United States General Accounting Office

GAO Report to the Secretary of Defense

November 1997 APACHE LONGBOW

HELICOPTER

Fire Control Radar Not

Ready for Multiyear

Procurement

GAO/NSIAD-98-11

GAO United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548

National Security and

International Affairs Division

B-276448 

November 17, 1997

The Honorable William S. Cohen

The Secretary of Defense

Dear Mr. Secretary:

The Army plans to award a multiyear contract for the Apache Longbow

helicopter’s fire control radar in December 1997. We reviewed the Apache

Longbow program to determine if the fire control radar design is stable

and ready for multiyear contract award.

Background The Longbow is a modification of the Apache helicopter that consists of

an upgraded airframe, a newly developed radar, and the Longbow Hellfire

missile. The Apache Longbow is designed to conduct precision attacks in

adverse weather conditions, automatically engage multiple targets,

provide fire-and-forget missile capability, and operate on the digital

battlefield of the future. The radar, the key component of the Longbow, is

designed to provide the helicopter with the capability to automatically

detect, classify, and prioritize targets.

In 1991, the Army planned to develop and procure 227 Longbow Apache

helicopters. In May 1993, the program was restructured to upgrade the

entire fleet of 758 helicopters to the Apache Longbow configuration but

outfit only 227 with the fire control radar and a more powerful 701C

engine. Full-rate production of both the Apache Longbow airframe and fire

control radar was authorized in October 1995. The first contract for 10 fire

control radars (lot 1) was awarded in March 1996, and the second contract

was finalized in January 1997 for an additional 11 radars (lot 2). The Army

plans to award a multiyear contract for the fire control radar in

December 1997.

Results in Brief Under 10 U.S.C. 2306b, before awarding a multiyear contract, the design of

the system should be stable. The radar’s transmitter, a critical component,

is being redesigned. Additionally, DOD regulations require that qualification

test and evaluation be completed prior to the full-rate production decision.

The original transmitter may not complete qualification testing and the

redesigned transmitter’s performance will not be demonstrated before the

contract is awarded. In our January 1997 letter to you, we expressed our

concern about the stability of the transmitter’s design and concluded that

Page 1 GAO/NSIAD-98-11 Apache Longbow Helicopter
B-276448 

the radar would not be ready for the planned multiyear procurement.1 Our

review confirmed this conclusion; however, the Army still plans to

proceed with the multiyear contract. Award of the multiyear contract

should be delayed until all statutory and regulatory requirements are met.

Multiyear Contract for

Fire Control Radar Is

Inappropriate, as

Planned

The fire control radar’s transmitter has had development problems, and

parts will not be available for a full production run of the original

transmitter; therefore, it is being redesigned. However, the contractor has

experienced delays in redesigning the radar’s transmitter and,

consequently, does not yet have a prototype. As a result, the actual design

of the radar’s transmitter is not stable, and its performance will not be

known when the scheduled multiyear contract is awarded. Since the

design of the radar is not yet stable, multiyear contract approval will occur

without meeting the statutory requirement.

In our January 1997 letter, we expressed concerns about the performance

of the Apache Longbow’s fire control radar, particularly the transmitter.

We noted that (1) the transmitter was being redesigned, (2) the lot 2

contract unit production costs had doubled from the original estimate, and

(3) the lack of a stable radar design could increase logistics support costs

due to two differently configured transmitters. We asked whether the

contract for the lot 2 fire control radar contract would be delayed and, if

not, what actions would the Department of Defense (DOD) take to ensure

that our concerns were resolved before awarding the contract. DOD

responded that it did not direct the Army to delay the award of the lot 2

contract because it believed that current program management oversight,

combined with the Integrated Product Team process, was adequate to

address all of our concerns.

According to the Apache Longbow project manager, while the radar was

approved for full-rate production in October 1995, it was apparent to the

program office that it would need time to resolve problems with the

radar’s design. As we noted in our January 1997 letter, some of the radar

transmitter’s electrical components, such as diodes and amplifiers, did not

perform well in cold temperatures. In addition, to achieve the required

output, the current transmitter must undergo time-consuming and costly

manual integration efforts. Also, suppliers informed the fire control radar’s

manufacturer in 1995 that they would no longer provide critical

transmitter components. To improve performance and address parts

availability and cost problems, the Army determined in November 1995

1

Apache Longbow Fire Control Radar (GAO/NSIAD-97-97R, Jan. 27, 1997).

Page 2 GAO/NSIAD-98-11 Apache Longbow Helicopter
B-276448 

that the radar’s transmitter had to be redesigned. The program office has

now scheduled the radar’s full-rate production to occur with award of the

multiyear contract.

DOD regulations require that qualification test and evaluation be completed

prior to the full-rate production decision. Qualification tests require that a

system satisfactorily demonstrate performance as specified in the

production contract. As early as 1993, the Army realized the program

contained a high degree of production risk because of the possible need to

redesign and requalify the fire control radar’s components. The Army

acknowledged that this concern would not be completely resolved until all

qualification tests were completed. However, the original transmitter may

not complete qualification testing prior to the multiyear contract award,

and the redesigned transmitter is not scheduled for qualification tests until

December 1998, over 3 years after full-rate production of the radar was

authorized. According to contractor officials, this performance

demonstration could be delayed until early 1999.

The contractor has experienced delays in developing the radar’s

redesigned transmitter and, therefore, does not yet have a prototype.

Because a prototype of the redesigned transmitter was not ready, bench

testing scheduled for March and then June 1997 did not occur. In addition,

the redesigned transmitter will not be available for the government’s first

article test,2

 scheduled to begin in March 1998; therefore, the Army plans

to use the original transmitter for these tests. Because approximately

85 percent of the fire control radars will be equipped with the redesigned

transmitter, first article test results using the original transmitter will not

provide an adequate basis for assessing the radar’s performance. Although

the current transmitter does not include the fixes from the redesign, the

Army still plans to use it in the event further delays occur in the

development and testing of the redesigned transmitter.

Recommendation Because the redesigned transmitter will be used in approximately

85 percent of the Apache Longbow’s fire control radars, we recommend

that the Secretary of Defense direct the Secretary of the Army to delay the

award of the multiyear contract until the radar has successfully passed

testing as required by the regulations and the design is stable as required

by 10 U.S.C. 2306(b).

2

First article testing comprises preproduction and initial production tests to ensure that the contractor

can furnish a product that meets the established technical criteria.

Page 3 GAO/NSIAD-98-11 Apache Longbow Helicopter
B-276448 

Agency Comments

and Our Evaluation

In commenting on a draft of this report, DOD nonconcurred with our

recommendation. DOD informed us that the Army plans to test a prototype

of the redesigned transmitter in November and December 1997 to verify

the compatibility and functionality of the transmitter with other

components of the radar and that lot acceptance testing will be completed

in December 1998. According to DOD, this test and evaluation approach and

the projected $80 million savings from the multiyear contract are in the

best interest of the government. DOD noted that the transmitter represents

only 2 percent of the fire control radar’s total parts and does not

jeopardize the design stability of the fire control radar or the Longbow

Apache weapon system. Further, DOD stated that we are incorrect in

asserting that the Army has not met the statutory requirement for a stable

design prior to multiyear contract approval. According to DOD officials, the

redesign effort is only a procedure to requalify an out-of-production part.

It now appears that DOD will delay award of the multiyear contract.

According to DOD officials, the contract that was originally scheduled to be

awarded in November 1997 will now be awarded after completion of the

functionality testing in December 1997. However, the Army’s plan does not

satisfy the lot 2 contract and regulatory requirements for testing. The lot 2

fire control radar production contract specifically requires qualification

testing of the redesigned transmitter. As we noted in the report,

qualification and first article testing validate that a component can operate

in an integrated system environment. However, neither DOD’s planned

November-December testing nor its planned first article test will achieve

these purposes. The first time that the redesigned transmitter will be

tested in a system environment is during the December 1998 qualification

tests.

We are not persuaded by DOD’s assertion regarding the significance of the

transmitter to the design stability of the radar or Apache Longbow weapon

system. Although the transmitter represents only 2 percent of the part

count for the radar, proper functioning of the transmitter is critical to the

performance of the weapon system. The transmitter is the critical

component of the radar, which is the single critical distinction between

the Apache Longbow and the original Apache helicopter. If the transmitter

does not work, the fire control radar will not provide the helicopter with

the capability to automatically detect, classify, and prioritize targets in

adverse weather conditions.

Also, we do not agree that this effort is only a procedure to requalify an

out-of-production part. The original transmitter has not completed and

Page 4 GAO/NSIAD-98-11 Apache Longbow Helicopter
B-276448 

may not complete full qualification testing prior to award of the contract.

In addition, the redesigned transmitter has not and will not be subjected to

qualification testing until 1 year after the multiyear contract award. It is

only through qualification testing that the Army can be assured that the

redesigned transmitter performs as required in an integrated system

environment. Therefore, we continue to believe that the multiyear contract

should be delayed until the radar has successfully passed first article and

qualification tests with the redesigned transmitter. DOD’s detailed

comments are reprinted in appendix I.

Scope and

Methodology

To determine whether the Apache Longbow fire control radar design was

stable and whether it was ready for multiyear contract award originally

scheduled for November 1997, we reviewed various program documents

related to the development and acquisition of the Apache Longbow fire

control radar. We interviewed cognizant officials at the Program Office for

Aviation; the Apache Attack Helicopter Project Management Office; and

the Office of the Executive Director, Aviation Research, Development, and

Engineering Center, at the Army’s Aviation and Troop Command, 

St. Louis, Missouri; the Office of the Secretary of the Army for Research,

Development, and Acquisition, Washington, D.C.; and the U.S. Army Office

of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and Plans, Washington, D.C.

We also interviewed officials from Lockheed Martin, Longbow Limited

Liability Company, and Northrop Grumman, manufacturers of the fire

control radar, in Orlando, Florida. In addition, we obtained documentation

from the Defense Contract Management Command located at McDonnell

Douglas Helicopter Systems, Mesa, Arizona.

To determine whether Apache Longbow fire control radar performance

requirements would be met and operational capabilities demonstrated, we

reviewed relevant Army, contractor, and DOD documents. These included

the Defense Acquisition Executive Summaries, contractor’s Fire Control

Radar Program Progress Review, and the Apache Longbow’s Operational

Requirements Document. We also discussed performance and capability

requirements with cognizant Army officials in St. Louis, Missouri, and

Washington, D.C.

We conducted our review from February through August 1997 in

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.

Page 5 GAO/NSIAD-98-11 Apache Longbow Helicopter
B-276448 

As you know, the head of a federal agency is required by 31 U.S.C. 720 to

submit a written statement of actions taken on our recommendations to

the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs and the House Committee

on Government Reform and Oversight not later than 60 days after the date

of this report. A written statement also must be submitted to the Senate

and House Committees on Appropriations with the agency’s first request

for appropriations made more than 60 days after the date of the report.

We are sending copies of this report to the Chairmen and Ranking

Minority Members, Senate and House Committees on Appropriations,

Senate Committee on Armed Services, Senate Committee on

Governmental Affairs, House Committee on National Security, and House

Committee on Government Reform and Oversight; the Secretary of the

Army; and the Director, Office of Management and Budget. We will also

provide copies to others upon request.

Please contact me at (202) 512-4841 if you or your staff have any questions

concerning this report. Major contributors to this report were 

Robert J. Stolba, Charles Burgess, Richard Burrell, and Nora Landgraf.

Sincerely yours,

Louis J. Rodrigues

Director, Defense Acquisitions Issues

Page 6 GAO/NSIAD-98-11 Apache Longbow Helicopter
Page 7 GAO/NSIAD-98-11 Apache Longbow Helicopter
Appendix I 

Comments From the Department of Defense

Page 8 GAO/NSIAD-98-11 Apache Longbow Helicopter
Appendix I 

Comments From the Department of Defense

(707238) Page 9 GAO/NSIAD-98-11 Apache Longbow Helicopter
Ordering Information

The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free.

Additional copies are $2 each. Orders should be sent to the

following address, accompanied by a check or money order

made out to the Superintendent of Documents, when

necessary. VISA and MasterCard credit cards are accepted, also.

Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address

are discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U.S. General Accounting Office

P.O. Box 37050

Washington, DC 20013

or visit:

Room 1100

700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)

U.S. General Accounting Office

Washington, DC

Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512-6000 

or by using fax number (202) 512-6061, or TDD (202) 512-2537.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and

testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any

list from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a

touchtone phone. A recorded menu will provide information on

how to obtain these lists.

For information on how to access GAO reports on the INTERNET,

send an e-mail message with "info" in the body to:

info@www.gao.gov

or visit GAO’s World Wide Web Home Page at:

http://www.gao.gov

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548-0001

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requested

Bulk Rate

Postage & Fees Paid

GAO

Permit No. G100