next generation of
AESAs in terms of lowering the cost and
providing more capabilities? In an attempt
to lower cost, accommodate air cooling,
and lower prime power needs, large, lowerpower AESA concepts are being developed.
Lower-power design approaches may produce a single MMIC T/R module. Higherpower modules require separate MMICs for
the power amplifiers, low noise amplifiers,
limiters, and phase and attenuation control
circuitry. It’s not uncommon for a T/R module to contain three or more MMICs.
Higher-power AESAs are required for
ground platforms that have limited space,
but still need to search and track small
objects at large distances. In addition to
these ongoing efforts, several advanced
packaging concepts are being investigated.
For example, three dimensional packaging
of MMICs, interconnects, etc. is now being
developed.
While Hollywood may be behind
the times in portraying AESA
technology in its films, one fact is
abundantly clear: Raytheon
will continue to pioneer the
next-generation of AESAs and
provide the warfighter with
superior capabilities that will
overwhelm an enemy.
Beyond lowering the cost of AESAs, several
other key challenges remain to be resolved.
Among these, “How can a platform obtain
more functionality given the limitations in
size, weight and cost?” One approach proposed by the Navy’s Office of Naval
Research (ONR) and the Naval Research
Laboratory (NRL) is called ‘Advanced
Multifunction RF Concepts (AMRFC)’.
Motivation for the concept was based on
the proliferation of antennas installed on
the Navy’s surface combatants to perform
the required radar, communications and
electronic warfare functions. It was also
obvious that the ship’s survivability and
operating costs are directly associated with
the number of antennas. ONR and NRL
have led the cooperative effort with industry and academia to develop the architectures and companion technologies that may
one day realize such a concept. Ultimately,
each platform would possess a minimal set
of apertures that can be dynamically reconfigurable — in real time — to perform
radar, communications and electronic warfare tasks independently and simultaneously, using only software. There are several
key technologies that need to be invented
and developed before an AMRFC can be
realized. Highly linear amplifiers, tunable
channelizers and wideband apertures in
an efficient dense package are just some of
the challenges.
Another major thrust of AESA development
is focused on digital beamforming. This
technology has been around for almost 20
years, but has been focused primarily on
L-band and below. A critical component
(and one that supports digital beamforming) is the analog to digital converter (ADC).
The ADC’s performance has been limited
due to device performance, similar to what
the limitations Silicon and GaAs imposed
upon higher RF frequencies. There are
certain applications of AESAs, when coupled with digital beamforming, that promise
superior performance and capabilities not
achievable with analog methods. Moving
the receiver/exciter front end closer to the
aperture can improve many performance
features, such as noise, efficiency, and
dynamic range, to name a few. The ultimate AESA would incorporate digital beamforming in transmit and receive at every element of the phased array. While this may
be achievable at lower frequencies (L-band
and below), it is several years away from
realization at C-band frequencies and higher. Cost, high speed converters, processing
requirements, and power consumption are
just a few of the significant challenges that
lie ahead.
New advanced-device technologies will also
play role in future AESAs. Investigations into
gallium nitride (GaN) and silicon germanium
(SiGe) semiconductor technologies show
promise. GaN is focused on achieving an
order of magnitude in amplifier power density for the same MMIC area. SiGe is a predominant commercial semiconductor for
the telecom industry.
A revolution in phased array technology has
occurred in the past 20 years and Raytheon
has clearly been instrumental in bringing
that about. While Hollywood may be
behind the times in portraying AESA technology in its films, one fact is abundantly
clear: Raytheon will continue to pioneer the
next generation of AESAs and provide the
warfighter with superior capabilities that
will overwhelm an enemy. Customer
success is our mission and our ultimate
goal. ■
23
DESIGN FOR SIX SIGMA —
DEPLOYMENT AT RAYTHEON MISSILE SYSTEMS
DFSS
Deployment Team
• ESSM Rear Receiver Value
Engineering
Leader, Richard Gomez,
• A classified program
reported on the current state
• NetFires (NLOS-LS)
of Design for Six Sigma (DFSS)
deployment throughout
Raytheon Missile Systems (RMS).
DFSS is a Raytheon-wide effort
whose mission is to improve the
affordability, performance and
producibility of Raytheon’s
designs. Missile Systems had
already (1) defined a DFSS
Methodology within the context
of IPDP in the first part of
2003, (2) developed a listing
of DFSS tools mapped to the
IPDP Stages, and (3) produced
a listing of DFSS tool subjectmatter experts.
The RMS DFSS Deployment Team (comprised of personnel from Engineering,
Operations, Supply Chain Management
and our Raytheon customers) has further
developed the DFSS deployment strategy.
The team has developed a DFSS Plan template for programs that selects the DFSS
Methodology and its appropriate tools, and
has also implemented a series of application workshops for these tools. Examples of
the types of DFSS Workshops that programs may choose to include are Design to
Cost (DTC), Statistical Design Methods
(SDM), and Design for Manufacturing &
Assembly (DFMA).
Gomez, the RF & Radar Design Center
manager, stated that the team has identified five pilot programs that will use the
DFSS methodology:
• SM-6 (ERAM)
• ESSM Front-End Receiver Value
Engineering
24
The SeaRAM program has also been designated as a backup to ensure that the
sponsor’s vision of implementing the DFSS
methodology on five pilot programs by the
end of the year will be achieved. RMS Vice
President of Engineering, Paul Diamond
sponsored the DFSS Deployment Team,
along with Director of Engineering,
Stu Roth.
Gomez identified the next step in deployment activities — designation of the
Technical Discipline Advisors (TDAs) who
will assist Engineering personnel in applying
DFSS concepts to specific technology fields.
“TDAs will help designers identify all
potential variation sources on the key characteristics, understand the impact of their
variation, and mitigate them to reduce risk
when necessary,” Gomez explained. “As
“DFSS is one of the critical
strategies that will assist
us in becoming our
Customers’ supplier
of choice.”
teams design, TDAs will attend peer
reviews on the design to further ensure
that all required variation sources
have been minimized and controlled
appropriately.”
System Product Development Engineers
(PDEs) and R6σ experts assigned to the
programs will coordinate the DFSS methodology and application workshops as specified by the deployment team. The program
managers and chief engineers for the pilot
programs have readily adopted DFSS. Most
of the programs are already using several
tools from the DFSS toolbox, but implementing the entire DFSS methodology will
supply them with a structured approach to
attaining a more balanced design, and a
metric set to evaluate their deployment and
implementation progress. Myron Calkins,
an Electro-optical Subsystems Engineer
remarked when discussing the DFSS tools
with the EON Subsystem staff, “Our best
engineers are doing this already.”
The DFSS methodology and tools workshops hosted by subject matter experts
serve a dual function at RMS: providing
engineers with the tool knowledge and
producing program work products. These
workshops are initially scheduled during
the DFSS planning stage in cooperation
with the program manager, chief engineer
and IPT leads. The workshop delivery coincides with the program’s schedule in order
to provide the knowledge and the tools
when the engineers need it. Recent workshops conducted on an air-to-air missile
program have produced parameter diagrams on a key characteristic and a statistical design analysis of the key characteristics
performance. These workshops brought
together engineers across many IPTs and
provided cohesion for the team on potential variation sources.
Fritz Besch, R6σ supporting expert for the
DFSS Deployment Team, explains, “DFSS is
not new. We’re merely refocusing our existing tools and processes on a cohesive
methodology and developing the infrastructure that will lead to these design
practices being integrated into the culture
at Missile Systems. DFSS is one of the critical strategies that will assist us in becoming
our customers’ supplier of choice.”
Debra Herrera
Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI)
ACCOMPLISHMENTS
Two Raytheon Company
businesses in North Texas have
attained Capability Maturity
Model Integration (CMMI®)
Level 5 certification for software
engineering from the Software
Engineering Institute (SEISM).
Raytheon Network Centric Systems
and Space and Airborne Systems
share this recognition at several locations
within North Texas. The Level 5 rating was
the result of a two-year effort culminating
in a 3-week appraisal led by John
Ryskowski, an outside independent
appraiser. In addition to over 4000 pieces
of objective evidence collected from the
four focus programs, the appraisal team
interviewed representatives from 39 of the
43 active programs in the region.
Ryskowski remarked on the breadth of
involvement: “This is exceptional. This
made for a really solid appraisal.” In the
end, only two minor weaknesses were
reported. “North Texas is no place for
wimps,” Ryskowski said. “The strengths
are too numerous to mention.” One of
the strengths identified was the Behavior
Change Management technique developed
by the organization to facilitate rapid
deployment. “I’ve never seen anyone who’s
been able to roll things out as quickly as
you do here,” Ryskowski said.
The concept for Behavior Change
Management is to identify and sequence a
set of discrete, “bite-size” behavior
changes needed to achieve business and
organization objectives (such as CMMI
process maturity). The behavior changes
are then deployed to the organization in a
constant flow over time, rather than in a
big-bang effect. Each behavior change
package is an integrated set of process
methods, tools, training, enablers and
subject matter expertise, designed to
reduce the cost required for engineers
to adopt the change.
Another identified strength was the integration of Raytheon Six Sigma with the
CMMI Level 5 organizational improvement
requirements. Elements of the process were
statistically characterized and placed under
statistical process control. Raytheon Six
Sigma processes were executed to improve
process performance with an emphasis on
process variability reduction.
A process architecture was developed that
would enable many of the organization’s
improvements. The process architecture is
tiered in order to allow strong integration
into IPDS, as well as other disciplines and
business processes. The architecture is
designed to balance the consistency
“Texas is no place for
wimps…the strengths
are too numerous to
mention…I’ve never
seen anyone who’s been
able to roll things out as
quickly as you do here.”
planning and tailoring tool), the use of
subject matter experts, integrating software quality engineers into software
teams, incremental planning and the
strong integration of process, methods and
tools.
“All of us should be very proud of this outstanding achievement by a dedicated and
extremely competent group of Raytheon
employees,” said Jack Kelble, president of
SAS. “Their effort distinguishes Raytheon
as a leader in developing and implementing the best technology solutions for our
customers. It also attests to our ability to
produce quality products on time and within budget. These are factors that will help
carry us to our ultimate objective — solid,
dependable growth.”
“The assessment provides us a unique platform for gaining a greater share of the
Software and Systems Integration marketplace in coming years,” commented Colin
Schottlaender, NCS president. “This success
today is an important milestone in another
commitment we have made: to achieve
customer satisfaction through superior
program execution. There is no higher
illustration of customer focus than this
level of excellence.”
needed at Level 3 with the agility and
innovation needed for Level 5. One of the
key elements is that the process provides
work-instruction level information that will
drastically reduce program start-up time
and process variability.
Other strengths specifically noted included
the use of iPlan (a web-based project
Steve Allo
®CMMI is registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark
Office by Carnegie Mellon University.
SM
SEI is a service mark of Carnegie Mellon University.
25
IPDS best practices
Developing an Integrated Product Development Systems (IPDS)
Deployment Infrastructure — let the enablers be your guide
IPDS deployment is
Raytheon’s primary method of
performing Integrated Program
Planning to win new business,
promote product quality
and ensure program
execution success.
Raytheon Technical Services Company LLC
(RTSC) Engineering and Production Support
(EPS) business recently launched an initiative
to institutionalize IPDS deployment, requiring the development of both knowledgeable resources and a supporting infrastructure in order to ensure timely and effective
deployment. The deployment enablers contained within IPDS provided the blueprint
for a successful IPDS implementation.
Although the organization was conducting
gate reviews on EPS programs, it did not yet
have experience performing IPDS deployments. Two critical questions had to be
answered: “What is IPDS deployment?”
and “What elements are necessary to support deployment?”
I P D S E n a b l e rs
Assembled from the best practices and lessons learned over many years of deploying
IPDS on new pursuits and programs, the
primary enablers are a set of three complementary documents: the IPDS Deployment
Concept of Operations, Guidelines for
Establishing an IPDS Deployment
Infrastructure, and the IPDS tailoring
Guidelines (released in IPDS version 2.2.3).
The infrastructure guide states: “These
guidelines discuss what constitutes an IPDS
deployment infrastructure and provides a
recommended approach to capability,
including key roles and responsibilities.”
The key infrastructure elements shown in
Figure 1 are considered the top-level infrastructure “products,” providing the initial
organizing structure for the project. The
first of these elements to be addressed at
EPS were: Organizational Structure, Training
and Mentoring and Communications.
A virtual deployment organization was created to address both deploying IPDS and
creating the deployment infrastructure. The
role of the IPDS deployment expert (DE) was
not deemed a full-time job, so it was important to identify qualified resources
that were currently aligned with each of the
six EPS business areas. This alignment provided the infrastructure team with expert
resources in each of the business areas, as
well as enabled the business areas to priori"At RTSC, we are focusing on the fundamentals;
Customer Focused Marketing (CFM), Raytheon Six
Sigma, IPDS and CMMI®. Design for Six Sigma, a
core process in IPDS, is grounded in the pillars of
CFM: Performance and Solutions. Doing these
well in combination, builds and strengthens our
Relationships.
Optimizing the customer's needs into our solutions from two perspectives, system performance
and producibility is why DFSS is important. Our
Engineering and Production Services (EPS) is leading the way for us at RTSC. By focusing on the
fundamentals, listening and being proactive, we
are strengthening our ability to consistently deliver superior solutions to all of our customers".
John Gatti, Vice President, Engineering,
Technology and Program Performance,
Raytheon Technical Services Company LLC
tize the work of their deployment experts.
Each business area aligned engineering
department maintains a position called
“process advocate.” The process advocate
represents the business area requirements
In June 2003, an initial team attended IPDS
deployment expert training in order to learn
how to conduct IPDS deployments. Upon
return, the team initiated a plan of action
to institutionalize IPDS deployment and
to design and implement the necessary
deployment infrastructure.
Because the project team had very little
experience with IPDS deployment, the initial
infrastructure requirements were not well
understood — the infrastructure needed to
evolve as deployment capability grew. To
perform the initial project planning, the
team turned to the deployment enablers
contained within IPDS.
Figure 1. “Components of a local IPDS deployment infrastructure” from Guidelines for Establishing an
IPDS Deployment Infrastructure
26
Integrated Product
Development System,
IPDS version 2.2.3 is
now available!
Updates include:
• Automation and Usability:
Figure 2. The deployment infrastructure team satisfies stakeholder requirements by organizing
around Infrastructure products
during process development and tailors
and implements the enterprise processes
to meet the needs of the business area.
The process advocates became the primary
IPDS deployment experts and the core of
the infrastructure development team.
Additional stakeholders — including project managers, the Engineering Process
Group, (EPG) manufacturing and repair
leads — and Raytheon Six SigmaTM experts
were trained as deployment experts to
ensure sufficient stakeholder participation
in the infrastructure development.
After training the appropriate resources,
the team focused on performing successful deployments. To ensure early success,
the team reached back to the IPDS
P ro f i l e
Sean K. Conley is the IPDS champion for the RTSC Engineering
and Production Support (EPS)
business unit and has led the
IPDS deployment initiative since
June 2003. He is the RTSC business representative to the IPDS Deployment
Network Steering Group (DNSG). Sean is a
Raytheon Certified IPDS Deployment Expert
and a Qualified Six Sigma Specialist.
Sean came to Raytheon from Northrop
Grumman in 1997, serving in various positions as a software and systems engineer,
engineering supervisor, project manager,
process advocate and IPDS Champion.
Sean holds a bachelor’s degree in Computer
and Electrical Engineering, a master’s degree
in Electrical Engineering from Purdue
University and a master’s degree in Business
Administration from Indiana University. He is
a Professional Engineer and is currently
preparing for the PMP exam.
Enterprise Deployment Network Steering
Group (DNSG) for mentoring. The DNSG
enlisted Raytheon Certified Deployment
Experts to conduct five deployments on
programs in Indianapolis. Through observing and assisting in these deployments,
individual deployment experts gained
valuable IPDS deployment experience.
EPS deployment experts share their experience and lessons learned through both
electronic collaboration and regular faceto-face communications meetings. As the
constraints of the organization and the
experience of the team identify new
requirements, such as cost estimating, tailoring, CMMI® artifacts, and sub-process
integration, the infrastructure development
plan becomes more detailed. Each additional engagement identifies potential
areas in which the deployment process
and outputs can be improved. These
opportunities may affect several infrastructure elements and may be thought of as
being infrastructure cross-products. Crossproduct teams, as depicted in Figure 2,
ensure that the derived requirements are
reflected in each of the appropriate infrastructure elements.
By utilizing the IPDS deployment enablers,
EPS developed a basic deployment capability and supporting infrastructure. As a
result of aligning to the elements in the
infrastructure guide, training, mentoring
and experience, sufficient knowledge was
gained to adequately scope the next iteration of infrastructure development.
– IPDS Threads: A thread is a grouping of
process tasks that pertain to the same
topic and they can be accessed from the
home page. This release includes a pilot
set of threads for the tenets of
Integrated Product and Process
Development (IPPD), the Capability
Maturity Model Integration (CMMI®)
Process Areas, Design for Six Sigma
(DFSS), and Raytheon Six Sigma
Principles. More of these threads are in
development and will include Risk
Management and Program Planning.
– Flowchart Access: Direct access to process
flowcharts is now available through a
link in the upper left corner of the IPDS
Home Page titled, “Process Flowcharts.”
– Change Request Access: Access to the
IPDS Change Request Database is now
easier with a link on the IPDS Home Page
under “Featured Content.”
• Raytheon Process Asset Library (RAYPAL):
The PAL is continuously being enhanced to
provide advanced search capability,
endorsement capability, and a simplified
submittal process.
• Deployment Material: The Deployment
Network Steering Group (DNSG) has completed a Corporate Deployment Expert
training curriculum and certification
process. This material is in the Deployment
section of IPDS along with a new set of
tailoring guidelines.
• Strategic Marketing / Customer Focused
Marketing Gates: A team of Business
Development process owners has developed and added material for Gates –1
and 0, Customer and Opportunity
Validation reviews. The new gates are integrated into stage 1 of IPDP.
For more information and to access the latest
IPDS release, please visit the IPDS Web site:
http://ipds.msd.ray.com or
http://ipds.rsc.raytheon.com. For detailed
information and links to the IPDS 2.2.3
updates, visit the What’s New in IPDS.
Sean Conley
27
The First Annual Raytheon
The first annual Raytheon Technology
Day held recently in Dayton, Ohio, at the
Air Force Research Lab (AFRL) on Nov. 12,
2003, provided an open forum for
exchanging ideas and ensuring that our
future initiatives fully support the strategies
of our customers.
More than 250 customers from AFRL and
the Aeronautical Systems Center (ASC)
attended the event, among them: Major
General Nielsen (AFRL Commander), all
Technology Day
Building Relationships with the U.S. Air Force
ARFL division chiefs and their technical
advisors, ASC SPO directors and their chief
engineers from many Raytheon programs
including F-15, F-16, F-117, J-UCAS, U-2,
EW, Predator and Global Hawk.
Customers were extremely impressed
with the quality of the event. The forum
provided an opportunity for customers
to learn about future applications of
Raytheon’s technology to provide solutions
for the Air Force.
“Our first Technology Day was
a great event and we look forward to many more successes,
which will help us build
Raytheon’s reputation as a
customer-focused and technology leader in the industry.
This event has helped build
stronger relationships between
our technology leaders and our
Air Force customers.”
Peter Pao, Raytheon corporate
vice president of technology
The agenda included presentations on Intelligence
Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR), Precision
Engagement (PE), RF Systems, Electro-Optics/IR,
Electronic Warfare (EW), Mission Integration and System Enablers. An exhibit room with interactive
demonstrations provided an excellent opportunity for customer interaction and discussion.
28
Peter Pao, left, enjoys an interactive discussion at
the first Raytheon Technology Day with Major
General Nielsen, AFRL, and Nick Uros, SAS.
Technology Day was truly a One Company event with
participation from each of our government and
defense businesses. Nick Uros, Space and Airborne
Systems technology director, and his team (pictured
above: Jack Urbaniak, Joe Mikolajewski, Diana Chu,
Rick DaPrato, Karen Patton, Cathy Larcom and Mike
Cloud) sponsored and lead the event. The team
received great support from the AFRL staff.
New Global Headquarters Showcases
Technology
Raytheon’s new global headquarters in Waltham, Mass. is a showcase of
Raytheon’s heritage and traditions, innovations and people, and the core idea
that at Raytheon, customer success is our mission. The headquarters lobby
experience is a feast for the eyes and a celebration of Raytheon’s technology.
Waltham Mayor-Elect Jeanette
McCarthy; Representative Ed Markey;
Raytheon Chairman and CEO Bill
Swanson; Lt. Governor Kerry Healey;
and Representative Marty Meehan
cut the ribbon at the dedication
ceremony on December 5, 2003.
The Strategy Wall
The main lobby atrium
shows the essence of
Raytheon dramatically
Atrium Vitrines
showcasing the Raytheon
brand, people, technology, vision and mission. The Strategy wall
features two plasma screens that showcase Raytheon’s reputation for
providing superior, innovative, integrated, customer-focused technology solutions and Raytheon’s pride in its talented, dedicated employees.
Three free-standing vitrines, located around the main spiral staircase,
display various Raytheon technologies and products. The SBA wall uses
six synchronized plasma screens to dynamically tell the Raytheon Strategic
Business Area story.
Archive Vitrines
The Innovation Wall
The waiting area features the
Innovation wall, celebrating
Raytheon’s technology leadership.
Three plasma screens feature
Raytheon’s history, innovative technologies and people, processes and
tools. Five vitrine display cases and three light boxes reflect Raytheon’s rich heritage
of innovation and technological advances that drive the company to greater levels
and, in many case, are the genesis of ongoing technology development now
and in the future.
The SBA Wall
Norm Krim, company archivist,
chats with Greg Shelton and Jean
Scire out side his office near the
lobby waiting area, which features
three vitrines containing historical
artifacts that helped earn Raytheon
a reputation for advanced technology, engineering and design.
For information on showcasing
your business or program’s
technology in the Wall of
Innovation vitrines, contact Jean
Scire at jtscire@raytheon.com
29
SENSORS
AT3
Continued from page 10
Continued from page 18
installation and integration, operational
support and logistics support. By incorporating the latest available technologies, we
have continuously improved and enhanced
our products, including more capacity,
greater capabilities, higher performance,
and higher potential for growth and expansion. A recent example is the OPTUS UHF
payload, which provides UHF communications for the Australian Defense Force. It
offers frequency-translated re-broadcast of
signals on selected UHF frequencies in one
25 kilohertz (kHz) nominal bandwidth
channel and five 5 kHz nominal bandwidth
channels in order to establish communications with user terminals anywhere on
Earth that are visible to the geostationary
spacecraft platform.
less susceptible to distortions. AT3 developed a hybrid algorithm, one, to help identify problem areas within a pulse and, two,
to ensure accurate time tagging of the
pulse leading edge.
Raytheon’s history in ultra-high-frequency
(UHF) SATCOM payloads, user terminals,
waveform development, user networks,
security systems, large geostationary spacecraft, satellite operations, space environments, launch systems, large antenna apertures and space-borne processing lays an
extensive foundation to pursue its Mobile
User Objective System (MUOS) Concept
Advanced Development (CAD) technology.
The MUOS architecture integrates the
expertise of four major companies into a
SATCOM solution for the mobile warfighter. With improved capacity, availability and
performance compared with existing UHF
systems, MUOS remains affordable and
producible, achieving a low-risk development path to the initial operational launch
by 2008. MUOS is a segment of the government’s planned advanced narrow-band
tactical communication capability that
replaces the existing constellation of UHF
Follow-On (UFO) satellites. It is a multiphase program which spans Concept
Exploration (CE), Component Advanced
Development (CAD), System Development
& Design (SD&D) and Production &
Deployment (P&D). Raytheon has concluded the CAD phase and is competing for the
final two phases. To date, Raytheon has
received high marks from the government
through all developmental phases. ■
Another technical challenge was the instrumentation required to verify the accuracy of
the time and frequency transfer. The AT3
system used cesium clocks to benchmark
time and frequency. Each platform had a
cesium clock that was calibrated before and
after each flight test. To support the accurate
measurement of frequency over short time
intervals, a frequency measurement system
was developed that was a hybrid between a
time interval analyzer and a phase noise
tester. The accuracy for time transfer pursued by AT3 required investigating the
impact of relativistic effects on the clocks
between the aircraft. Raytheon worked with
NIST on some investigative flight tests in
order to fully characterize this impact.
30
The ‘multi-ship’ geolocation requires a data
link to share detection information between
collection platforms. DARPA had specified
that the Joint Tactical Information Distribution
System (JTIDS) be employed. JTIDS is heavily
utilized and, since bandwidth is a precious
commodity, the challenge to the AT3 program was to reduce the amount of data
requiring transfer. This was achieved by a
combination of loosely coupling the collection synchronization and only having two
of the collector platforms return results to a
master platform for each engagement.
Summary
The AT3 system was installed on three
Air Force T-39 (Saberliner) aircraft. Over
20 flight Tests were done between
Ft. Huachuca, China Lake, and Edwards
AFB against various emitter systems. The
flight tests were successful. The next phase
will include an advanced concept technology demonstration for the U.S. Air Force on
the F-16 aircraft. The AT3 capability will
be embedded into the ALR-69A (currently
under development at Raytheon in
Goleta, Calif.) and installed into the F-16.
Although demonstrated as a radar targeting system, the AT3 technology is also
applicable to a wide range of radio
frequency transmitters. ■
U.S. Patents Issued
to Raytheon
Raytheon,
At
we encourage people to
work on technological challenges that keep
America strong and develop innovative
commercial products. Part of that process is
identifying and protecting our intellectual
property. Once again, the United States
Patent Office has recognized our engineers
and technologists for their contributions in
their fields of interest. We compliment our
inventors who were awarded patents from
July through December 2003.
CARL NICODEMUS
RANDALL PAHL
MARCUS SNELL
6584880 Electronically controlled arming unit
ROLAND W. GOOCH
THOMAS R. SCHIMERT
6586831 Vacuum package fabrication of integrated circuit
components
JOHN L. VAMPOLA
RICHARD H. WYLES
6587001 Analog load driver
RICHARD D. STREETER
6587021 Micro-relay contact structure for RF applications
BRIAN L. HALLSE
6587070 Digital base-10 logarithm converter
WILLIAM D. CASSABAUM
STEPHEN J. ENGLISH
BRIAN L. HALLSE
RICHARD L. WOOLLEY
6588699 Radar-guided missile programmable
digital predetection signal processor
RICHARD DRYER
GARY H. JOHNSON
JAMES L. MOORE
WILLIAM S. PETERSON
CONLEE O. QUORTRUP
RAJESH H. SHAH
6588700 Precision guided extended range artillery
projectile tactical base
THAD J. GENRICH
6590948 Parallel asynchronous sample rate reducer
HOWARD V. KENNEDY
MARK R. SKOKAN
6596982 Reflection suppression in focal plane arrays by
use of blazed diffraction grating
DWIGHT J. MELLEMA
IRWIN L. NEWBERG
6597824 Opto-electronic distributed crossbar switch
ERNEST C. FACCINI
RICHARD M. LLOYD
6598534 Warhead with aligned projectiles
JOHN A. DEFALCO
6600301 Current shutdown circuit for active bias circuit having
process variation compensation
STEVEN R. GONCALO
YUCHOI FRANCIS LOK
6600442 Precision approach radar system having computer
generated pilot instructions
JOHN M. HADDEN, IV
LONNY R. WALKER
ROBERT G. YACCARINO
6600453 Surface/traveling wave suppressor for antenna
arrays of notch radiators
RAPHAEL JOSEPH WELSH
6600458 Magnetic loop antenna
DAVID K. BARTON
ROBERT E. MILLETT
CARROLL D. PHILLIPS
GEORGE W. SCHIFF
6603421 Shipboard point defense system and
elements therefor
KHIEM V. CAI
ROBERT L. HARTMAN
6603427 System and method for forming a
beam and creating nulls with an adaptive array
antenna using antenna excision and orthogonal
Eigen-weighting
YUEH-CHI CHANG
6603437 High efficiency low sidelobe dual
reflector antenna
ROBERT J. SCHOLZ
6603897 Optical multiplexing device with
separated optical transmitting plates
DAN VARON
6604028 Vertical motion detector for air traffic
control
MILES E. GOFF
6624716 Microstrip to circular waveguide transition with a stripline portion
TONY LIGHT
PAUL LOREGIO
6647175 Reflective light multiplexing device
MICHAEL RAY
6667479 Advanced high speed, multi-level uncooled bolometer and method for fabricating same
ROBERT C. ALLISON
JAR J. LEE
6624720 Micro electro-mechanical system
(MEMS) transfer switch for wideband device
MILES E. GOFF
6647311 Coupler array to measure conductor
layer misalignment
GERHARD KLIMECK
JAN PAUL VAN DER WAGT
6667490 Method and system for generating a
memory cell
FERNANDO BELTRAN
ANGELO M. PUZELLA
6624787 Slot coupled, polarized, egg-crate
radiator
RONALD W. BERRY
ELI E. GORDON
WILLIAM J. HAMILTON, JR.
PAUL R. NORTON
6627865 Nonplanar integrated optical device
array structure and a method for its fabrication
ALBERT E. COSAND
6628220 Circuit for canceling thermal
hysteresis in a current switch
WILLIAM H. HENDERSON
66649281Voltage variable metal/dielectric
composite structure
ADAM M. KENNEDY
WILLIAM A. RADFORD
MICHAEL RAY
JESSICA K. WYLES
RICHARD H. WYLES
6649913 Method and apparatus providing
focal plane array active thermal control
elements
EDWARD A. SEGHEZZI
JOSEPH D. SIMONE
6650271 Signal receiver having adaptive interfering signal cancellation
KENT P. PFLIBSEN
6604366 Solid cryogen cooling system for
focal plane arrays
NORMAN RAY SANFORD
6628225 Reduced split target reply processor
for secondary surveillance radars and identification friend or foe systems
ELVIN C. CHOU
JAMES R. SHERMAN
6608535 Suspended transmission line with
embedded signal channeling device
CLIFFORD A. MEGERLE
J. BRIAN MURPHY
CARL W. TOWNSEND
6630663 Miniature ion mobility spectrometer
DAVID A. FAULKNER
6608584 System and method for bistatic SAR
image generation with phase compensation
ANDREW F. FENTON
THOMAS D. SHOVLIN
6630902 Shipboard point defense system and
elements therefor
WILLIAM DERBES
JONATHAN D. GORDON
JAR J. LEE
6650304 Inflatable reflector antenna for space
based radars
THAD J. GENRICH
6647075 Digital tuner with optimized clock
frequency and integrated parallel CIC filter and
local oscillator
MAURICE J. HALMOS
ROBERT D. STULTZ
6650685 Single laser transmitter for Qswitched and mode-locked vibration operation
DUSAN D. VUJCIC
6650808 Optical high speed bus for a
modular computer network
STANLEY V. BIRLESON
6653969 Dispersive jammer cancellation
ROBERT R. BLESS
JAMES C. DEBRUIN
YALE P. VINSON
MARTIN A. WAND
6609037 Gimbal pointing vector stabilization
control system and method
JOSEPH CROWDER
PATRICIA DUPUIS
GARY KINGSTON
KENNETH KOMISAREK
ANGELO PUZELLA
6611180 Embedded planar circulator
YONAS NEBIYELOUL-KIFLE
WALTER GORDON WOODINGTON
6611227 Automotive side object detection
sensor blockage detection system and related
techniques
DAVID A. FAULKNER
RALPH H. KLESTADT
ARTHUR J. SCHNEIDER
6614012 Precision-guided hypersonic
projectile weapon system
GARY G. DEEL
6655638 Solar array concentrator system
and method
THAD J. GENRICH
6661852 Apparatus and method for
quadrature tuner error correction
JOAQUIM A. BENTO
DAVID C. COLLINS
ROBIN HOSSFIELD
6637561 Vehicle suspension system
RIC ABBOTT
6638466 Methods of manufacturing
separable structures
GARY A. FRAZIER
6614373 Method and system for sampling a
signal using analog-to-digital converters
YUEH-CHI CHANG
COURT E. ROSSMAN
6639567 Low radar cross section radome
PILEIH CHEN
KENNETH L. MOORE
CHESTER L. RICHARDS
6614386 Bistatic radar system using transmitters in mid-earth orbit
JOSEPH M. FUKUMOTO
6639921 System and method for providing
collimated electromagnetic energy in the 8-12
micron range
ROGER W. BALL
GABOR DEVENYI
KEVIN WAGNER
6614967 Optical positioning of an optical fiber
and an optical component along an optical axis
ANTHONY CARRARA
PAUL A. DANELLO
JOSEPH A. MIRABILE
6615997 Wedgelock system
DAVID J. GULBRANSEN
6642496 Two dimensional optical shading gain
compensation for imaging sensors
DANIEL T. MCGRATH
6642889 Asymmetric-element reflect array
antenna
STEVEN D. EASON
6642898 Fractal cross slot antenna
WILLIAM E. HOKE
KATERINA Y. HUR
6620662 Double recessed transistor
CAROLINE BREGLIA
MICHAEL JOSEPH DELCHECCOLO
THOMAS W. FRENCH
JOSEPH S. PLEVA
MARK E. RUSSELL
H. BARTELD VAN REES
WALTER GORDON WOODINGTON
6642908 Switched beam antenna architecture
JEFF CAPARA
LARRY D. SOBEL
6621071 Microelectronic system with integral
cryocooler, and its fabrication and use
DAVID U. FLUCKIGER
6643000 Efficient system and method for
measuring target characteristics via a beam
of electromagnetic energy
SUSAN G. ANGELLO
GEORGE W. WEBB
6621459 Plasma controlled antenna
JOHN W. BOWRON
6644813 Four prism color management
system for projection systems
GABOR DEVENYI
6621948 Apparatus and method for differential output optical fiber displacement sensing
KAPRIEL V. KRIKORIAN
ROBERT A. ROSEN
6646602 Technique for robust characterization
of weak RF emitters and accurate time difference of arrival estimation for passive ranging of
RF emitters
THOMAS W. MILLER
6618007 Adaptive weight calculation
preprocessor
RAY B. JONES
BARRY B. PRUETT
JAMES R. SHERMAN
6622370 Method for fabricating suspended
transmission line
RANDALL PAHL
MARCUS SNELL
6622605 Fail safe arming unit mechanism
ALEXANDER A. BETIN
HANS W. BRUESSELBACH
DAVID S. SUMIDA
6646793 High gain laser amplifier
KAPRIEL V. KRIKORIAN
ROBERT A. ROSEN
6650272 Radar system and method
KAPRIEL V. KRIKORIAN
ROBERT A. ROSEN
6650274 Radar imaging system and method
KAPRIEL V. KRIKORIAN
ROBERT A. ROSEN
6653972 All weather precision guidance of
distributed projectiles
WILLIAM D. FARWELL
LLOYD F. LINDER
CLIFFORD W. MEYERS
MICHAEL D. VAHEY
6667519 Mixed technology microcircuits
STEPHEN MICHAEL SHOCKEY
6667837 Method and apparatus for configuring an aperture edge
CHUNGTE W. CHEN
CHENG-CHIH TSAI
6670596 Radiometry calibration system and
method for electro-optical sensors
KWANG M. CHO
6670907 Efficient phase correction scheme for
range migration algorithm
MICHAEL JOSEPH DELCHECCOLO
JOHN M. FIRDA
JOSEPH S. PLEVA
MARK E. RUSSELL
H. BARTELD VAN REES
WALTER GORDON WOODINGTON
6670910 Near object detection system
TSUNG-YUAN HSU
ROBERT Y. LOO
ROBERT S. MILES
JAMES H. SCHAFFNER
ADELE E. SCHMITZ
DANIEL F. SIEVENPIPER
GREGORY L. TANGONAN
6670921 Low-cost HDMI-D packaging
technique for integrating an efficient
reconfigurable antenna array with RF MEMS
switches and a high impedance surface
WILLIAM D. FARWELL
6671754 Techniques for alignment of multiple
asynchronous data sources
PYONG K. PARK
RALSTON S. ROBERTSON
6653984 Electronically scanned dielectric
covered continuous slot antenna conformal
to the cone for dual mode seeker
MARY G. GALLEGOS
ROBERT A. MIKA
IRWIN L. NEWBERG
6630905 System and method for redirecting a
signal using phase conjugation
YUEH-CHI CHANG
THOMAS V. SIKINA
6653985 Microelectromechanical phased array
antenna
PHILLIP A. COX
6631040 Method and apparatus for effecting
temperature compensation in an optical apparatus
JAMES W. CULVER
MATTHEW C. SMITH
THOMAS M. WELLER
6657518 Notch filter circuit apparatus
MICHAEL JOSEPH DELCHECCOLO
DELBERT LIPPER
MARK E. RUSSELL
H. BARTELD VAN REES
WALTER GORDON WOODINGTON
6657581 Automotive lane changing aid indicator
WILLIAM P. GOLEMON
RONALD L. MEYER
RAMAIAH VELIDI
6658269 Wireless communications system
KWANG M. CHO
6661369 Focusing SAR images formed by RMA
with arbitrary orientation
MARY DOMINIQUE O'NEILL
6662700 Method for protecting an aircraft
against a threat that utilizes an infrared sensor
MOHI SOBHANI
6663395 Electrical joint employing conductive
slurry
MARGARETE NEUMANN
LOTHAR SCHELD
CONRAD STENTON
6664124 Fabrication of thin-film optical devices
JAMES LAMPEN
JAIYOUNG PARK
6664870 Compact 180 degree phase shifter
EDMOND E. GRIFFIN, II
CHARLES J. MOTT
TRUNG T. NGUYEN
6664920 Near-range microwave detection for
frequency-modulation continuous-wave and
stepped frequency radar systems
TOVAN L. ADAMS
W. NORMAN LANGE, JR.
ERIC C. MAUGANS
6666123 Method and apparatus for energy
and data retention in a guided projectile
BILLY D. ABLES
JOHN C. EHMKE
JAMES L. CHEEVER
CHARLES L. GOLDSMITH
6633079 Wafer level interconnection
WILLIAM K. HUGGETT
6633251 Electric signalling system
WILLIAM DAVID AUTERY
JAMES JAY HUDGENS
JOHN MICHAEL TROMBETTA
GREGORY STEWART TYBER
6634189 Glass reaction via liquid encapsulation
TERRY A. BREESE
WILLIAM A. KASTENDIECK
JAMES F. HOLLINGSWORTH
6634209 Weapon fire simulation system and
method
ROBERT DENNIS BREEN
6633251 Pin straightening tool
KENNETH W. BROWN
THOMAS A. DRAKE
THOMAS L. OBERT
6634189 High power variable slide RF tuner
CARL P. NICODEMUS
6634189 Multiple airborne missile launcher
ROBERT A. BAILEY
ANDREW D. HARTZ
CHARLES M. POI, JR.
6634209 Dispenser structure for chaff ermeasures
THAD J. GENRICH
6634392 Method and system for generating a
trigonometric function
JOHN ALLEN ARMSTRONG
JOHN MITCHELL BUTLER
BRIAN WILLARD LEIKAM
TOM MATTHEW MAGGIO
TERRY NEAL MCDONALD
6636414 Method for detecting a number of
consecutive valid data frames and advancing
into a lock mode to monitor synchronization
patterns within a synchronization window
31
Raytheon receives
AS9100 enterprise
certification
Future Events
Raytheon 3rd Joint Systems
and Software Engineering
Symposium
– Innovative Solutions
through Technology
Engineering
March 23 – 25, 2004
Westin Hotel, Los Angeles
Los Angeles, Calif.
The Third Joint Raytheon Systems &
Software Engineering Symposium is
devoted to fostering increase teaming
and technical collaboration on current
developments, capabilities and future
directions between the Systems &
Software Engineering disciplines. This
symposium, sponsored by the Raytheon
Systems & Software Engineering
Technology Networks and the Raytheon
Systems & Software Engineering
Councils, is conducted as a means to
provide an improved understanding of
Raytheon’s expertise in these areas, and
to build and cultivate networking
among our technologists and engineering personnel. The symposium will focus
on Raytheon developed or developing
technologies by the systems and software engineering disciplines. As technology is always expanding, the impacts
and effects of Information Technology
on engineering disciplines will also be
addressed.
While Raytheon continues the integration of engineering disciplines into a
cohesive unit, we need to aggressively
exploit existing and emerging technological competencies along with networked interoperable common product
architectures, COTS products, and integrated engineering processes, while
ensuring customer inclusion, acceptance
and satisfaction. Our relentless challenge is to find better ways to collaborate in bringing innovative, high quality
integrated turnkey solutions to our customers for less cost and within shorter
schedules.
For more information, visit the Systems and
Software Engineering symposium Web site
at http://home.ray.com/rayeng/
technetworks/tab6/se_sw2004/index.html
7th Annual Electro-Optical
Systems Symposium
Call for Papers
April 20 – 22, 2004
Manning House
Tucson, Ariz.
The Electro-Optical Systems Technology
Network is pleased to sponsor the
Seventh Annual EOSTN Symposium in
Tucson, Ariz., April 20 – 22, 2004.
This symposium is open to ElectroOptical Technologists, Program
Managers and Technology Directors
from across Raytheon and our Customer
Communities. Authors are invited to
submit presentations on Electro-Optical
technology developments and applications in the following general categories: EO Systems; Test Systems;
LADAR/Laser Systems; Mechanisms,
Controls, & Cryogenics; Optics; Focal
Plane Arrays; High Energy Lasers; Laser
Comm; and Image Processing/ATR.
For more information, visit the ElectroOptics Systems symposium Web site at
http://home.ray.com/rayeng/
technetworks/tab6/eostn2004/
registration.html
6th Annual RF Symposium
– One Company – Advancing
Technology for Customer
Success
May 3 – 5, 2004
Marriott Long Wharf Hotel
Boston, Mass.
Raytheon announces the Sixth Annual
RF Symposium devoted to the exchange
of information on RF/microwave, millimeter wave and associated technology.
Sponsored by the Raytheon RF Systems
Technology Network and the RF
Engineering Management Council, this
company-wide symposium provides the
RF/microwave technical communities,
business segments, and HRL with a
forum to exchange information on
existing capabilities, emerging developments, and future directions. The symposium fosters the sharing of
Raytheon’s collective expertise in RF
technology and communication
between its technical leaders.
National Quality Assurance (NQA) recently
presented Raytheon Company with AS9100
enterprise certification. AS9100 certification,
developed by the International Aerospace
Quality Group, is a set of quality requirements
for system design, development, production,
installation and servicing for the aerospace
and defense industry.
“This is a significant achievement for
Raytheon Company. Our customers want, and
expect us to have, quality systems across the
company, and AS9100 is the key to proving
that we do,” said Gerry Zimmerman, Raytheon
vice president of quality. “This outstanding
accomplishment reflects Raytheon’s commitment to quality in all aspects of the business.”
The certification includes 47 sites from
Integrated Defense Systems — including
Raytheon RF Components, Information and
Intelligence Systems, Network Centric
Systems, Thales Raytheon Systems, Missile
Systems, and Space and Airborne Systems.
AS9100 is much more comprehensive than
ISO 9001, containing 82 additional requirements that cover business development, customer satisfaction, engineering, operations,
supply chain and continuous improvement. Its
purpose is to standardize management systems for the aerospace industry worldwide.
The objective of AS9100 certification is to
achieve significant quality improvements and
cost reductions throughout the value stream
or supply chain.
In building on this year’s theme, the
symposium will invite customers to
attend and give keynote addresses,
emphasizing their system and mission
needs. Papers presented at the symposium’s technical sessions should emphasize our advances in RF systems technologies and the benefits to our customers. Papers that also highlight
advances through enterprise-wide
collaboration are strongly encouraged.
Other activities will include meetings of
the RFSTN Technology Interest Groups
(TIGS), breakout sessions, workshops in
various RF technology topics, and
industry and university displays.
For more information, visit the RFSTN home
page at http://home.ray.com/rayeng/
technetworks/rfstn/rfstn.html
Copyright © 2004 Raytheon Company. All rights reserved.