• Military Menu                       

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Industry
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• WMD
• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

Multi-Mission Radar (MMR)

As envisioned in 2007, the MMR will provide multifunctional radar information to support air surveillance, air defense, counter-battery, and air traffic control missions. Additionally, the MMR will support intelligence requirements through the development of a common operational picture for the Future Combat Force.

The Multi-Mission Radar (MMR) program will mature a Multi-mission HMMWV mounted radar technology to support air defense, counter-battery, and air traffic control missions within a single system to enhance Future Combat Systems (FCS) mobility and agility. MMR will be self-contained to process target data, identify aircraft/unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), and classify artillery, mortar and rockets. All target data will be distributed to relevant units in the battlefield through network centric channels.

In FY04, MMR matured radar antenna array; matured software to perform target cl assification, 4865 6579 5100 0 mission sorting, and target queuing management. In FY05, mature and demonstrate radar hardware and software; conduct systems engineering test to verify hardware and software; conduct initial field tests against targets of opportunity. In FY06 performed radar system test against dedicated targets to validate performance; conducted demonstration of system capabilities to user community, and delivered prototype MMR system and prime item development specification suitable for moving into system development and demonstration phase in support of Future Force MMR development.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction 3170.01E, "Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System," May 11, 2005, defines the process DoD uses to identify, assess, and prioritize joint military capability needs. The Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS) process begins with the top-down capabilities identification methodology, which occurs before the start of the Defense acquisition management process.

The Army's MMR capability was in the JCIDS process in 2007 and the Army was in the process of completing the top-down capabilities identification methodology. The JCIDS process is preliminary to the Army designating the MMR as an acquisition program and assigning it an acquisition category. The Army Directorate of Combat Development (DCD), the sponsor office responsible for the preparation of the documents required in the JCIDS process, had completed the first JCIDS document, the Functional Area Analysis (FAA), on March 6, 2006. Additionally, DCD had drafted the three documents that follow the FAA in the JCIDS process: the Functional Needs Analysis (FNA), the Functional Solution Analysis (FSA), and the Initial Capabilities Document (ICD). Appendix B provides details on the purpose and contents of these JCIDS documents.

In the draft FNA, the Army DCD stated that the MMR will be required to track a large number of threats to avoid fratricide and that the inherent flexibility of the MMR was a critical capability the Army needed to offset threats. While the draft FNA primarily discussed threats in a general manner, it did discuss five critical gaps. Specifically, existing Army radars:

• lacked multi-mission functionality and the capacity to rapidly switch between mission modes;
• were unable to detect, track, and shoot down all threats at extended ranges within 360 degrees;
• lacked the capability to detect and precisely locate the full spectrum of indirect fire locations at extended ranges for the counter-battery mission;
• were incapable of accurately predicting the impact points for the counter-battery mission; and were incapable of classification, characterization, and positive identification of aerial objects at high levels of accuracy and assurance.

The Army requested the Defense Intelligence Agency to prepare an Initial Threat Warning Assessment for the MMR as required in Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Manual 3170.01B, "Operation of the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System," May 11, 2005. In the Initial Threat Warning Assessment, the Defense Intelligence Agency identified adversarial threats that could affect a multiplemission radar capability. The Initial Threat Warning Assessment also identified actions that adversaries could use to degrade or disrupt the operations, such as threats to radars or radar platforms and threats to the associated communications, command, control, and computer networks. Threats identified included rocketpropelled grenade launchers, anti-material agents, unmanned aerial vehicles, and lasers.

The "Future Combat Systems1 Operational Requirements Document," January 31, 2005, which the JROC validated, stated that the MMR should be capable of simultaneously performing the air surveillance, air defense, counter-battery, and air traffic control missions for the Brigade Combat Team2 between 2017 and 2020. Further, the Deputy Director for DCD stated that developing a multiple-mission radar would decrease existing operation and support costs because a single radar rather than multiple radars would lower logistical support costs and maintenance requirements.

The Army conducted an analysis for material approaches (AMA) to recommend the most feasible approaches to close the gaps. In the AMA, the program sponsor evaluated the feasibility of three options for material approaches.

The first option included an evaluation of 13 domestic radar systems for potential upgrades to meet the MMR capability requirements. These systems included air surveillance and air defense radars, counter-battery radars, air traffic control radars, and the G/ATOR. Of the two most suitable solutions, one would require modifications to the radar equating to developing a new system without achieving all of the MMR requirements. The other solution, the Marine Corps G/ATOR, offered at least twice the range, but required more manpower; was less mobile and transportable; and was projected to cost more than twice that of the MMR capability.

The second option included an evaluation of eight foreign groundbased radar systems to meet the MMR capability requirements. These systems included multi-mission radars and counter-battery radars. Only two of the eight radars had the potential to meet MMR requirements. The first radar would provide improved performance, but would require expensive reductions in size and weight to meet Army C-130 deployability requirements. The other radar met the Army C-130 deployment requirements, but would require expensive upgrades to address considerable capability shortfalls.

The third option was an evaluation of the development of a new ground-based radar system. The program sponsor based this option on the results of an MMR science and technology objective demonstration initiated in 2002 to show the feasibility of developing the MMR. The demonstration addressed radar requirements for the air surveillance, air defense, counter-battery, and air traffic control missions. The radar in the demonstration exceeded the performance capabilities of the radars in options one and two. For example, the radar developed for the MMR science and technology objective demonstration had double the range of the Army counter-battery radar and the capability to track 10 times more targets than the Army counter-battery and air surveillance radars.