Technology Today Volumn 3 Issue 1 - Raytheon

technology 

today 

HIGHLIGHTING RAYTHEON’S TECHNOLOGY 

RF TECHNOLOGY 

Innovation for Mission Success 

Volume 3 Issue 1

A Message from Greg Shelton 

Vice President of Engineering, 

Technology, Manufacturing & Quality 

Ask Greg on line 

at: http://www.ray.com/rayeng/ 

2 

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) 

business model. Most of our major engineering sites achieved Level 3 certification for 

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

TECHNOLOGY TODAY 

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 

Editorial Assistant 

Lee Ann Sousa 

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 

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 

INSIDE THIS ISSUE 

RF Technology – Innovation for Mission Success 4 

Radar – Active RF Sensors 5 

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 

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. 

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). 

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. 

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. 

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 Millimeter and 

mm sub millimeter 

Wave Wavelength 

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 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. 

Shipboard Radar 

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

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 

RADARS 

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 APS- 

137 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. 

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. 

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 

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. 

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. 

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 


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, LONG- 

BOW, 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 


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. 

Ground and Battlefield 

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

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. 

Commercial Radars 

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. ■ 

P R O F I L E 

Mike Sarcione is a Principal 

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 Sensors 

Space-borne Microwave 

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 

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. 

Space-borne SATCOM 

Payloads 

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 

ALE-50 

Rotman lens enabled high 

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 


11

Engineering 

Perspective 

12 

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. 

ELECTRONIC WARFARE 


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). ■

RF Communications 

Radios, 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. 

HF/VHF/UHF Tactical 

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 

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 Counter- 

Counter 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 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 

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. 


13

RF COMMUNICATIONS 


RF Communications — 

Today 

Raytheon is currently involved in the development 

of the following systems which 

employ RF technologies: 

• 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 

14 

RF Communications — 

The Future 

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. 

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.

emote 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 System- 

Communications (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 


15

16 

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: 

• 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. ■ 

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. 

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 

Your responsibility in a 

Customer-Focused 

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 Sigma TM 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 


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. 

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 

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 

Component Function Key Features 

Radome 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 

18 

A summary of the RF technologies for the 

AT3 system 

Technological Challenges 

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 

Active Electronically Steered Antennas 

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 

(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 


19

PHASED ARRAY SYSTEMS 


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 

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 MES- 

FET 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 

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

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 

processed through any 

work cell. Integrated 

capacity, cost and scheduling 

tools allow changing 

requirements to be 

quickly assessed and 

optimized. Automatic 

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 

cost goals, this method 

of traceability allows statistical 

analysis, correlation and optimization 

of test requirements from the device to 

system level. As a result of these improvements, 

T/R module manufacturing cost has 

decreased by an order of magnitude from 

the early 90s with tens of thousands of 

modules now being processed monthly. In 

addition, some future systems are projected 

to have their module or T/R element cost 

reduced by over two orders of magnitude, 

to less than $50 per T/R channel. 

Legacy Hughes Aircraft developed the first 

fielded active array in a fighter aircraft in 

the Late 1980s. These arrays used fullyactive 

TR modules, operating at X Band frequencies. 

Nineteen units were installed and 

fielded in F-15 fighters. Since Fighter aircraft 

are limited in weight, power and cooling, 

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 

Figure 2. Corporate and Space Feed Systems 

The Patriot Space Fed 

Phased Array 

F-15 

Corporate Fed Array 

ferrite-based phase shifters for beam 

scanning. 

From Passive to Active, a 

Sensor Revolution 

The advent of phased arrays began more 

than 30 years ago, but it was in the early 

1990s that AESAs began to thrive and 

mature. The earliest implementation of 

phased array antennas was focused on 

radar applications. These initial phased 

arrays utilized high-power tubes that would 

generate the required electromagnetic 

energy needed to feed the phased array, so 

that the array could provide enough 

Effective Radiated Power (ERP) to detect 

the target at the necessary selected range. 

Two popular feed approaches were used 

for these passive, phased arrays: corporate 

and space fed (see Figure 2). 

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, 


21

PHASED ARRAY SYSTEMS 


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. 

Transformation from 

Passive to Active, Solid 

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. 

Array Packaging: 

Brick vs. Tile 

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. 

The Future of AESAs, 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 

Leader, Richard Gomez, 

reported on the current state 

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 

• ESSM Rear Receiver Value 

Engineering 

• A classified program 

• NetFires (NLOS-LS) 

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 (SEI SM ). 

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.” 

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 

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.” 

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

26 

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?” 

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. 

IPDS Enablers 

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 

Figure 1. “Components of a local IPDS deployment infrastructure” from Guidelines for Establishing an 

IPDS Deployment Infrastructure

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 Sigma TM 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 

Profile 

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. 

Sean Conley 

Integrated Product 

Development System, 

IPDS version 2.2.3 is 

now available! 

Updates include: 

• Automation and Usability: 

– 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. 

27

Technology Day 

The First Annual Raytheon 

Building Relationships with the U.S. Air Force 

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 

28 

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. 

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. 

The Strategy Wall 

The main lobby atrium 

shows the essence of 

Raytheon dramatically 

showcasing the Raytheon 

Atrium Vitrines 

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. 

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 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 


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. 

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. ■ 

30 

AT3 


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. 

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. 

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. 

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 

At Raytheon, 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 

KENT P. PFLIBSEN 

6604366 Solid cryogen cooling system for 

focal plane arrays 

ELVIN C. CHOU 

JAMES R. SHERMAN 

6608535 Suspended transmission line with 

embedded signal channeling device 

DAVID A. FAULKNER 

6608584 System and method for bistatic SAR 

image generation with phase compensation 

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 A. FRAZIER 

6614373 Method and system for sampling a 

signal using analog-to-digital converters 

PILEIH CHEN 

KENNETH L. MOORE 

CHESTER L. RICHARDS 

6614386 Bistatic radar system using transmitters 

in mid-earth orbit 

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 

THOMAS W. MILLER 

6618007 Adaptive weight calculation 

preprocessor 

WILLIAM E. HOKE 

KATERINA Y. HUR 

6620662 Double recessed transistor 

JEFF CAPARA 

LARRY D. SOBEL 

6621071 Microelectronic system with integral 

cryocooler, and its fabrication and use 

SUSAN G. ANGELLO 

GEORGE W. WEBB 

6621459 Plasma controlled antenna 

GABOR DEVENYI 

6621948 Apparatus and method for differential 

output optical fiber displacement sensing 

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 

MILES E. GOFF 

6624716 Microstrip to circular waveguide transition 

with a stripline portion 

ROBERT C. ALLISON 

JAR J. LEE 

6624720 Micro electro-mechanical system 

(MEMS) transfer switch for wideband device 

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 

NORMAN RAY SANFORD 

6628225 Reduced split target reply processor 

for secondary surveillance radars and identification 

friend or foe systems 

CLIFFORD A. MEGERLE 

J. BRIAN MURPHY 

CARL W. TOWNSEND 

6630663 Miniature ion mobility spectrometer 

ANDREW F. FENTON 

THOMAS D. SHOVLIN 

6630902 Shipboard point defense system and 

elements therefor 


6647075 Digital tuner with optimized clock 

frequency and integrated parallel CIC filter and 

local oscillator 

DUSAN D. VUJCIC 

6650808 Optical high speed bus for a 

modular computer network 

GARY G. DEEL 

6655638 Solar array concentrator system 

and method 


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 


COURT E. ROSSMAN 

6639567 Low radar cross section radome 

JOSEPH M. FUKUMOTO 

6639921 System and method for providing 

collimated electromagnetic energy in the 8-12 

micron range 

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 

CAROLINE BREGLIA 

MICHAEL JOSEPH DELCHECCOLO 

THOMAS W. FRENCH 

JOSEPH S. PLEVA 

MARK E. RUSSELL 

H. BARTELD VAN REES 


6642908 Switched beam antenna architecture 

DAVID U. FLUCKIGER 

6643000 Efficient system and method for 

measuring target characteristics via a beam 

of electromagnetic energy 

JOHN W. BOWRON 

6644813 Four prism color management 

system for projection systems 

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 

ALEXANDER A. BETIN 

HANS W. BRUESSELBACH 

DAVID S. SUMIDA 

6646793 High gain laser amplifier 

TONY LIGHT 

PAUL LOREGIO 

6647175 Reflective light multiplexing device 

MILES E. GOFF 

6647311 Coupler array to measure conductor 

layer misalignment 

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 



6650272 Radar system and method 



6650274 Radar imaging system and method 

WILLIAM DERBES 

JONATHAN D. GORDON 

JAR J. LEE 

6650304 Inflatable reflector antenna for space 

based radars 

MAURICE J. HALMOS 

ROBERT D. STULTZ 

6650685 Single laser transmitter for Qswitched 

and mode-locked vibration operation 

STANLEY V. BIRLESON 

6653969 Dispersive jammer cancellation 



6653972 All weather precision guidance of 

distributed projectiles 

PYONG K. PARK 

RALSTON S. ROBERTSON 

6653984 Electronically scanned dielectric 

covered continuous slot antenna conformal 

to the cone for dual mode seeker 


THOMAS V. SIKINA 

6653985 Microelectromechanical phased array 

antenna 

JAMES W. CULVER 

MATTHEW C. SMITH 

THOMAS M. WELLER 

6657518 Notch filter circuit apparatus 


DELBERT LIPPER 




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 

MICHAEL RAY 

6667479 Advanced high speed, multi-level uncooled 

bolometer and method for fabricating same 

GERHARD KLIMECK 

JAN PAUL VAN DER WAGT 

6667490 Method and system for generating a 

memory cell 

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 


JOHN M. FIRDA 

JOSEPH S. PLEVA 




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 

MARY G. GALLEGOS 

ROBERT A. MIKA 

IRWIN L. NEWBERG 

6630905 System and method for redirecting a 

signal using phase conjugation 

PHILLIP A. COX 

6631040 Method and apparatus for effecting 

temperature compensation in an optical apparatus 

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 


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

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 Electro- 

Optical 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 Electro- 

Optics 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. 

Raytheon receives 

AS9100 enterprise 

certification 

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.

Technology Today Volumn 3 Issue 1 - Raytheon

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?