technologytoday

INTEGRATED MISSION SOLUTIONSDD(X) – Transforming Naval Technology

Summer 2003 Volume 2 Issue 2

HIGHLIGHTING RAYTHEON’S TECHNOLOGY

From Chips to Ships

In this issue of technology today, we feature DD(X)—a program that is transforming technology

for the Navy. DD(X) is a revolutionary program for Raytheon that will move us forward as an

integrator of mission solutions. The engineers and technologists that are working on DD(X) are

excited and proud to be a part of this challenging program. Their energy is contagious. The

breadth and depth of the technology at Raytheon is insurmountable. From MMIC (monolithic

microwave integrated circuit) chip technology to T/R modules, from focal plane arrays and signal

processing to systems integration—we have the strategies, capabilities and technologies from

design, product development, system integration and test through operations and support cycles.

Radar technology is in our roots and the heart of it all is the MMIC chip technology. I believe that

our MMIC chip technology and manufacturing capabilities is a business discriminator—as

detailed in this magazine. We have the capabilities from chips to ships. MMICs are critical to our

advanced radar and communications business. RRFC continues to reinvent technology to pro-

vide state-of-the-art solutions and drive the competition.

I am also very proud of the hard work and efforts that we have made with CMMI (Capability

Maturity Model Integration) across the company. IDS and IIS in Garland, Texas have set the stage

and led the way, being the first to achieve CMMI Level 3 appraisals. It is a great accomplishment

and many of the other engineering sites are working hard to achieve the same. I am proud of the

One Company efforts that are on-going to make these milestones. The CMMI project managers

and Engineering Process Groups (EPGs) are working together to share best practices and lessons

learned. NCS and SAS in North Texas achieved CMMI Level 5 for Software this past week—it is

an exciting time for our engineering community as we all work to drive a process culture, provid-

ing a bedrock of discipline enabling technology to flourish.

We are driving Raytheon Six Sigma into the design phase, from business strategy execution

through systems integration, test and validation. We need to continue to stop the fire-fighting and

prevent the fires—and that is what Design for Six Sigma (DFSS) is all about. The tools are

embedded in our development process, IPDS (Integrated Product Development System), and need

to be used throughout the design process. We will continue to share program successes with DFSS

in future issues.

Please take the time to read through this issue and learn about the exciting technologies that are

being designed, developed and used for DD(X)—it is an exciting program, for our people, compa-

ny and partners.

Sincerely,

Greg2 summer 2003

A Message from Greg SheltonVice President of Engineering, Technology, Manufacturing & Quality

Ask Greg on line

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

Editor's Supplement

Spring 2003 edition:1) “Engineers as Lifelong Learners”article (page 24) was written byFreeman Moore, not Victor Wright.

2) Alan McCormick (page 28), directorof engineering and technology at RSLreceived his degrees from Heriot WattUniversity in Edinburgh, Scotland, notEdinburgh, England.

DD(X) – Transforming Naval Technology 4

DD(X) Systems Architecture 5

MK57 Advanced Vertical Launch System 6

Dual Band Radar 8

Distributed Development, Test and Integration 9

External Communications 11

Integrated Undersea Warfare System 12

Total Ship Computing Environment 13

Engineering Perspective – Mark Russell 14

Leadership Perspective – Mike Hoeffler 15

MMIC Chip Technology 16

CMMI Accomplishments 19

Design for Six Sigma 21

In the News 24

IPDS Best Practices 26

Quality Awards 28

Patent Recognition 30

Future Events 32

TECHNOLOGY TODAY

summer 2003 3

EDITOR’S NOTE

I hope you all notice our new cover for this issue of technology today, reflecting our new brandidentity. This design is part of the initiative to align our branding around our Customer FocusedMarketing efforts so that as we deliver to our customers around the three components of CFM—Performance, Relationships and Solutions, we present a unified look to our customers and ouremployees.

Like many of you, I did not always think about branding or even marketing in my prior role as amaterials engineer. As long as I understood the requirements, worked with my team, and designedand developed products that performed, I believed I had done my job. As I transitioned into com-munications, working across the Enterprise, I became a true believer of the value of branding, bothinternally and externally. It is at the heart of One Company.

On a personal level, I relate the importance of branding with the Target symbol—the red bulls eyeso predominately displayed in media, advertisements and in the store itself. Yes, I am a shopaholic,but I am also a working mother of three with little time and lots to do. I love Target for its value,quality and ease. Each time I visit a Target store, I also find it a fun experience—they’re providingthat experience through their brand in everything they do.

At Raytheon, we all need to continue to enhance the branding of Raytheon in everything we do.

We celebrate our differences, embrace our cultures, and operate as One Company. One Companymeans working with our customers to provide superior solutions, executing flawlessly and in theend, growing as a company, while protecting the Raytheon brand.

Jean Scire, Editorjtscire@raytheon.com

INSIDE THIS ISSUETECHNOLOGY TODAY

technology today is published quarterly by the Office of Engineering,Technology, Manufacturing & Quality

Vice PresidentGreg Shelton

Engineering, Technology,Manufacturing & Quality StaffPeter BolandGeorge LynchDan NashPeter PaoJean ScirePietro VentrescaGerry Zimmerman

EditorJean Scire

Editorial AssistantLee Ann Sousa

Graphic DesignDebra Graham

PhotographyJon BlackRob Carlson

Publication CoordinatorCarol Danner

ContributorsJerry CharlowArcenia DominguezJeff GilstrapIlene HillMike HurtKaren JohnsonBill KilleavyDavid LaightonChuck LarrabeeSiobhan Lopez

Tom McHaleJohn MoriartyDan NashLynda OwensCourtney PennyMark PolnaszekAnn TaylorBrian WellsGary WolfeFrank Zupancic

an Product

4 summer 2003

RaytheonIntegrated Mission Solutions

DD(X) – Transforming Naval Technology

T he ability of the UnitedStates, as a maritimenation, to project its

influence around the globe isas critical to the freedom ofour allies as it is to our own.

Throughout the history of the United Statesthere have been distinct periods when theinvestments in developing new ships for theNavy have spawned technological advancesthat have influenced subsequent ship designefforts around the world for years to come.

One of the most famous examples comesfrom the American Civil War. The advent ofthe U.S.S. Monitor introduced a totally newclass of fully-armored, steam-powered,screw propeller-driven warships. It has acompact hull, low profile, unobstructeddecks, a small comparatively specializedcrew, and a revolving gun turret that couldbe brought to bear on any naval or landtarget regardless of the Monitor’s head-ing—while also effectively protecting boththe guns and the gun crews.

Nothing like the Monitor ever existedbefore, and, virtually overnight, it relegatedsail-driven, wooden ships-of-the-line withtheir primitive broadside armament andtime-consuming gun-aiming maneuvers toobsolescence. In today’s terminology, thisseminal class of naval vessels represented a“transformational” design concept, signify-ing a radical departure from the old ways—a true revolution. And, its unqualified suc-cess quickly and heavily influenced thethinking of every major and minor navalpower around the world for decades to come.

Now, another transformational concept innaval ship systems design, is rapidly takingshape: DD(X), a new surface combat vesselthat promises to impact all new naval shipdesigns well into the 21st century.

Versatility and Aggressiveness — TheTraditional Hallmark of Naval DestroyersSince first introduced to the world’s naviesat the dawn of the twentieth century asfast torpedo-carrying surface attack vessels,destroyers have come to be recognized assome of the most versatile and aggressivesurface combatants ever developed—legendary “hunter-killers” of the seas.Throughout their long history, destroyershave continued to assume progressivelygreater defensive and offensive roles, such as:

• Conducting anti-submarine, anti-mineanti-shipping, anti-aircraft, and elec-tronic warfare;

• Supporting U.S. Marine and othercombat forces ashore with gunfireand missiles in support of amphibiousassault and other combat missions;

• Screening and defending other shipsin the fleet, as well as convoys ofships carrying vital troops, equipmentand material;

• Patrolling the high seas conductingsurveillance activities to keep themsafe in times of peace and of war;and

• Performing humanitarian missionssuch as search and rescue.

Although “DD” has long been the U.S.Navy’s shorthand for “destroyer”, the newDD(X) will be a vessel that far surpasses theoperational spectrum traditionally associat-ed with naval destroyers, even in their mostrecent AEGIS incarnations.

With the advent of DD(X), the hereditaryversatility and aggressiveness of the destroy-er is destined to grow in startling ways thatthe designers of the original torpedo boatdestroyers could never have envisaged acentury ago.

Four Key DD(X) Concepts to UnderstandTo better understand why DD(X) is so trans-formational, it helps to view the ship interms of four broad concepts, described byMichael Hoeffler, vice president of theDD(X) Program at Raytheon IntegratedDefense Systems:

• The Human System “The ability to inte-grate the sailor as a critical part of theIntegrated Warfare System is a revolu-tion,” says Cronin. “We ‘design in’ theoperators as part of our DD(X) commandcenter. We apply intensive automation.We look at the total ship and all of thework requirements to achieve a signifi-

The DD(X) is one of the most complex ‘system of systems’ currently in development.

summer 2003 5

cantly greater capability from a ship per-spective at significantly lower crew levels.”

• Survivability “DD(X) will use a combi-nation of passive and active means tofight in coastal (littoral) and other envi-ronments with incredible warfightingcapabilities,” says Hoeffler.

• Mobility “DD(X) will be designed tooperate in forward areas for extendedperiods,” says Hoeffler. “It will have theability to replenish underway—includinglong-range land attack projectiles. Inaddition, because of the way the ship isdesigned, it will have the ability to transitminefields and operate in other difficultlittoral areas and do so with great success.”

• Integrated Warfare Systems “If youlook at ships today,” says Hoeffler, “landattack, anti-air warfare and anti-subma-rine warfare each are separate systems.On DD(X) we have fully integrated thecapability that combines each of thesedomains into one cohesive system. Wehave a single integrated command cen-ter, such that the ship has the ability tothink and fight in a multi-domain per-spective: land attack, undersea warfare,anti-air warfare, information dominance,and so forth. It can look at all of thosemissions simultaneously and executethem with greater effectiveness. Thetechnologies underpinning this architec-ture are truly revolutionary. This was infact the major element of our proposalto the navy, to harness that revolution in technology.”

The Role of Raytheon IntegratedDefense SystemsReflecting back on the U.S.S. Monitor, oneof the most important attributes that madeit such a significant departure from conven-tional 1860’s shipbuilding approaches isrelated not to the ship itself but to the man-ner in which it was created. It was designedand built by an independent contractor—John Ericsson—whose foresight, innovativeideas, and keen ability to engineer a trulywell-integrated and highly effective surfacecombatant were unlimited by the traditionalboundaries of naval ship design then invogue. So too is the situation with DD(X)and Raytheon’s ongoing role in the project.

As the systems integrator for all ship-board electronics, missions systems engi-neering, software development and testand evaluation systems on the DD(X) pro-gram, Raytheon is facing some new andexciting challenges in the days ahead. Best-of-breed methodologies and approachesare being applied to the design of theDD(X) system and software architecture.Raytheon has been renowned for buildingshipboard radars, missiles, electronics andcommunications equipment for many years,but DD(X) is the first program in which thecompany has had the opportunity to put allthe pieces together. The approach to design-ing a system architecture is essential to under-standing how to put those pieces together.

Using a side-step approach modeled afterthe George Mason University systems archi-tecture design process, DD(X) systemdesigners are defining all the parts of thesystem, the best ways to assemble all thoseparts, and the most suitable strategies fortesting the collective system.

George Mason University is one of the lead-ers in defining system engineering processes.DD(X) is combining that process with theDoD Joint Technical Architecture and theNavy Open Architecture precepts to create asystem and software architecture that is easilyaccessible to team members and customersthroughout the DD(X) distributed network.

DD(X) system engineers will face some trulyunique and exciting challenges ahead asthey design a system architecture that willsuccessfully integrate approximately 30major shipboard subsystems, including the

radar, launchers, guns, navigation systemand communications suite, most of whichare being built by other contractors. TheDD(X) system is the largest and most com-plex of its kind that Raytheon has ever built,employing technologies that go beyondanything used in today’s Navy. “We’re stilltrying to figure out how large the ship isgoing to be, how much equipment it willcarry, how fast it will go”, said Brian Wells,Raytheon systems architect on DD(X). Thenew ships will be manned with approxi-mately one-third the crew that currentlyoperates the destroyers of today. To achievesuch a high level of automation requiresusing new technologies like data fusion andintelligent agents that essentially behavelike a person. Intelligent agents help theoperator make decisions by collecting andanalyzing information, plotting one or twocourses of action and making recommenda-tions, thereby reducing the amount ofhuman involvement and the possibility ofhuman error.

An engineer’s dream, this program givespeople a rare opportunity to be involvedwith the creation of a system from the earlyconcept stages right on through to the finalsell-off to the US Navy. The DD(X) programhas placed Raytheon in the enviable role ofa large systems integrator, a key factor inpositioning the company to win contractsfor which we might not otherwise havebeen considered. As an added benefit, thework being done on this program will givesmaller programs the opportunity to capi-talize on the technological and innovativestrengths of DD(X). ■

– Brian Wells

Systems Architecture

Achieving all DD(X) objectives within a single naval vessel involves a myriad ofcomplex integrated warfare systems andsubsystems. Working in concert with theprogram’s prime contractor, NorthropGrumman Ship Systems and the Navy,Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems hasbeen designated overall DD(X) electronicand weapon systems integrator, tasked withthe responsibility of making certain that all ofthese concepts are transformed into reality.

Where We Are TodayRaytheon engineers, who are spearheadingPhase III of the DD(X) program, are creatingthe engineering development models(EDMs) that are described in this specialedition of Technology Today. Developing theEDMs and testing them before actual shipconstruction begins in 2005 reducesrisk and assures operational excellence

Continued on page 15

Barbara Belt

is the Program Integration andControl Lead for the SensorsSegment on DD(X). In Octobershe will pass a milestone withthe company—20 years of dedi-cated service. She has enjoyedworking on many different projects and says, "It's the vari-ety of challenges that I find mostexciting, especially on the DD(X)program. This program has sucha broad scope that it offers awealth of opportunity. Thebreadth and depth of this pro-gram is unlike anything that I've ever seen."

Key areas in which Barbara willprovide expertise are Cost andSchedule Management andManagement Infrastructure

Processes. Barbara notes,"Effective communication is criti-cal to the success of our pro-gram. We need to define anddeploy processes that improveour efficiency while accomplish-ing our goals. Our team size isgoing to continue to grow at arapid rate, and we realize that a fully integrated ship needs afully integrated team. I am excited to be involved in theprocess that will see the next-generation surface combatantship become a reality."

Some highlights of Barbara’scareer include Software TaskManagement and serving asDeputy Program Manager onthe Integrated Terminal WeatherSystem. She has also taughtsoftware and management classes, including the EVMS(Earned Value ManagementSystem) Tracking course that shedeveloped. She is a graduate ofthe University of Massachusettsin Amherst, with a Bachelor ofScience degree in ComputerScience.

Sylvia Courtney

is the director of the DD(X)Sensors Segment and hasworked at Raytheon since 1984.Over the course of her career atRaytheon, she has worked onSatellite Communications, AirTraffic Control and AdvancedEngineering Technology. “Theflexibility to work in differentdomains has enabled me to regularly step outside of mycomfort zone and tackle newapplication areas and new technologies,” says Sylvia.

As DD(X) Director, Sylvia is veryexcited about the many interest-ing challenges on this uniqueand multi-dimensional program.“Because we are starting some

thing new and unlike anythingwe have done before, there is ahigh level of excitement amongthose of us who are establishingthe foundation from which thisprogram will grow and evolve inthe coming decades.”

She sees DD(X) as a spectacularprofessional opportunity. “Themembers of the DD(X) teambelieve in the tremendous ‘possibility’ of this program—the possibility to create trulytransformational capabilities forour fleet through the applicationof technology; the possibility tocreate a process and communi-cation foundation that will withstand the test of time; thepossibility of creating a programculture that fosters personaldevelopment—and what is trulyremarkable is that this feeling ofbeing on the edge of doingsomething really important isshared by our customer andindustry partners.”

6 summer 2003

DD(X) (continued)

The MK57 AdvancedVertical Launch System (AVLS)is the next-generation navalmissile launching system forfuture surface combatants ofthe U.S. Navy. Part of theDD(X) program, the MK57AVLS Integrated Process Teamis presently designing an

Engineering DevelopmentModel. The MK57 AVLS, a notewor-

thy advance in the technology of missilelaunching systems, is significantly expand-ing the capabilities of DD(X) and the futurefamily of surface combatants that will follow. The MK57 AVLS design providesmajor increases in capability over the1970’s designed MK41 VLS presently used

by the U.S. Navy. The MK57 AVLS is beingdeveloped by Raytheon in Portsmouth,Rhode Island.

The MK57 AVLS will be mounted aroundthe periphery of the DD(X) hull to providegreater firepower and enhanced resistanceto battle damage. Compared to the oldMK41 VLS, the new launcher offers a 25%greater missile canister area and measures1.66 ft. longer, resulting in a 35% increasein canister volume. Missile weight capacityis boosted by 39%. These advances allowthe MK57 AVLS to accommodate futuremissile technologies without having tomake major modifications to the launcher.Other improvements include a robust mis-sile exhaust gas management system that

will eliminate the need for a missile delugesystem, which is expensive, manpowerintensive and a maintenance nightmare.These mechanical advances in launchertechnologies are being created with the aidof the MK57 AVLS IPT’s teammate andlargest subcontractor, United Defense LP ofMinneapolis, Minnesota.

The most transformational advance in theMK57 AVLS’s development is Raytheon’simplementation of the electronic architec-ture. One of the first true applications ofthe Navy’s Open Architecture concept, theelectronic architecture allows for futureintegration of new missile systems with nomodification to the launcher control soft-ware, while reducing integration costs of

M K 5 7 A d v a n c e d

P R O F I L E – T h e D D ( X ) T E A M

summer 2003 7

Prior to October 2002, Sylviamanaged the C3I Software Engineering Laboratory (SEL).This role garnered Sylvia muchvaluable experience. She com-ments: “I assumed that role at a time when Raytheon wasfocusing intently on organiza-tional alignment, so I put a lotof energy into setting a visionfor the Lab and then establish-ing an executable strategy forrealizing the vision. Thanks to avery talented team, we wereable to get the Lab alignedaround the vision of reducingproduct cost through the appli-cation of the CMM Level 5process. It was extremelyrewarding when the Labachieved its Level 5 rating inDecember 2002.”

Sylvia was previously a Raytheonnominee for the Society ofWomen Engineers, Engineer ofthe Year Award. When askedwhat accomplishments she wasmost proud of, Sylvia replied,

“Mentoring talented peopleand watching them grow into

positions of responsibility withinRaytheon Company, leading SELto achieve CMM Level 5 ratingand balancing a fulfilling careerwith the interests of a cherishedfamily.”

Sylvia graduated from theUniversity of Virginia in 1977,and did follow-on graduatework in Computer Science atBoston University.

Ron Jackson

is a trained Raytheon Six SigmaExpert and spends the majorityof his time on DD(X) as ActingSix Sigma Lead on the program.He plans on becoming certifiedas an Expert next year.

Ron began working on DD(X)when it was in the proposalstage. He enjoys working onthis program because “it isexciting working with high levelpeople and being able to contribute, both as an engineer,and as an R6σ expert. DD(X) is a great opportunity todemonstrate the application ofSix Sigma tools and processes. Our goal is doing it right the first time.”

When asked how this will beaccomplished, Ron replied, “to succeed, we have to worktogether across companies. Wehave to fix problems, not fixblame. To that end, I’ve beenteaching R6σ Specialist Training to our prime and Navy customer.”

Ron has spent much of hiscareer supporting simulationactivities and flight tests onAMRAAM, Sparrow, StandardMissile and THAAD. He has alsoserved as Program Lead onHWIL (Hardware-in-the Loop).His simulation work has takenhim to many sites includingEglin Air Force Base and thePacific Missile Test Center.

Ron graduated from theUniversity of Rhode Island in1978 with a Bachelor of Science degree in electrical engineering and a Master ofScience degree in 1980.

V e r t i c a l L a u n c h S y s t e m

P R O F I L E – T h e D D ( X ) T E A M

the new missile’s control and interface soft-ware. This innovation lies in the full integra-tion of three electronic modules and a mis-sile/canister specific Canister Electronic Unit(CEU) that allows for weapon specific con-trol and interface data to be transferredseparately from the launcher specific data.These modules include the ModuleController Unit (MCU) that provides theinterface between the DD(X)’s transforma-tional Total Ship Computing Environment(TSCE) and the MK57 AVLS. In particular,this dynamic module will allow for thelauncher and missile interface manage-ment, launcher equipment management,missile and module activity management,and fault detection and reconfiguration.The Power Distribution Unit (PDU) allowsefficient transfer and monitoring of power

to launcher and missiles. The Hatch ControlUnit (HCU) provides advanced motion con-trol and servo drive technology to operateall missiles and exhaust hatch actuations.

The CEU is the key to becoming the first“any missile, any cell” architecture that theU.S. Navy desires for their launching sys-tem. The CEU interfaces with a specificencanistered missile, similar to an adapter,and links the missile and the combat system. In this way, the Navy can insert anew missile into inventory rapidly and without major, costly Ordnance Alterations(ORDALTs) for the launcher and CombatSystems. As part of Phase III and IV, CEUs will be developed for all existing missiles/canisters in the present inventory.For future missile developments, the CEU

design can be integratedinto the canister design,eliminating the need for theCEU. This transformationallauncher will effect a majorreduction in the life cyclecosts of current Navylaunching systems.

The MK57 AVLS IPT in conjunction with the DD(X)Engage Segment Design Team is pushing the boundaries of missilelaunching technology and working withour Navy customer to bring the future tothe fleet today. ■

– Mark Polnaszek

8 summer 2003

DD(X) (continued)

The Dual-Band Radar (DBR) is a sin-gle, integrated radar system combiningthe SPY-3 and Volume Search Radar(VSR) functions. S-band (VSR) and X-band (SPY-3) elements are coupled atthe pulse or waveform level. The DBRconcept combines the detection capa-bility of the SPY-3 radar system on thehorizon and VSR in the volume torespond efficiently to surveillance,track, threat assessment, and engage-ment support commands from theship’s combat system. Coordinatedresource management, scheduling andtracking offer potent functionality toprovide quick reaction queued acquisi-tion of threat targets, dual band count-

er to electronic attack, backup S-bandhorizon search coverage during X-bandmissile illumination support, and bal-ancing of precision tracking radar

resources. Control of each radar at thewaveform level promotes a more opti-mized usage of both frequencies tomaximize utilization of the radar time-line and increase search and trackrevisit rates. Correlation of detectionmeasurements in a centralized trackdatabase provides for improved preci-sion threat track, minimized fades andreduced susceptibility to electronicattack. The DBR concept also providesan excellent air traffic control (ATC)capability for CVN21 next-generationcarrier operations, whereby the VSRhandles air traffic marshalling and themultifunction radar (MFR) supportsprecision landing. ■

– Mike Hurt

Mark Munkascsy

is the Chief System Architect onthe DD(X) program. He has beenbased in Portsmouth, RhodeIsland for his entire 19 yearcareer at Raytheon, but doesextensive travel to the many sitesinvolved in DD(X).

When asked what he found tobe the most exciting aspect ofworking on DD(X), Mark replied,“It’s fun to be in on the groundfloor. As Chief System Architect,I get to look at the big picture. I am responsible for establishingour overall approach to the sys-tem and to communicate this tothe team and get them going inthe right direction.”

He also states, “You learn quick-ly that there are no easyanswers. When you have aquestion, you don’t have anyoneto ask who has done it before.You also have to think of theanswers from the customer per-spective. CAIV (Cost As anIndependent Variable) has beeninstrumental in optimizing theseengineering decisions that havebeen so critical to our success indesigning a high performancesystem.”

Mark is an Engineering Fellowand just received an Author’sAward for his paper onArchitecting DD(X). His pastexperience includes work on theTomahawk Cruise Missile LaunchSystems and Team Lead formany of Raytheon’s SurfaceCombat Systems programs.

Mark says, “The Tomahawk hasbeen successfully used on subsin the Gulf Wars. It’s gratifyingto know that what we do makesa real difference to the sailors.

But, if I had to choose one areain my work that has been mostsatisfying, it is working with thehigh quality engineers on DD(X).I have never worked with such atalented and enthusiastic team.This is the best example ofRaytheon as One Company thatI’ve ever seen. The best peoplefrom across the company havebeen assigned to this programand it is evident every day thatwhat we are doing now willinfluence this system for thenext 35 years.”

Mark graduated from MIT in1978 with a Bachelor of Sciencedegree in physics.

LaShaun Skillings,

a Senior Systems Engineer, is currently doing MissionScenario Analysis work on DD(X).She is very enthusiastic about herwork on this start up program. “I am particularly excited by theinteractions that help to align thevisions of the customer withRaytheon,” comments LaShaun.“Customer focus is a foundationfor success. As one of our ‘topline goals,’ this allows us to manage expectations and avoidmisunderstandings.”

LaShaun sees DD(X) as a greatopportunity not only to contribute,but also to learn. “The people Iam working with have a wealthof knowledge. The technical

P R O F I L E – T h e D D ( X ) T E A M

D u a l B a n d R a d a r

Conceptual diagram of the extensive coverage pro-vided by the integrated dual band radar devel-oped for DD(X).

summer 2003 9

experience I am gaining is phe-nomenal. I am continually chal-lenged by the intricacies of thisprogram.”

Raytheon celebrated MulticulturalWeek at many sites during themonth of June, and LaShaun wasinvolved in the planning of theseactivities for Marlborough, Mass.She also volunteers her time as amember of the Diversity Counciland is a National Executive Boardmember for the National Societyof Black Engineers. (Her officialtitle is Region One AlumniExtension Chairperson and thisincludes the areas of Massachusetts,New York, Connecticut, RhodeIsland and Canada.)

LaShaun graduated from BrownUniversity in 1997 with a Bachelorof Science in electrical engineer-ing and Bachelor of Arts in inter-national relations. She also receivedMaster of Science degree in elec-trical engineering from BrownUniversity in 1998. LaShaun previously worked at LucentTechnologies in Naperville, Illinois.

Mike Sogar

is the Program Manager forDD(X) MK57 Advanced VerticalLaunch System (AVLS). TheDD(X) program continues toexcite Mike and he describes hisenthusiasm as “contagious.”“The excitement in the MK57program is twofold. The first isdeveloping the next generationnaval missile launching systemfor the future surface combat-ants of the U.S. Navy. The second is working with highlyenergized Raytheon engineersfrom all parts of the company.My career started in the missileportion of the business. Now I am on the other side of thefence in launching them. I feelfortunate to be able to tietogether my entire career

within this program. DD(X) is a tremendous opportunity forRaytheon and its engineers.”

After living in three differentregions of the country – Dallas,Texas, Tucson, Arizona and cur-rently Portsmouth, Rhode Island– Mike has had a chance towork in many interesting and challenging assignments.“Experiencing the diversity of the company has been a real eye-opener for me. I’ve also been in many challengingroles, each being a steppingstone to the next”, says Mike.“While in the missile business,several of the programs werewith international customersproviding an opportunity to go abroad. But, I get the mostpride from seeing the resultsfrom my direct efforts, whetherit is a video clip of one of my old weapons in action on CNN or a test shot out on the range. I am proud of mywork and thankful to being able to do it.”

Mike’s four years of experienceat Raytheon also include LPD17Engineering Control SystemManager, Enhanced Paveway IIIChief Engineer, ERGM (ExtendedRange Guided Munition) IPT(Integrated Product Team) Lead,and Javelin Software Manager.One of his proudest memorieswas the execution of theEnhanced Paveway III EMD(Engineering/Manufacturing and Development) Program for the United Kingdom. Theprogram was very profitable for Raytheon and was completedon the original schedule. Theteam received a letter of commendation from the UKMinistry of Defense for theirexcellent performance.

Mike is a graduate of SouthernIllinois University – Carbondaleand previously worked for TexasInstruments for 21 years. He waselected to the position ofEngineering Fellow in 2001.

P R O F I L E – T h e D D ( X ) T E A M

Distributed Development, Testand IntegrationDistributed development, test and inte-

gration involves creating a shared virtual

infrastructure that allows both Raytheon

and non-Raytheon sites around the country

to build and test various software and

hardware components of the DD(X) system

in a simulated environment, which mimics

the system that will go out to sea. Never

before has Raytheon developed this kind of

technology on so grand a scale as on the

DD(X) program. This infrastructure can be

achieved by having a solid, classified com-

munication mechanism across all sites. As

various system tests are run, people online

at different sites monitor the tests and

provide real-time data that helps in trou-

bleshooting problems as they arise, thereby

helping to accelerate the integration

process.

DD(X) will incorporate seven major soft-

ware builds beginning this year. The goal is,

through a distributed test network, to inte-

grate these software builds from each of

the different development sites into a single

system build and then run system tests

against that build. What’s innovative about

this approach is that rather than bringing a

large group of people together for a large

software integration activity, few people are

actually required to come together at any

one site. Development and integration

teams can take advantage of the distributed

infrastructure and collaborative environ-

ment to shorten the integration process,

saving both travel time and time away from

ongoing development efforts.

One of the technologies being explored on

the DD(X) program is the use of data com-

pression to establish an infrastructure that

will effectively support classified data trans-

mission throughout the DD(X) network,

including communications between the

simulation and shipboard infrastructures.

Data compression is very sensitive to the

kind of data traffic that will flow through-

Continued on page 10

Brian Wells

is the System EngineeringDirector for DD(X). His previouslyheld positions include managerof Systems Design Laboratory,manager of Patriot SystemsEngineering and manager ofMissile Concept and DesignDepartment. “All of these posi-tions have been exciting, butDD(X) is one of the most chal-lenging weapons systems everdeveloped. Each day I face newand ever-changing dynamic situ-ations that require innovativeengineering solutions. Six Sigmahas been used extensively in thisgroundbreaking initiative,” said Brian.

This fast-paced program requiresgreat flexibility and talent fromall its team members.

“One day we are designingworkspaces for our team, andthe next we are figuring outhow to integrate the VTUAV(Vertical Take-off UnmannedAerial Vehicle) into the ship. I am continually on teleconswith team members all acrossthe country. This is the mostcomplex program that I’ve ever worked on and it trulydemonstrates a real one company initiative.”

Team members hail from suchfar away sites as: Pascagoula,Mississippi; Washington, D.C.;Newport News, Virginia;Portsmouth, Rhode Island; andSudbury and Marlboro,Massachusetts. “Our biggestchallenge is fact gathering. Oncewe have all the facts on the

table, everyone has an easy time of deciding which way togo in a design area. RaytheonSix Sigma is playing a crucialrole, as is CMMI. We are continually improving ourprocesses and have a goal inplace to reach CMMI Level 3within the next year.”

Brian joined Raytheon in 1976after receiving his Bachelor ofScience in electrical engineeringfrom Bucknell University andMaster of Science in electricalengineering from the Universityof Illinois.

Tommy Wong

is the Software/Total ShipComputing Environment(SW/TSCE) Segment DeputyManager on DD(X). He hasspent a large portion of his 17-year career at Raytheon onthe PATRIOT program. He heldincreasingly responsible positionsas Firmware Design TaskManager and Missile SystemsDivision Lead Engineer for thePATRIOT Communication Upgradeprogram prior to working on thewinning DD(X) proposal.

When asked about the Patriot Upgrade work, Tommy’senthusiasm shows. “Thisupgrade was used in the

P R O F I L E – T h e D D ( X ) T E A M

10 summer 2003

out the 21-site network currently in devel-

opment. Risk reduction exercises and tests

will be conducted throughout the summer

to show just how effective this kind of

compression technology is with the kind of

data that’s being shipped around, in addi-

tion to it’s ability to minimize the amount

of bandwidth needed to support a real-

time, distributed test.

Initially used as a software-testing platform,

the distributed test infrastructure will ulti-

mately be used to test hardware as well.

With a major combat system integration

facility in Portsmouth that will be connected

to hardware assets, both in Portsmouth and

other sites around the country, true hardware

integration and testing can be performed via

the distributed network prior to shipping it to

the shipyards in Bath and Pascagoula.

Another distinct advantage of having a dis-

tributed development and test environment

is the way DD(X) is able to use “Doors”

software to capture program requirements

and share them across a national team.

This data sharing or integrated data envi-

ronment (IDE), is going to be deployed

across 60 sites by the DD(X) prime contrac-

tor, Northrop Grumman. The Tewksbury,

MA facility will be the development site for

the requirements and software databases

that tie into this environment. ■

– Frank Zupancic

DD(X) (continued)

Gulf war. It is so gratifying to know thatwhat we designed at Raytheon saved lives during the war by giving our soldierscapability that they didn’t have previously,”says Tommy.

Now working on DD(X), Tommy is equallyexcited. “The work is challenging andexciting at the same time. We will be helping our country by designing the next generation ship. It is critical that wedo a good job.”

Tommy cites Raytheon Six Sigma as thevital tool that helps him to do his job. “My philosophy is, you have to use it everyday. I also see communications as beingextremely important. There are so manydifferent development sites and it is such a big program that we need to over-communicate to make sure that weare successful.”

Tommy received his Bachelor of Sciencedegree in computer engineering fromBoston University in 1986. He also tookfollow-up graduate level classes in comput-er engineering. He published two papers in 1998 on PATRIOT Communications thatwere presented at the MilitaryCommunications (MICOM) conference.

summer 2003 11

E x t e r n a l C o m m u n i c a t i o n sExternal Communications (ExComms)is an $80M task within the Command,Control, Communications, andIntelligence (C3I) segment to developthe requirements and concept for theship radio room and the phased arrayantennas. Raytheon will fabricatearrays to populate a prototype deck-house for electromagnetic, radar cross-section, and infrared signature testing.ExComms employs state-of-the-artcomponents in its ship communica-tions architecture, including the anten-nas, radios, baseband equipment, andthe software that controls the commu-nication equipment.

Most of the antennas are flat-panel,phased arrays that conform to the

faces of the ship deckhouse. The combined Extremely High Frequency(EHF)/Global Broadcast System(GBS)/Ka-band receive antenna and theEHF transmit antenna will use newtechnologies for the radiators andmicrowave circuit card assemblies(MCCAs) that comprise the array ele-ments. An active EHF/Ka band antennais being built to integrate with a full-scale deckhouse that will be used fortesting electromagnetic effects. Thedeckhouse, built by NorthropGrumman, will be integrated with theantenna at Wallops Island, Virginia,where the systems will be tested.These arrays are being designed inTewksbury, Mass. by IntegratedDefense Systems.

Other phased array antennas includethe Cooperative EngagementCapability, X/Ku band data link andUltra High Frequency (UHF) satellitecommunications. In addition, a Multi-Function Mast (MFM) will support several frequencies. SubcontractorHarris is developing the X/Ku antenna.Ball Aerospace is developing the UHFand MFM antennas. These antennasare also included in the deckhouse integration and testing.

The Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS)radios, operating below two gigahertz(GHz), have an open architecture andare software programmable. This newgeneration of radios for this frequencyrange is in development and theRaytheon Network Centric Systems(NCS) Ft. Wayne team plans to bid onthe Navy version of the radio.

Above two GHz, the satellite commu-nications terminals will support high

data rate communications for tacticaland quality of life functions. The quality of life functions provide sailorswith Internet communications such ase-mail to keep in contact with familyand friends while deployed. The otherterminals communicate using militarysatellite payloads that support Milstar,Ka band and the Global BroadcastSystem (GBS) to support the DD(X)mission.

The Navy requires extensive automa-tion to reduce the ship’s crew.Software monitors and controls heterogeneous equipment, including a radio frequency (RF) switch, satellitecommunication terminals, radios, information security equipment, andbaseband switches and routers. Theamount and type of control is basedon a set of communication plans that corresponds with ship mission scenarios. The software architecturedevelopment during this phase willtrade off approaches for implementingthe control engine (commercial off-the-shelf, rules-based, command-based, etc.) and the interfaces (Simple Network Control Protocol,Extended Markup Language, client-server, device agents, etc.). This architecture will leverage new tech-nologies to make DD(X) a truly transformational program by discovering solutions that can bereused to upgrade the capabilities of other types of ships. ■

– Ed Wojtaszek

12 summer 2003

The IntegratedUndersea WarfareSystem (IUSW) provides DD(X) withundersea domi-nance. Using hull-mounted andtowed acousticsensors operatingover two frequencybands, IUSW inte-grates acoustic,environmental and radar data toaddress the Anti-Submarine Warfare(ASW), In-Stride Mine Avoidance(ISMA) and Torpedo Defense (TD) mis-sions. While IUSW uses the latest insensor and electronic technologies, thegreatest technical challenge is toreduce crew levels for DD(X) whileimproving sonar performance. To meetthis challenge, IUSW uses the openarchitecture of the DD(X) Total ShipComputing Environment (TSCE) toimplement advanced signal processing,using state of the art techniques inautomation, environmental adaptationand human-system interface.

Highly advanced automation is neededto continually search for underseathreats. The large undersea battlespaceand the varied threats require search-ing many acoustic beams over multiplefrequency bands, searching for variousacoustic signatures. Enhancingautomation techniques improves sonarperformance while significantly reduc-ing the number of steps a sonar opera-tor must take to search the oceanenvironment for threats. IUSW incor-porates automated detection, classifi-cation and localization (DCL) for eachacoustic sensor to minimize false

alarms and eliminate false dismissals ofvalid targets. Data fusion automaticallycorrelates acoustic sensors and inte-grates data from non-acoustic sensorsto further enhance localization andclassification performance.

Environmental adaptation dynamicallyadjusts for the ever-changing acousticenvironment in the ocean. These envi-ronmental changes dramatically affectacoustic propagation, and, if notaccounted for, will significantlydegrade sonar performance. IUSWautomatically monitors the ocean’sacoustic conditions and assesses envi-ronmental data. Using acoustic andnon-acoustic sensors to gather infor-mation, IUSW models the surroundingocean environment for acoustic propa-gation, then uses this data to set upthe sonar for optimum performanceand to alert the operator to the cur-rent acoustic scenario.

The Human-System Interface (HSI) pro-vides operators with the informationneeded to respond quickly to acousticevents. An operator must be alerted,

review the sensor information, assessthe situation and take action for eachpotential threat. With the large under-sea battlespace and multiple missions,an operator cannot review all of thedata needed to keep track of theentire battlespace. HSI techniques willreduce the workload for the operators.IUSW uses next-generation sonar dis-plays to provide for mission planning,automated alerts, evaluation tools,intelligent agents and decision aids forthe operator.

Historically, up to ten operators havebeen required to handle all of theIUSW missions – ASW, ISMA and TD.By using state-of-the-art techniques inautomation, environmental adaptationand HSI, IUSW reduces the operationsneeded to conduct these missions by80% while improving sonar perform-ance. These techniques allow twosonar operators to control the entireIUSW suite at peak performance whilesimultaneously responding to demand-ing undersea tactical situations. ■

– Tom McHale

DD(X) (continued)

Conceptual images of the Integrated Undersea Warfare System’s sensor arrays mounted in the DD(X) bowbelow the waterline.

IntegratedUndersea Warfare System

Total Ship Computing Environment(TSCE), which was defined and estab-lished as part of the transformationalvision for DD(X), is a revolutionary con-cept that integrates all of the war-fight-ing and peacetime operations of a sur-face combatant into a common enter-prise computing environment. TheTSCE also extends ashore to encompassthe maintenance, logistics, and trainingfunctions that support the deploymentof the DD(X).

At its core, TSCE defines the computa-tional characteristics of a 21st centurysurface combatant, integrating theCombat System with the Command,Control, Communications andComputers/Intelligence Surveillance andReconnaissance (C4/ISR) functions on acommon resource infrastructure. TheTSCE is an open system, designed tomeet all current and future missionsbased on evolving DD(X) operational

requirements and concepts. The TSCEarchitecture achieves these goalsthrough a combination of strategiesincluding:

• Integration of warfare domains in a multi-dimensional systemwith a common presentation and human interface

• Managed distribution of processing

• System-wide implementation ofstandards-based COTS computingtechnologies

• Integrated system views of functional capabilities

• Adoption of advanced human systems technologies for optimalmanning

• Use of standards for interconnec-tion of and interoperation amongcomponents

• Use of commercial best practicesfor publicly visible services and application programingInterfaces (APIs)

The detailed TSCE can be viewed fromtwo different perspectives. First is thephysical TSCE that includes the process-ing, network, and presentation hard-ware, which are incorporated into theDD(X). This hardware environmenthosts the ship’s functions, forming apool of managed computing resources.Most of these computing resources areCommercial Off The Shelf (COTS) commodities. The second perspectivecomprises the TSCE software, which iswhat really sets DD(X) apart from itspredecessors.

The TSCE software environment is aservice-based architecture where eachelement of the software environment(infrastructure and applications) is treat-ed as a service provider to the system.At the lowest level, a service equates toa single software object that resides in

Continued on page 14

summer 2003 13

The Total Ship Computing Environment integrates all DD(X) warfighting and peacetime operations into a common enterprisecomputing environment.

Total Ship Computing Environment

14 summer 2003

MARK RUSSELLVice President ofEngineering - IDS

DD(X) is a revolution-ary program which willdevelop the next gen-eration surface com-batant ship for the USNavy as well as redefine the way Naval shipand computing systems are architected,developed and produced. The mission areaswithin DD(X) include C4ISR, radar, sonar,mine-hunting, combat control, torpedoes,navigation, advanced air and missiledefense, land attack precision surface-to-surface strike and systems integration. Theentire Engineering organization is proud tohave contributed to this significant contractwin and to be involved in solving complexengineering problems while helping to pro-mote the security of our country.

Raytheon's role is to be the DD(X) systemsintegrator and to design, develop, and testengineering development models for theTotal Ship Computing Environment,Integrated Undersea Warfare, VerticalLaunching System, and Dual Band Radar,and engineer the results of the testing intoa fully integrated DD(X) System Design. The DD(X) integration role employs revolu-tionary development technologies that catapult Raytheon to the forefront ofSystems Engineering and Combat Systemstechnology. The technological advancesachieved will be used to upgrade otherexisting Raytheon programs and open thedoor for new customer solutions

This program provides many challengesacross the engineering disciplines. Whetheryour skills are in system architecture anddesign, software development, mechanicaldesign and advanced materials, modelingand simulation, electrical design or systemintegration and test, there are more thanenough design challenges for everyone. Inaddition to these engineering disciplinesthat have a long and distinguished historyat Raytheon, design of the DD(X) is driving

DD(X) (continued)

Total Ship Computing Environment

Continued from page 13

the TSCE. TSCE software servicespopulate all of the hardwareresources that make up the TSCEphysical environment. An applicationcan reside in a ship’s data center,shore site, or a remote access devicesuch as a PDA. The location makesno difference, as long as the deviceprovides the necessary computingresources. Services are deployed tothe TSCE, locate each other throughlookup and discovery mechanisms,and are assimilated into the softwareenvironment as peers in the servicecommunity. The vision is that servicescan join and leave the TSCE as themission requirements of the systemchange. More importantly, the systemhas the ability to move servicesdynamically when a failure or casualtyoccurs, yielding the maximum systemreliability, scalability and availability in a dynamic changing computingenvironment.

The DD(X) open standards-basedapproach to the TSCE detaches applications from hardware and software, eradicates rigid weapon-sensor pairings, and eliminates theneed for independently managed tactical software programs. DD(X),through the TSCE, is establishing the framework for the entire surfaceNavy as part of its Open Architecture(OA) initiative. Raytheon is also look-ing to extend the TSCE concept to a networked force designated theTotal Grid Computing Environment(TGCE) in support of the Navy’sFORCEnet vision. ■

– Bill Killeavy

Engineering Perspective on DD(X)

Raytheon to make use of object orientedsoftware, open architectures, data fusion,human systems interface, reduced crewsize, and training policies to take fulladvantage of the system automation andimprovements in shipboard processes.

The real value of the DD(X) program cannotbe measured just by the financial value ofthe contract. Raytheon’s number one assetis our people, and our engineers are grow-ing and benefiting from this program.During the execution of our contractualduties, we are accomplishing much morethan just completing milestones. We arelearning and growing individually and as agroup. We are sharing our knowledge andexperiences with others as mentors. We arestepping into challenging positions of sig-nificant authority and responsibility. We arerepeatedly interacting with the Navy cus-tomers and building relationships with cus-tomers, suppliers, and industry teammatesupon a solid foundation of integrity andtrust. We employ the best process method-ologies in the industry, including theCarnegie Mellon Capability MaturityModel® Integration (CMMI®), theIntegrated Product Development System(IPDS), the Earned Value ManagementSystem (EVMS), and R6σ. We are also gain-ing experience as we perform as a systemintegrator of the products developed byother teams and other companies.

The outcome of all this is the growth anddevelopment of individuals who listen,anticipate, respond, and perform today,and will raise the bar for all of our efforts inthe future. In demonstrating dedication toexcellence and developing the best solu-tions, we will attract individuals who wantto join and be part of the team. In total,our Engineering workforce is beingenhanced by our involvement with theDD(X) program.

® Capability Maturity Model and CMMI are registeredin the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office by CarnegieMellon University.

summer 2003 15

DD(X) (continued)

MIKE HOEFFLERVice PresidentDD(X)Increasingly, globalthreats to U.S. interests are multi-faceted and asymmet-

rical, ranging from terrorists to tyrants.Overcoming such threats demands newstrategies, technologies, and capabilities tocarry the battle to any enemy. DD(X)—the U.S. Navy’s next generation surfacecombat ship—will help achieve all of these objectives.

Now being developed by a national team ledby Northrop Grumman and Raytheon, DD(X)represents a major departure in U.S. Navyships. As such, it will serve as the vanguardof an entire new generation of advanced,multi-mission surface combat ships destinedfor the Navy’s 21st century fleet.

The Ultimate Land Attack ShipForemost among DD(X)’s missions is to support Marine and Joint ExpeditionaryForces ashore in the littoral (coastal) envi-ronment. DD(X) will effectively prosecutethese combat missions with continuous,precision gunfire at ranges up to 100 miles and land-attack missiles at evengreater distances.

A Stealthy Hunter-Killer Prowling the seas, DD(X) will be a fast,heavily-armed hunter-killer ship, bearing themost sophisticated suite of radar, sonar,command, control, communications, andintelligence, stealth technologies, and war-fighting systems ever assembled in oneship. So equipped, DD(X) will seek out anddestroy—or, if necessary, circumvent—anythreat, including surface ships, submarines,aircraft, mines, coastal gunfire, and missiles.

The Smartest Ship AfloatDD(X) will simplify war campaign and battlemanagement activities by integrating itsown vast array of enterprise-computingresources with those of every otherseaborne, land-based, airborne, and space-based asset of the joint services. DD(X) willassess, manage, and act on any threatfaster and more efficiently than any othership in history.

A Self-Aware Problem SolverDD(X) will automatically anticipate andresolve systemic problems due to battledamage or normal wear and tear. If some-thing vital shuts down, DD(X) will automati-cally analyze the problem and reconfigureitself to restore operations. In case of battledamage, damage control procedures, suchas fire suppression, will also occur automati-cally. In fact, DD(X) will be so automated,that it will require only one-third as manycrewmembers as current destroyers.

A Top Performer on the WaterDD(X) will be vastly different in look,design, construction, and function than anyprevious naval ship. Below the waterline, ahigh-performance, wave-piercing hull willslip quickly and easily through the waterwith a minimal wake. Above the waterline,a tumble home hull; sloped, low reflectancesurfaces; and an unobstructed superstruc-ture will minimize DD(X)’s radar signatureand befuddle any opponent. A fully-inte-grated electrical power system will driveDD(X) swiftly and silently and, at the sametime, generate enough electricity to run allon-board systems, including futuristicweapons yet to be designed.

A Tough SurvivorDD(X) will be unrivaled in survivability. Itsinherent toughness will let it carry out itsmission, sustain and protect its crew, and bringthem safely home when the mission is done.

The Bottom LineAll key DD(X) technologies are now in anadvanced state of development. WhenDD(X) sets sail, its acquisition costs willcompare favorably to those of current gen-eration destroyers. Lifecycle costs will besignificantly less due to DD(X)’s reliability,fuel efficiency, smaller crew, lower mainte-nance, and easier support. Over the longterm, DD(X) will prove itself a very soundinvestment for America—one that will playa leading role keeping us all safer throughmost of the 21st century.

From Raytheon’s perspective as lead systemsintegrator for the entire ship, the DD(X)program is full of exciting and challengingopportunities, and we want to attract thebest talent in the industry. Likewise, wewant DD(X) to be a ship on which the menand women of the Navy will want to serve.

Leadership Perspective on DD(X)

DD(X) Overview – Where We are Today

Continued from page 5

of the various electronic systemsbefore installation on the actual ships.

These developments will occur whilethe Navy moves ahead with otherderivative elements of the DD(X) family of ships: the Littoral CombatShip (LCS), the next-generation cruiserCG(X) and the next-generation aircraftcarrier CVN21. Technologies devel-oped for the DD(X) will be found onall major new naval ship design and construction projects through the end of the century.

The U.S. Navy is committed to theDD(X) program. The current planshows funding for the first ship’s con-struction beginning in 2005, with oneeach in fiscal years 2006 and 2007,two in 2008, and three in 2009. Thefirst completed DD(X) will be launchedand join the fleet in 2011.

DD(X) provides challenging and excit-ing work for Raytheon employees, andthe company fully understands theimportance of performance excellenceon the program. As a key member ofthe DD(X) national team, Raytheonenthusiastically looks forward to theday when this transformational ship—capable of defending U.S. interestseffectively around the globe well intothis century—first ventures out ontothe world’s seas. ■

– Chuck Larrabee, Gary Wolfe

MMIC chip technology at Raytheon is a

means to an end and not an end product

itself. Raytheon is designing advanced radar

and communications systems for use in

government applications and the extent to

which the performance of these systems

can be enhanced by solid state chip tech-

nology is Raytheon RF Components’ pri-

mary interest. The most compelling use of

solid state devices in Raytheon systems

occurs in large phased array radars. These

systems use, in many cases, thousands of

transmit receive channels in order to generate

and receive radar signals.

Raytheon built the

first solid state active

aperture phased array

in 1976, the Pave

Paws ballistic missile

early warning system.

Four of these systems

were built and fielded

originally, and subsequently BMEWS sys-

tems were upgraded with the same solid

state technology. Starting from this base of

phased array system technology, Raytheon

has grown to be the single most important

provider of such systems for

the government.

In the early 1990s, Raytheon built the

ground-based radar (GBR) for the U.S.

Army which serves as the basis for all

theater missile defense systems at the

present time. The Theater High Altitude

Air Defense (THAAD) is the present version,

which is now in the EMD phase. When the

current three EMD radar systems are built,

production of eleven subsequent tactically

deployable radar systems will start. In the

late 1990s, Raytheon won the contract to

build SPY-3, the Navy's modern approach

to shipboard self-defense. This system will

also use active transmit/receive modules to

transmit and receive radar signals of all

types. The chronology of Raytheon solid

state radar systems, starting with PAVE

PAWS and culminating in the artist’s sketch

of the Marine Corps Affordable GBR mobile

radar is shown in Figure 1.

In the late 1990's, Raytheon joined forces

with groups formerly belonging to Texas

Instruments in Dallas, Texas and Hughes

Aircraft Company in El Segundo, California.

These units added capability in airborne

phased array systems to Raytheon's

repertoire. The F-22 and F-18 radar systems

represent significant steps forward in terms

of functionality for airborne fire control and

multifunction systems. At the current time,

Raytheon is the leading supplier in the

world of solid state phased array systems,

based on the experience gleaned over the

last 20 plus years of activity.

Much of the solid state phased array busi-

ness depends on being able to utilize state-

of-the-art solid state components, particu-

larly in the areas of microwave and millime-

ter-wave integrated circuits. Phased array

systems, in particular, require significant

power output coupled with exceptional

efficiency in the transmit mode. They also

require relatively low noise figure in the

receive mode. This functionality is provided

by gallium arsenide (GaAs) monolithic

microwave integrated circuits (MMICs) at

the present time.

From a physical standpoint, microwave and

millimeter wave chips are completely

different from CMOS digital chips. As

currently done in Raytheon and the

industry, millimeter-wave and microwave

chips require advanced epitaxial structures

coupled with fine-line lithography in order

to achieve useful characteristics. Modern

gallium arsenide field effect transistors are

typically built on epitaxial substrates using

many layers, some as small as a single

molecule in thickness. These layers are

band-gap engineered to provide precise

characteristics in terms of sheet charge and

semiconductor mobility. Through tailoring

of layer structure characteristics, the

characteristics of the ultimate device made

on the wafer can be tailored.

Epitaxial structures are used to contain

mobile carriers in a portion of the device

called the channel. Control over these

mobile carriers is provided by a Schottky

gate structure. In general, the layer thick-

nesses used in epitaxial structures for

advanced millimeter wave devices are

measured in Angstroms, a fundamental

measurement unit for the wavelength of

light. A typical channel for pseudomorphic

high electron mobility transistors (PHEMT) is

135 Angstroms thick. Some of the layers of

the super-lattice buffer used in such devices

are as thin as 15 Angstroms. When sub-

micron geometry’s are discussed, that is the

designation given to the control element

that modulates the flow of carriers moving

through the channel at a given time. In

order to do this quickly; the time carriers

MMIC Chip Technology at Raytheon

PAVE PAWS/BMEWS (1976)

THAAD (1992)

SPY-3 (2001)

AGBR/MRRS (2003)

Figure 1. Legacy Raytheon Solid State PhasedArray Radar Systems

16 summer 2003

summer 2003 17

take to transit the channel region must be

limited sharply. This leads to the conclusion

that short channel gates are required for

microwave and millimeter wave devices.

Gate lengths on the order of 0.5 microns

are used for devices at X-band, and gate

lengths of as little as 80 nanometers are

used for millimeter-wave devices useful at

W-band. Scanning electron microscope

photos of microwave gate sections are

shown in Figures 2a and b. Figure 2a shows

a typical tee-gate structure. Figure 2b

shows a close up of the channel structure

and the bottom of the tee-gate. The neces-

sity to fabricate features on this scale places

severe stress on the equipment that must

be used to fabricate such devices. Present

processing equipment relies heavily on

e-beam lithography in order to provide

quarter-micron and shorter gate structures.

Microwave and millimeter-wave chip

technology is very definitely a niche market.

Large-scale semiconductor fabrication facili-

ties to make advanced CMOS devices typi-

cally cost in the region of five billion to

build and bring on-line. This is obviously

not an investment that a company like

Raytheon would make just to support the

relatively modest quantities involved in

government phased array systems.

Therefore, companies like Raytheon walk a

fine line between being able to provide

state of the art capability while trying to

keep costs in line with making affordable

T/R modules.

Equipment such as the e-beam lithography

tool is very expensive to procure as well as

expensive to operate and maintain. This,

however, is almost an entry-level for mak-

ing state of the art millimeter and

microwave devices at the present time.

Raytheon RF Components (RRFC), part

of the Integrated Defense Systems (IDS)

business, is presently the Raytheon facility

for providing state-of-the-art microwave

and millimeter-wave components for use in

Raytheon systems. This facility, located in

Andover, Massachusetts is capable of pro-

ducing as many as 7,500 four-inch gallium

arsenide wafers annually. At full capacity,

this facility is capable of providing T/R

module chip sets to programs for approxi-

mately $100 per channel, depending on

functionality quantities, and particular spec-

ifications. At this price point, the T/R mod-

ule GaAs MMICs are considered relatively

affordable in view of the functionality they

provide to the system.

Due to the nature of Raytheon's primary

defense business, a facility such as RRFC

must continually be reinventing its technol-

ogy to remain state-of-the-art and stay

ahead of the competition. Program wins are

heavily dependent on the ability to provide

advanced capabilities in the semiconductor

electronics going into phased arrays. When

Raytheon won the GBR program in 1991,

gallium arsenide metal semiconductor field

effect transistor (MESFET) devices were con-

sidered the current state of the art. During

that time, Raytheon was developing PHEMT

technology. The use of PHEMT technology

allowed Raytheon to offer the Army cus-

tomer substantial improvement in system

sensitivity at no increase in cost. Figure 3

shows a roadmap of the technologies that

have been developed and that are under

development at RRFC.

Figure 2a. Tee-gate pHEMT Section

Figure 2b. Tee-gate pHEMT Close-up TEM

Figure 3. Roadmap of Process Development at RRFC

300 nm

Starting in the early 1990’s with MESFET,

RRFC has migrated to virtually all PHEMT

for its present production. While PHEMT is

the present production process, RRFC has

been developing an advanced process

called metamorphic, or MHEMT. Figure 4

shows a comparison of PHEMT, indium

phosphide (InP) and MHEMT material struc-

tures. InP devices get their outstanding

electrical properties from the high percent-

age of indium (>50%) in the channel.

Typical PHEMT devices are limited to about

20% indium. The MHEMT device uses a

graded buffer layer to compensate the

strain caused by different lattice constants

between a high indium content channel

and a GaAs substrate. The result is a device

with indium phosphide performance on a

low-cost GaAs wafer. The performance of a

3-stage K-band LNA is shown in Figure 5.

Raytheon is currently in the final throes of

bringing its metamorphic HEMT or MHEMT

technology to production status. The use of

an MHEMT device allows low noise ampli-

fiers to have approximately 0.5 dB less

noise figure at X-band than their PHEMT

counterparts. This improvement in noise

figure translates directly to improvement

in receiver sensitivity, which can improve

range and detectability for a given phased

array system.

Even as the MHEMT device is being

brought into production, RRFC is working

on the next generation of device for use in

major systems in the 2010 time period.

Figure 6 shows a multifunction circuit that

integrates digital circuitry with microwave

circuitry on the same wafer. This process,

called E/DpHEMT, uses multiple etch stops

to set the depth of gates for enhancement

and depletion mode FET devices. The

resulting MMIC chips can integrate several

disparate functions onto the same piece of

GaAs, greatly reducing the parts count and

assembly touch labor at the T/R module

assembly level. A type of device that is even

farther out in development time is the

gallium nitride device shown in Figure 7.

This new type of device will use different

materials other than gallium arsenide and

will be what is known as a wide band gap

semiconductor. Wide band gap semicon-

ductor devices can support much higher

bias voltages than GaAs and therefore are

capable of delivering much higher transmit

levels than present devices.

Raytheon RF Components continues today

to develop the technologies needed for

future defense systems built by Raytheon.

Using the semiconductor devices developed

at RRFC, Raytheon has the technology

capability to go from chips to ships.

- David Laighton

Figure 4. Comparison of PHEMT, MHEMT and InP Materials

Figure 6. E/D pHEMT Multifunction chip

Figure 5. Measured Results on 3-Stage MHEMT LNA

MicrowaveCircuitry

AT25 pHEMT attenuator with digital control logic

Digital Circuitry 50%area reduction possibleusing E/D pHEMT

Figure 7. GaN HEMT Device

300 Å i-Al0.2Ga0.8N

i-AlGaN Spacer

0.3 µm i-GaN

0.1 µm AlN Buffer

SiC Substrate

high thermal conductivityhigh power handling

large bandgaplarge critical fieldhigh breakdown voltagehigh voltage operation

high saturation velocityhigh drain current

18 summer 2003

CHIP TECHNOLOGY (continued)

summer 2003 19

During 2003, Raytheon businesses are

making their integrated product develop-

ment processes compliant with the CMMI®

model requirements. CMMI is a joint

DoD/Industry project that provides a single

integrated framework for improving

processes in organizations that span several

disciplines (software and systems engineer-

ing, supply chain, program management,

etc.). Recently several Raytheon businesses

successfully passed independently-led

CMMI appraisals. Jerry Charlow from IDS

and Ann Turner from IIS, with their teams,

led their sites and organizations to the first

CMMI Level 3 appraisals.

IDS The IDS strategy to achieving CMMI com-

pliance was to leverage off existing

processes and architecture to demonstrate

institutionalization. From this strategy, two

independent teams were formed with Jerry

Charlow as the common program manag-

er. Each team underwent a formal appraisal

and successfully achieved CMMI Level 3 in

June 2003. This success resulted in IDS

becoming compliant across its business,

covering the following sites: Tewksbury,

Andover, Portsmouth, San Diego, Bedford,

Sudbury, and Huntsville. The scope of the

model used by IDS was the CMMI Systems

& Software Engineering Level 3 Model,

Staged Representation.

The IDS CMMI team, which consisted of a

wide array of disciplines, began their CMMI

planning in 2000, leveraging from the

existing software CMM capability and

maturity. The general approach for IDS was

to use the Raytheon Standard IPDS for its

procedures, processes, and enablers and

augment it with local process assets to fill

CMMI compliance gaps. In addition, an

enterprise viewpoint was used whereby in

many cases only one process asset or

training course was created for all disci-

plines (e.g.; Risk Management Plan,

Decision Analysis & Resolution Course,

etc.). This approach was significant in

doing the “I” part of CMMI, integrating

the teams/programs to look at one

plan/process and speak the same language.

This was clearly an enterprise approach

involving the following disciplines: Systems

Engineering, Software Engineering,

Program Management, Quality, Supply

Chain Management, Configuration & Data

Management, Human Resources, etc. The

programs that were part of this activity,

XBR, THAAD Radar, CCS MK2, AQS-20,

LPD-18, and CAC2S, were superb in

their support.

The benefits of institutionalizing the

process are countless. The integration of

systems and software engineering disci-

plines, the involvement of Quality to

objectively evaluate processes and ensure

their implementation, the involvement and

knowledge gained by the program offices

toward process improvement, the impor-

tance placed on training people to do their

jobs more efficiently and a general aware-

ness across the enterprise of what CMMI

is and why it is important are just a few

of these benefits.

The future of process maturity for IDS is to

integrate legacy business processes and

architectures into one common set and

implement a plan to achieve CMMI Level 4

& 5 in SE, SW, IPPD, & SS, the full extent of

the CMMI Model.

President of IDS, Dan Smith had the follow-

ing words on CMMI.“This great achieve-

ment of CMMI Level 3 demonstrates the

power and effectiveness of small focused

multi-discipline teams operating with a

common mission, specific focus, and an

ownership of success. CMMI Level 3 also

certifies the strong systems and software

engineering process embedded in

Raytheon’s IPDS and most importantly ties

to disciplined program management

required to successfully provide superior

solutions to our customers in full and open

partnership.”

IIS Garland

Intelligence and Information Systems

at Garland, Texas attained a Maturity

Level 3 rating for Systems and Software

Engineering using the staged representa-

tion of the CMMI model. The Level 3

rating was the result of a two-year effort

by the site and an independent appraisal

led by Rick Barbour from the SEISM. During

a three-week period, the appraisal team,

which included two customer representa-

tives, reviewed over 6500 pieces of

objective evidence and interviewed 95

people in 23 interviews. The focus pro-

grams for this appraisal were IDS-D,

MIND, and Viceroy. The appraisal team

identified best practices in program

management, measurement and analysis,

and supply chain management.

This achievement follows a long history of

process improvements at the Garland site.

Continued on page 20

Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI)

ACCOMPLISHMENTS

SMSEI is a service mark of Carnegie Mellon University.

®CMMI is registered in the U.S. Patent and TrademarkOffice by Carnegie Mellon University.

20 summer 2003

CMMI (continued)

CMMI Achievements

Continued from page 19

The approach to deploying CMMI leveraged

heavily on the Garland site’s extensive use

of IPDS, supplemented by local process

requirements documentation for critical

processes such as software, systems,

program management, quality, and supply

chain. The strategy was to manage the

CMMI effort as a program using IPDS.

Requirements were identified from gap

analysis in each process area and process

action teams were formed to respond to

the gaps. A schedule was established and

variances to the schedule were reviewed

weekly. Senior management reviewed

progress and issues monthly. Process

improvements resulting from the use of the

SW CMM, EIA-731, and CMMI led to a

42% drop in rework costs over several

years. This translates into significant cost

savings and increased award fees. “These

documented processes provide effective

tools for project management, and in turn

will reduce development risks, enabling on

time delivery of quality products to our cus-

tomers,” said David Terrell, Viceroy program

manager. The focus on CMMI has brought

together previously separate discipline

approaches based on different process

models. An enterprise approach to CMMI

was the key to success. “Strong manage-

ment support led to critical alignment in

organizational processes and their associat-

ed behaviors. Integration must occur at all

levels of the organization to produce the

desired impact on program success.”

So, what is next for Garland? "We are

proud of this accomplishment” said Mike

Keebaugh, IIS president, “but we must not

rest on our laurels. Achieving the CMMI 3

rating is not an end in itself. Our competi-

tors are also hot on the trail of CMMI levels

above 3. The customers in our markets are

already expecting that their potential part-

ners will be CMMI 3 or above. So, simply

having the rating will soon no longer be a

discriminator. We must use all the process

tools and best practices available to us so

that we can reach our goal of becoming

the No. 1 intelligence and information solu-

tions provider."

– Jerry Charlow, Dan Nash, Ann Turner

PROCESS AND TOOLSNOONTIME SEMINARSERIES

What’s going on in the world ofRaytheon process and tools? Findout by attending the RaytheonEngineering Common Program(RECP) sponsored Process and ToolsNoontime Seminar series, right fromyour desktop. The seminars are bothinsightful and interactive. Hosted livetwice per month on Thursdays from12:00-1:00pm and again from 2:30-3:30pm (EDT), guests from all overthe country present a variety of top-ics that give the viewer a “sneakpeek” into what processes and toolsare being integrated into our work-ing culture throughout Raytheon’sbusinesses. At the end of each pres-entation, viewers are encouraged tosubmit their questions via the semi-nar’s feedback tool for a liveresponse from the presenter.

The seminars are presented via livewebcasts that can be accessed fromthe following URL: http://home.ray.com/rayeng/news/ptsem.html. The presentations are also recorded foron-demand viewing at a later time.If you are interested in presenting a topic for a future seminar, contact Lee Ann Sousa by phone(508) 490-3018 or e-mailLeeann_Sousa@raytheon.com.

1

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0

* Data sample not statistically significant for 1998 and 2000

IIS Garland Rework Improvement

1995 1996 1997 1999* 2001 2002

Nor

mal

ized

Rew

ork

Hour

s Ex

pend

ed

summer 2003 21

DESIGN FOR S IX S IGMA - PREDICT AND PERFORM – DRIVE WASTE OUT

Design For Six Sigma (DFSS) is a

subset of Raytheon Six Sigma

focused on product design. It

involves creating the appropriate

balance between affordability,

product performance and pro-

ducibility to maximize Customer

Value and Raytheon’s profitability.

In order to create this balance, we

must have a good understanding

of each component. Through

DFSS, we can predict, model and

control the variability of these

components during product design

and development.

DFSS is not a process in and of itself.

DFSS is embedded in our design process,

IPDS. It helps us to optimize the elements

of IPDS Stages 1, 3, 4 & 5. These are the

stages that lead us through product design

and development. Stage 2, Project

Management, Planning and Control is

focused on Program Management and not

directly on the design of the deliverable.

We use other R6σ tools and techniques,

such as Critical Chain, to optimize Stage 2.

Stage 6, Production and Development and

Stage 7, Operations and Support are

focused on post-design activities. Again,

we use R6σ to optimize these Stages. Let’s

take a closer look at Stages 1, 3, 4 & 5.

Stage 1: Business Strategy Execution

At first glance, you might ask yourself why

DFSS is included in Stage 1. Business

Strategy Execution is focused on proposal

and capture. However, most of you will

agree that the majority of the time, the

design concept, and maybe even key ele-

ments of the design, are locked in at the

time of capture. As engineers, do we have

a true understanding of our customer’s

needs as we move from proposal/capture

into requirements and architecture develop-

ment? It is imperative to involve our sys-

tems architects very early in the IPDS cycle

to clearly understand customer needs if we

are to properly translate these needs into

performance requirements and begin the

allocation process.

We begin to use DFSS in Business Strategy

Execution to optimize 1-02, Program

Capture/Proposal Development. We start

with Customer Centric Thinking. We use

these concepts to truly understand the cus-

tomer needs, define customer requirements

that will fulfill these needs and understand

and manage customer perceptions. Quality

Function Deployment (QFD) is a great tool

to use for customer requirements. Critical

Parameter Management (CPM) provides the

linkage between our customer require-

ments and performance requirements. As

we explore different design concepts, we

can use other DFSS tools such as TRIZ and

affinity diagrams/KJ Analysis. We can also

start exploring re-use options through

benchmarking across Raytheon businesses

and industry.

This should leave us with a very clear

understanding of our customer’s needs

as we move into Requirements and

Architecture Development.

Stage 3: Requirements and

Architecture Development

This is where the heart of Design For Six

Sigma resides. The soul is in Stage 1, the

heart is in Stage 3. As we begin to develop

the system architecture, the Program

Systems engineer would use DFSS to begin

statistical requirements analysis. This entails,

building models, characterizing and opti-

mizing the input variables, determining the

impact that the inputs and their variation

have on the system, analyzing the outputs

and allocate variability. DFSS brings statisti-

cal analysis into the picture and allows us

to predict the performance of our system.

But do we have time for this? Let’s see…

At the core of every design is a model.

That’s what engineers do. Building models

is the most time-consuming element of sta-

tistical requirements analysis; and now we

have a way to optimize these efforts. (DFSS

helps us optimize the remaining steps.)

Engineers know the input and response

variables. By using statistical methods to

characterize those input variables that

introduce variation, we are able to optimize

the input much more effectively, explore

more design options and make selections

with a greater level of confidence. Without

statistical models of the input variables,

how can we really understand the

response? We cannot. So let us re-ask the

question. Do we have the time NOT to do

DFSS? NO!

Continued on page 22

“DFSS is grounded on the pillars of

customer focused marketing—using

customer requirements to drive

performance excellence—building

relationships by understanding our

customer’s needs from the proposal

and capture phase throughout the

total life cycle into operations and

support —listening, being proactive,

providing superior solutions.”

Greg Shelton, Vice President, Engineering, Technology,

Manufacturing and Quality

Design for Six Sigma

Continued from page 21

Here’s an example of applying statistical

design methods to a “problem” that was

identified using a traditional design approach.

Boresight Example:

A traditional worse-case tolerance analysis

indicated that all of the MK-47 sensors

would require a mechanical alignment. Jeff

Gilstrap, a senior system engineer from

NCS, was brought in to do a boresight

analysis. Jeff had recently attended the first

session of the R6σ for Design Practitioner

Track and saw an opportunity to use the

Statistical Design Methods he learned in

class to accomplish the following design

objectives:

• Determine if boresight requirements

could be achieved with hard-mount-

ed cameras and Laser Rangefinder

(LRF)

• Establish the optical and mechanical

parts tolerances required to achieve

boresight requirements.

Jeff constructed a detailed model of the

complete optical system and performed a

Monte Carlo simulation with Six Sigma

manufacturing tolerance distributions (vari-

ability) for all of the optical elements and

mechanical part features. Fabrication

process capabilities were obtained from

PCAT. This model can now be reused or

modified for similar applications. Using the

model and the statistical methods from

DFSS, Jeff was able to verify that:

• Both cameras must be aligned at

assembly due to wide tolerance

ranges

• The LRF could be hard-mounted,

avoiding a costly alignment mecha-

nism and procedure

What if we had used statistical design

methods from the beginning? Do we have

the time NOT to use DFSS? Again, NO!

Another DFSS technique that can be used

to generate preliminary System and Product

Design concepts is TRIZ. TRIZ, a Russian

acronym for Theory of Inventive Problem

Solving, is a philosophy and methodology

for solving technical problems using inven-

tiveness and creativity. TRIZ was developed

by Genrich Altshuller and his colleagues in

the former USSR starting in 1946, and is

now being developed and practiced

throughout the world.

Stages 4 & 5: Detailed Design and

System Integration, Test, Verification

and Validation

The body of DFSS resides in Stages 4 & 5.

The design concepts are defined, require-

ments are clearly understood and have

been allocated and the preliminary designs

are complete. Now it is time for the

detailed design work, with a strong focus

on Producibility and Affordability. We con-

tinue to use the DFSS concepts and tools

that we used in Stages 1 & 3, as appropri-

ate. Other DFSS tools we might consider

are Design For Manufacture and Assembly

(DFMA), Design Of Experiments (DOE),

Process Capability Analysis Tool (PCAT),

Design To Cost (DTC) and Cost As an

Independent Variable (CAIV), Capability

Analysis, Test Optimization, Test Error

Allocation, Combinatorial Design

Methodology, Markov Chains, etc.

It is in Detailed Design and System ITV&V

that we achieve the balance between

Product Performance, Affordability and

Producibility that provides Customer Value

and maximizes our profitability.

I know what you’re thinking, “How on

earth can you possibly expect me to use all

of those tools and design a system in a

reasonable amount of time?!” A common

22 summer 2003

“At it’s heart R6σ is about seeking perfec-

tion, looking current reality in the eye

and then using appropriate tools to close

the gap. R6σ in engineering is no differ-

ent except perfection is defined by cus-

tomer value, in terms of ever aggressive

performance of our products and services.

Taking a facts and data approach, using

predictive tools, to quantifying current

performance levels and then using these

predictive techniques as a part of the

engineering processes, as we strive to

deliver solutions, is R6σ in engineering.”

Jon W. McKenzie, Director Six Sigma Institute

DFSS (continued)

R6σσ in Product Developmentis defined as our ability to predict andperform to our customer requirements,quantify variation and understand thesource of that variation. There are fourareas of interest to our customers andprograms. Program Managers andEngineers must constantly evaluate theseareas and balance with customer value toassure a successful execution of a program.

Product Development Schedule – Ourability to plan and execute that plan inthe development of products and services.

Product Development Cost – Our abilityto predict the cost of the development ofthe products or services and then performto those predictions.

Product Performance – Our ability to predict how our products will performwhen fielded. The prediction is done onkey technical parameters, often driven byidentified risk on the program. Manytimes these predictions are done withModeling and Simulation.

Product Cost – Our ability to predict thecost of the production of a product or theoperational and maintenance cost associ-ated with the product.

Design for Six Sigma specifically refers tothe dimensions of Product Performanceand Product Cost.

The More You Know About DFSS…

References:

“Engineering of Creativity:Introduction to TRIZ Methodology ofInventive Problem Solving”, SemyonSavransky, CRC Press LCC, 2002

“And Suddenly the Inventor Appeared”,Genrich Altshuller, TechnicalInnovation Center, 1996, 2nd ed.

“Design For Six Sigma”, Creveling,C.M., J.L. Slutsky, and D. Antis, Jr.,Prentice Hall PTR, 2003

To accept this challange, join theDFSS Community of Practice bycontacting:Lynda Owens l-owens@raytheon.com

Herrick Haenischhaenisch@raytheon.com

DFSS General Information:

R6σσ Institute:Brian Morgan jbmorgan@raytheon.com

IDS: Wayne RisasWayne_E_Risas@raytheon.com

IIS: Karl Arunski arunski@raytheon.com

MS: Lou Vetoe lnveto@raytheon.comDebra HerreraDebra_S_Herrera@raytheon.com

NCS:Lynda Owens l-owens@raytheon.comRichard Johnson r-johnson8@raytheon.com

RAC: Otto Baierleinotto_baierlein@rac.ray.com

RSL Derek RichardsonDerek_R_Richardson@raytheon.com

RTSC: Patty Smithsmithp@indy.raytheon.com

SAS: Nancy Fleischernlfleischer@raytheon.comTim FitzgeraldTim_K_Fitzgerald@raytheon.com

summer 2003 23

misconception is that we have to use all of

the tools. Using all of the tools would take

too long and cost too much. As a design

engineer, you are expected to use the right

tool at the right step of the process to pro-

vide the right amount of balance between

Performance, Affordability and Producibility.

This is a call that only you can make. So

how do you make the right choices?

When choosing the appropriate DFSS tools,

your past experiences will play a huge role.

But knowledge of the toolset that is avail-

able to you is also important. That is where

learning new skills comes in. A Practitioner

Track has been developed to help you inte-

grate R6σ concepts and tools into the

design process.

The R6σ for Design Practitioner Track was

developed for design engineers and R6σExperts that are involved in the design

process. In this session, the participant will

learn about DFSS through discovery of new

concepts, case studies and application

through simulations and exercises. Our

intent is to provide the skills and the con-

text for engineering practitioners to recog-

nize and apply appropriate R6σ tools in

optimizing product design. This is a pull

system, not a push.

The R6σ for Design Practitioner Track is

broken into two sessions. The first session

(four days) focuses on Stages 1 & 3 and on

the systems architects and systems engineers.

The second session (four days) pertains to

detailed design efforts. The first two days

focus on detailed design of the hardware.

The second two days focus on software

design. Systems architects, engineers and

R6σ Experts should plan to participate in all

eight days. Detail designers should plan to

participate in the first session and choose

either the hardware or software piece of

the second session for a total of seven

days. For more information on the Design

For Six Sigma Practitioner Track go to:

http://homext.ray.com/sixsigma and

click on the Six Sigma Practitioner Track

Brochure icon.

Our ultimate challenge as engineers is to

“Predict and Perform”.

R6σ, as deployed today, is very much a

reactive improvement strategy. We find a

problem and resolve it. We have to mature

to a much more proactive approach by

engaging early in the design. Our challenge

is to prevent problems rather than fix them.

Our ability to predict and then perform

against those predictions forms the founda-

tion of design excellence. Are you ready to

accept this challenge?

- Lynda Owens

View Point

DFSS offers several key advan-tages to statistical analysis.

• Better accuracy – use of sim-ulation instead of estimation.Can specify inputs as distribu-tions. Models more closely

represent the real product. Worst caseanalysis typically results in over-design.

• Greater insight – worst case and MRSScalculations yield no statistical data.

• Greater analysis capability – improvedsensitivity analysis, ability to easilychange input parameters and obtainquick results for “what if “ scenarios.

• Greater calculating power – spread-sheet-based analysis tools provide pow-erful and flexible calculation capabilityand more efficient management oflarge amounts of data and calculations.

Jeff Gilstrap, senior principal systems engineer, NCS, Plano, Texas.

NEW CHAIRS FOR TECHNOLOGY NETWORKS

Greg Shelton, vice president of Engineering, Technology, Manufacturing, and Quality, ispleased to announce the following appointments.

Walt Caughey MECHANICAL AND MATERIALS TECHNOLOGY NETWORK (MMTN)

Walt Caughey joins the Leadership team after having served with Integrated Defense Systems in Sudbury,Mass. Before coming to Raytheon, Walt spent many years as an airframe structural engineer at GrummanAerospace, and as a project engineer at Teledyne Materials Research. At Raytheon, Walt has held a variety ofpositions including lead mechanical engineer on the SM-2 Block VA radome development and the SM-3 thirdstage rocket motor (TSRM), lead engineer on the Patriot missile radome and rocket motor, and participant ofthe ME invention disclosure review subcommittee. Walt holds a BSME from Manhattan College and a MSMEfrom Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn.

Randy Conilogue RF SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY NETWORK (RFSTN)

Randy Conilogue, an engineering fellow, joins the Leadership team after having served on the Transmitters,Receivers, Exciters, and Data Link Department and the Radar RF Design Center. His past experience includesover 27 years in project and line management, circuit design, and device characterization. Randy’s past posi-tions have ranged in areas that have developed his expertise in the designing of several high-performance analog and digital ASICs to receiver subsystem design. His achievements have included the awarding of several patents as well as individual achievement awards. Randy received his BS, MS and PhD all in ElectricalEngineering from UCLA.

Kenneth Kung SYSTEMS ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY NETWORK (SETN)

Kenneth Kung, a certified Raytheon Six Sigma Expert, joins the Leadership team after having served as theengineering fellow for Network Centric Systems in Fullerton, Cailf. His expertise encompasses a variety of subjects including information system security, integrity, availability, network communications, front-end systemrequirements and analysis, operational concept definition, and system and software design, development, testand deployment. Kenneth is a valuable asset to the company and has participated in, as well as led, manyimportant projects over the past 25 years, including the awarding of 8 patents. Kenneth received his BS inElectrical Engineering, his MS and PhD in Computer Science, all from UCLA.

NE W SI X S I G M A MA S T E R EX P E RT S

24 summer 2003

In the News

In her newly appointed position with Corporate Engineering, Technology, Manufacturing, and Quality, Mia willreport directly to Greg Shelton as she provides Raytheon Six Sigma support to address urgent issues as well asenhance performance of the operations and quality communities at a systemic level. Mia will remain with theRaytheon Six Sigma Institute, as well, where she will continue to serve as architect for the 2003 Expert curriculum.

Mia has been part of the Raytheon family since 1985 when she began with the former Texas Instruments.Throughout the years Mia has served as a Manufacturing Engineer, Shop Facilitator/Production ControlSupervisor, Continuous Flow Manufacturing (CFM) Consultant, and finally, as a Raytheon Six Sigma Expert.With her exceptional management, problem solving, innovative thinking, leadership and change managementskills, Mia has become a valuable asset to Raytheon and is sure to be a great contributor to the team. Miaholds a BS in Industrial Engineering from the University of Iowa.

Mia McCallumRaytheon Six SigmaMaster Expert

summer 2003 25

New Look forEngineering, Technology,Manufacturing and Quality

The Engineering, Technology, Manufacturing

and Quality Web site has a new look

thanks to a recent makeover. The site

(http://home.ray.com/rayeng/) now includes

spotlight features, improved navigability and

better organization of featured content and

One Company initiatives. The update to the

Web site also includes Manufacturing and

Quality pages.

We will continue to upgrade and improve our

site as well as provide new features in the

coming months. We invite you to visit the

Engineering, Technology, Manufacturing and

Quality site and to share your comments and

suggestion with us using the feedback link on

the left side navigation pod or directly at:

RayEng_Communication@raytheon.com

JOHN RIEFF APPOINTED NEW CHAIR FOR THE SYSTEMS

ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY COUNCIL (SE&TC)

Raytheon Engineering and Technology is pleased to announcethat John Rieff has been named chair, Systems Engineering andTechnology Council (SE&TC).

As the SE&TC Chair, John’s responsibilities will encompass a variety of tasks all aimed at promoting One Company solutionswhile meeting the needs of our customers and businesses. Tasksinclude the coordination and facilitation of the SE Council meet-ings, representing the SE Council on the CMMI Steering Team,

functioning as a liaison between the various business units, and assisting in local SEresources throughout Raytheon that can provide assistance during pursuits and proposalpreparation.

John is the section manager for Systems Engineering Process and Operations for theGarland site, which is part of the Intelligence and Information Systems Business. Johnsupports engineering-wide initiatives related to systems engineering, cost estimation,process improvement, object-oriented technologies, and architecture-based develop-ment. He is one of the co-authors of the Raytheon Enterprise Architecture Process(REAP). John is also a member of the COSYSMO Working Group which is developing aparametric cost estimating model for Systems Engineering as well as a representative onthe INCOSE Corporate Advisory Board.

John received his Bachelor of Science degree from Iowa State University, and his graduate and post-graduate degrees from Iowa State University, University of Iowa, andUniversity of Texas.

John is replacing Dan Dechant who has completed his term. Dan will continue to workas director of the 1000-person, IDS Systems Architecture, Design and IntegrationCenter. He will also continue on the council as the IDS representative.

Please help us in congratulating John in his newly appointed role and in thanking Danfor his dedication and commitment.

Brian will report directly to Greg Shelton in his newly appointed position with Corporate Engineering, Technology, Manufacturing, and Quality. Brian’s duties will be to provideRaytheon Six Sigma support to address urgent issues as well as enhance performance of the operations and quality communities at a systemic level. Additionally, Brian will remainwith the Raytheon Six Sigma Institute where he will continue to oversee the deployment of Design for Six Sigma (DFSS) throughout Raytheon.

Brian has been a devoted employee since 1984 when employed with the former Texas Instruments, at whichtime he began his career as a mechanical design engineer. Throughout the years his experiences have spannedpositions such as design engineer, program manager, and finally as a Raytheon Six Sigma Expert. Before assum-ing his current position, Brian was Program Manager for both the Multi-Spectral Targeting System (MTS-B)development program and the Predator Rapid Reaction Program. Brian holds a BS in Mechanical Engineeringfrom Tulane University.

J. Brian MorganRaytheon Six SigmaMaster Expert

Applying IPDS to the Corporate Relocation Project

26 summer 2003

IPDS best practices

Raytheon’s Integrated Product Development

System (IPDS) is the way we do business,

from strategic planning through operations

and support. The Corporate Relocation

team, under the management of RTSC’s

Sandy Wilk, proved that IPDS can be easily

implemented on an atypical program. The

end result of using IPDS is the same—

predictability—schedule execution as

planned—on time and on budget, while

meeting customer expectations.

In October 2002, Raytheon began construc-

tion of its new Global headquarters in

Waltham, Mass. The new facility is 150,000

square feet and will employ approximately

350 Raytheon headquarters employees. The

completion date for the project is scheduled

for October 27, 2003. The project consists

of managing the construction activities as

well as coordinating the move of employees

from both administrative buildings on the

current Lexington Campus (125 and 141

Spring St.). The first phase of moves was to

vacate and relocate most of the employees

of 125 Spring Street to a renovated portion

of the Waltham East facility, also funded by

this project. The next phase will be to

vacate 141 Spring Street and move into the

newly constructed building at Waltham

Woods in Waltham, Mass.

It was important to achieve success on this

project right from the start. The budget and

schedule were extremely tight and meeting

the needs of the customer was critical. The

contract was complicated with legal terms.

There were two purchase and sale agree-

ments; one for construction of the new

building and one for the sale of the existing

Lexington campus, together with a lease

agreement for the land on which the new

Global headquarters would be built. There

were also state-of-the-art technology

requirements for the facility as well as secu-

rity requirements appropriate for a defense

company.

Like many projects, there were risks that

needed to be managed. The construction

schedule spanned less than a year, which is

very aggressive for construction of an office

building. The current corporate headquar-

ters had been sold and rent was being paid

in Lexington. The project budget was limit-

ed to the money gained from the sale of

the Lexington facility. The building was

being constructed as the headquarters for

the fourth largest defense firm, which

necessitated the inclusion of many security

requirements that are not typical for an

office building.

When the Corporate Relocation project was

kicked off, the decision was made to treat

the project like any other Raytheon program

by implementing IPDS to assure a successful

outcome. Processes and tools, used on

other Raytheon projects, were applied such

as Earned Value Management System

(EVMS) and Risk Management. IPDS was a

new and unfamiliar approach for those

involved in construction projects, including

a program management team, which had

to quickly learn about IPDS. To help imple-

ment IPDS, a deployment specialist was

hired full time for the life cycle of the project.

Initially the product structure for the

Corporate Relocation was determined. This

included constructing a building and mov-

ing. From the product structure, a Work

Breakdown Structure (WBS) was created,

then broken down further into an

Integrated Master Plan (IMP). From this,

details were added to create an Integrated

Master Schedule (IMS). This WBS approach

was also used to track earned value and

provides a consistent structure to track cost

and schedule performance. Figure 1 sum-

marizes the WBS approach.

An Integrated Product Team (IPT), including

representatives from many of headquarters’

functional areas, was formed to address

specific parts of the building. Points of con-

tact for each function were identified to

ensure a smooth transition to the new

headquarters. Figure 2 shows the initial IPT

structure. New IPT’s are created as needed.

An IPDS Gate Plan was developed for the

project, beginning with the Gate 5 Start-Up

meeting. The architect and the construction

project management team were invited to

participate in the development of the

program plan to prepare for the Gate 5

meeting. This plan provided the necessary

summer 2003 27

discipline in setting up the proper project

elements to ensure a successful execution

of the program, including a tailored Gate 5

checklist. In the Start-Up meeting, the

Product WBS, EVMS approach, Risk

Management Process, IMP/IMS and several

other applicable plans for the project were

presented and reviewed. In reviewing the

Gate 5 checklist, the team discovered sever-

al measures that could be applied to help

broaden their understanding of what need-

ed to be accomplished.

Several requirements

reviews were held in

preparation for the

Gate 6 System

Functional review.

Gates 6 and 7 were

combined into a

System Functional/

Preliminary Design

Review and the Gate 8

Critical Design Review

was conducted by reviewing the design in

each room of the building.

In preparation for the move of employees

to Waltham East, a Gate 9 Readiness

Review meeting was

conducted to ensure

that we were ready for

the move. A second

review will be conduct-

ed prior to the move to

the new Waltham

Woods facility.

According to Paul

Simpson, executive

sponsor of the project,

“… no matter the end

product—a radar, a

building, a ship system —having a disci-

plined process like IPDS keeps everyone

focused, and makes the team think through

each step in advance. As long as there is

some kind of end product, and that can

include a service, then IPDS can be applied

as a means of structuring the approach.

It helps you ask the right questions,

although you still have to go find and

then take responsibility for the answers.

It’s like a checklist, and it can work on any

size program.”

Following the IPDS process helped the

Corporate Relocation team create an inte-

grated product and team structure that

merged the EVMS approach and the func-

tional tasks identified in the IMS to achieve

success. By following a disciplined

approach, the team combined all manage-

ment tasks into an organized, structured

format to better execute project goals. This

has resulted in the sustainment of a greater

than 1.0 CPI from the inception of the

project. Figure 3 shows the CPI/SPI trend.

The building was erected amidst a difficult

New England winter and spring season

and is still on schedule for an October 27,

2003 opening.

– Ilene Hill

Figure 2. Corporate Relocation IPT Structure

Figure 1. WBS Approach for the Corporate Relocation Program

Figure 3. CPI/SPI Trend Chart

1.18

1.14

1.1

1.06

1.02

0.98

0.94

0.9

0.86

0.82

0.86 0.88 0.90 0.92 0.94 0.96 0.98 1.00 1.02 1.04 1.06 1.08 1.10 1.12 1.14 1.16 1.18

SPI

Performance Overview

CPI

Behind Schedule and Underspent

Ahead of Schedule and Underspent

Target Area

11/0212/021/035/03 6/03

4/039/02

2/03

10/02

Behind Schedule and Overspent

Ahead of Schedule and Overspent

PROGRAM•Corporate

Relocation

PROJECT•Base Building• Interior Fit-Out•Building

Acceptance•Move•PMO

COMPONENT•Design Plan•Permit/Approval•Build• Furnishings•etc…

TASK•Design development•Construction Documents•Start Construction•Top Out Steel•Purchase Furniture•Plan Alternate Moves•etc…

SUB-TASK•Review Design• Install Misc. Steel• Provide Security Systems•Remove Surplus Partitions•etc…

FUNCTIONAL GROUP•Facilities• IT•Security• Legal•EH&S•etc…

L1.L2.L3.L4.L5.L6

28 summer 2003

Distinguished Level Awards Ceremony

On May 20, 2003, Raytheon’s highest quality honor was bestowed upon five

individuals and ten teams from across Raytheon’s businesses. Awardees

and their guests gathered at the Marriott hotel in Burlington, Mass. to

celebrate their accomplishments with key Raytheon leadership figures.

Dan Burnham, Raytheon chairman and former CEO, and Bill Swanson, president, who suc-ceeded Mr. Burnham as CEO July 1, hosted the evening. After a cocktail reception in thefoyer, the evening’s emcee, Pat Coulter, vice president of communications, Government &Defense, welcomed everyone to the ceremony.

Greg Shelton, vice president of engineering, technology, quality and manufacturing,opened the evening by stating, “One of the big things that I think is important tonight iswe’re honoring the big “Q” — the quality beyond just the quality organization, it’s reallyhonoring quality across our company. Raytheon Six Sigma has been a rallying point for thiscompany for the past 5 years. As you know, we’re also incorporating CMMI to drive higherlevels of achievement in the process control and disciplines of execution across our pro-grams. We’re using IPDS to drive program management, engineering, supply chain, quality,and operations. Many of you receiving the quality award tonight have used Six Sigma inyour processes. Excellence through Six Sigma has become a culture here at Raytheon.”

Gerry Zimmerman, vice president of corporate quality, presented the first 2002 QualityExcellence Award to Dan Burnham, and stated, “For leading the Raytheon Six Sigma culturalrevolution, for relentless pursuit of excellence, and for motivating all of us to look in themirror, and not look up, Dan, I’d like to present you with our first 2002 Quality ExcellenceAward.” Burnham graciously accepted the award, and began his moving keynote address.

“Quality is indivisible, it’s key to everything that we do. Sure, Six Sigma is quality and I’m aSix Sigma guy, but there’s nothing antithetical between quality and six sigma — they aretwo peas in a pod. And I’m talking about quality with that big “Q”.

“What do we want to do next? What we want next is for the quality organization to be anorganization of power, an organization that’s defining excellence for us. Excellence that wecan see, that we can measure, and that we can assess.”

“What a great opportunity (for) those of you in the quality departments — you have ahuge opportunity to drive this company forward. Take full advantage of it. We need tocontinue to develop this culture of quality — not just a set of data but a whole culture thatengages and energizes every single part of the business. Every aspect of the way that weanticipate and respond to the customers’ needs — it’s all part of this seamless web.”

“We take responsibility — we know that this isn’t just a business we’re in; we are a national treasure. We’re a national asset. We make our country a better place to live. Wehave a huge responsibility in this wonderful institution called Raytheon.”

“You’ve put the customers and your teams first, sometimes requiring a lot of sacrifice onyour part. And you’ve worked as One Company, leveraging all of our strengths, providing

summer 2003 29

superior solutions to our customers. Qualitysolutions, quality processes, quality people,reduced costs, increased producibility,improved customer relationships — all ofthis is quality with a big “Q”. It is ourwhole raison d’être; it’s our reason forbeing here. The kind of quality that you’rebeing recognized for is teachable, it’s replic-able, it’s sustainable, and it’s expandable.You’re going to have an obligation toteach, and to show, not to pontificate, butto be Raytheon’s quality leaders, our teach-ers, and our mentors. What a wonderfulrole for you to be in! But what an obliga-tion as well. We are going to be a companythat all the others aspire to be. Thank youto each and every one of you.”

Dan Burnham’s address was well receivedby everyone in attendance. Following theawards presentation, several awardeescommented on the ceremony and thankedthe leadership team for bringing themtogether.

As Sandy Kukurba from Raytheon MissileSystems (RMS) said, “I thought the eventwas just incredible; to be able to be in thesame room with the executive leadershipteam and Dan Burnham and Bill Swanson— it just shows how much quality meansto the company.” Additionally, Matt Kehret,also from RMS, said, “It’s really great to seethat Raytheon is so interested in quality andis dedicated to making sure that theiremployees are committed to quality.”

– Siobhan Lopez

2002 QUALITY EXCELLENCE DISTINGUISHED AWARD WINNERS

Integrated Defense Systems Michael R. Klein (formerly RCE)Performance Excellence CMM Level 4 John McCarthy, Richard Ortiz, Paul Savickas, Edwin Schulz, Robin Shoop

Intelligence & Information Systems IIS Quality Management Team Nancy Crawford, John Matras, Ronald Myers, Christie Porter, Kenneth Wise

Missile Systems Raytheon Multi-Program Cost Model TeamRhonda Feltman, Matt Kehret, Quentin Redman, George Stratton Multi-Product Factory Yield Improvement Team Francisco Castro, Sandy Kukurba, Stephen Malfitano, Henry Molina, Loren Sadler Operations/Engineering Producibility Engagement/Sigma Scorecarding Team Paul Curdo, Lewis Lane, David Lipovsky, Eric Maiden, David Ufford

Network Centric Systems Hope Miller Terry Patterson

Raytheon Aircraft CompanyElectronic Squawk Data Recording Team Jeane Bird, Jeremy Bodecker, Joe Howenstein, Steve Peters, Billy Wilda

Raytheon Systems LimitedAPG65 Hybrid Recovery TeamGerry Curran, Kenny Dalgeish, Harry Millar, Azad Murdochy, Allan Walker

Raytheon Technical Services Company Charles S. Stevens

Space and Airborne Systems Property Contractor Self-Oversight (CSO) William Kanatsky, Jr., James Dobbin, Johnnie Coleman, William Gertsch, Mark Weeks IPDS Gating Team Emily Friedman, Charles Kelly, Jarel Wheaton, Rey Rojo, Adeline Chappell RF Feed Development Team Phillip Richardson, William Fogg, Michael Godfrey, Miguel Arellano, Tee Phelps

Thales Raytheon Systems Johnes Bessent

30 summer 2003

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

April through June 2003.

U.S. Patents Issuedto RaytheonON-LINE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CENTER INAUGURATED

Commenting recently on the company’s future, Corporate Intellectual Propertyand Licensing Vice President Glenn Lenzen predicted that “Raytheon’s leadingtechnological position will be based upon a strong intellectual property portfolioconsisting of patents, trade secrets and know-how.”

A high-technology company that generates cutting-edge products and technolo-gies must be able to identify, protect and leverage its intellectual capital. To helpachieve these goals and to reinforce a One Company philosophy, a Raytheon corporate team led by Lenzen has created a new Raytheon Intellectual PropertyCenter (RIPC) intranet site at http://appus-as02.app.ray.com/rtnipcenter.

The site provides employees with a centralized resource for all kinds of intellectualproperty information. Individuals are strongly urged to use the site to file inven-tion disclosures electronically. The RIPC site also enables users to search Raytheon’sentire IP portfolio.

Another important feature is the Leveraging IP module, which allows users to sub-mit ideas for new technology applications that fall outside of the Company’s coredefense business. The Technology Map module, currently under construction, willlink Raytheon’s intellectual property to key technology areas, and to the variousRaytheon businesses, business units, and geographical locations that are stake-holders in the IP supporting these technologies.

The site also has a number of useful links listed on the left-hand side of the page.These include:

• IP Background, which contains aseries of introductory presentationson subjects such as IP ownershiprights, copyright and patent training.

• Policies and Procedures, a library ofCompany IP policies and procedures,including information regarding theclearance of technical papers for pres-entation or publication and aTechnical Publications ClearanceRequest (TPCR) form, and require-ments and procedures for control ofCompany most private, Raytheon pro-prietary and competition sensitiveinformation. This link will be updatedas revised policies and proceduresbecome available.

• Directories of IP&L staff and members of Patent Evaluation Committees.

This site can answer many frequently asked IP questions and provide easy accessto information. Everyone is encouraged to visit the RIPC and become familiar withthe many resources it has to offer.

– John Moriarty

summer 2003 31

ELVIN C. CHOU JAMES R. SHERMAN 6542048 Suspended transmission line with embedded signal channeling device

JAMES E. BIGGERSKEVIN P. FINNRICHARD A. MCCLAIN, JR.HOMER H. SCHWARTZ, II6542879 Neural network trajectory command controller

ROBERT A. BAILEYCARL P. NICODEMUSBRADY A. PLUMMER6543328 Convertible multipurpose missile launcher

DAVID T. GREYNOLDSWILLIAM E. HUNTVERNON W. MILLERVINCENT A. SIMEONE6543716 Shipboard point defense system and elements therefor

IRL W. SMITH6545563 Digitally controlled monolithic microwave integrated circuits

WAYNE N. ANDERSONANDREW B. FACCIANOPAUL LEHNER6548794 Dissolvable thrust vector control vane

MICHAEL BRANDJAN S. GALLINA6549112 Embedded vertical solenoid inductors forRF high power application

JAMES T. HANSON6549158 Shipboard point defense system and elements therefor

WAYNE ANDERSONJOHN HEROLDKEVIN W. KIRBYANTHONY JANKIEWICZFRANK JUDNICHJOHN J. VAJOCARLOS VALENZUELA6551663 Method for obtaining reduced thermal flux in silicone resin composites

BLAKE G. CROWTHERDEAN B. MCKENNEYSCOTT W. SPARROLDMICHAEL R. WHALENJAMES P. MILLS6552318 Sensor system with rigid-body error correcting element

JAMES P. MILLS6552321 Adaptive spectral imaging device and method

RICHARD W. BURNSDONALD A. CHARLTONTHOMAS M. SHARPE6552626 High power pin diode switch

RAY B. JONESBARRY B. PRUETTJAMES R. SHERMAN6552635 Integrated broadside conductor for suspended transmission line and method

CHARLES L. GOLDSMITHDAVID H. HINZELLLOYD F. LINDER6559530 Method of integrating MEMS device withlow-resistivity silicon substrates

MAURICE J. HALMOS6559932 Synthetic aperture ladar system using incoherent laser pulses

CONRAD STENTON6559948 Method for locating a structure using holograms

JAMES ROBERT WHITTY6560046 Collimator positioning system

SEYMOUR J. ENGELWILLIAM M. FOSTERCLIFTON F. ORCHARDCARROLL D. PHILLIPS6561074 Shipboard point defense system and elements therefor

RONALD M. WALLACE6563450 Shipboard point defense system and elements therefor

KAPRIEL V. KRIKORIANROBERT A. ROSEN6563451 Radar imaging system and method

CHUNGTE W. CHENJOHN E. GUNTHERRONALD G. HEGGWILLIAM B. KING6563638 Wide-angle collimating optical device

CHUNGTE W. CHENRONALD G. HEGGWILLIAM B. KING6563654 External pupil lens system

CLAY E. TOWERY6563975 Method and apparatus for integrating optical fibers with collimating lenses

DELMAR L. BARKERHARRY A. SCHMITTSTEPHEN M. SCHULTZ6567174 Optical accelerometer and its use to measure acceleration

ROBERT W. BYRENDAVID F. ROCKCHENG-CHIH TSAI6567452 System and method for pumping a slab laser

MICHAEL J. KAISERMANMICHAEL T. RODACKARTHUR J. SCHNEIDERWAYNE V. SPATEJENNIFER B. WEESNERSTANTON L. WINETROBE6568330 Modular missile and method of assembly

WILLIAM A. CURTINGEORGE W. SCHIFFARTHUR B. SLATER6568628 Shipboard point defense system and elements therefor

SIDNEY C. CHAOEDNA M. PURERNELSON W. SORBO6569210 Gas jet removal of particulated soil from fabric

JOHN S. ANDERSONGEORGE F. BAKERCHUNGTE W. CHENC THOMAS HASTINGS, JR.6570715 Ultra-wide field of view concentric scan-ning sensor system with a piece-wise focal plane array

EUGENE R. PERESSINI6570902 Laser with gain medium configured to provide an integrated optical pump cavity

STEPHEN E. BENNETTCHRIS E. GESWENDERKEVIN R. GREENWOOD6571715 Boot mechanism for complex projectilebase survival

ROGER WILLARD BALLBRIEN DOUGLAS ROSSROBERT J. SCHOLZ6572327 Method for positioning a cylindrical article

WILLIAM E. HOKEKATERINA HURREBECCA MCTAGGART6573129 Gate electrode formation in double-recessed transistor by two-step etching

PHILIP ANDREW PRUITT6573982 Method and arrangement for compensating for frequency jitter in a laser radar system by utilizing double-sideband chirped modulator/demodulator system

LEON GREENJOSEPH A. PREISS6574021 Reactive combiner for active array radarsystem

CHARLES R. STALLARD6574055 Method and apparatus for effecting a temperature compensation movement

LEONARD W. HOPKINSCHARLES Q. LODIHARRY T. O'CONNOR6575400 Shipboard point defense system and elements therefor

DAVID A. ANSLEY6576891 Gimbaled scanning system and method

MICHAEL JOSEPH DELCHECCOLOJOSEPH S. PLEVAMARK E. RUSSELLH. BARTELD VAN REESWALTER GORDON WOODINGTON,6577269 Radar detection method and apparatus

BRUCE R. BABIN6578491 Externally accessible thermal ground planefor tactical missiles

JEFFREY A. GILSTRAPGARY J. SCHWARTZWILLIAM GERALD WYATT6578625 Method and apparatus for removing heatfrom a plate

DAVID D. CROUCHWILLIAM E. DOLASH6580561 Quasi-optical variable beamsplitter

ERASMO MARTINEZEARL WINTER6581467 Portable gas purge and fill system for nightvision equipment

Raytheon 3rd Joint Systemsand Software EngineeringSymposium– Innovative Solutionsthrough TechnologyEngineering

March 23 –25, 2004Westin Hotel, Los Angeles AirportLos Angeles, Calif.

Sponsored by the Systems & SoftwareEngineering Technology Networks andthe Systems & Software EngineeringCouncils.

The 3rd joint Raytheon Systems & SoftwareEngineering Symposium is devoted to fos-tering increased teaming and collaborationon current developments, capabilities, andfuture directions between Systems &Software Engineering. It is sponsored by theRaytheon Systems & Software EngineeringTechnology Networks and the RaytheonSystems & Software Engineering Councilsand will feature 3 days of presentations,tutorials, panels, and exhibits in all areas relevant to systems and software disciplines.The symposium will provide an excellentopportunity to network with your peers,

and to explore innovative solutions throughtechnology engineering to increase ourfuture competitiveness.

Each day features up to six tracks devotedto the latest in Raytheon technologies with prominent speakers from Raytheonsenior management such as Bill Swanson,Greg Shelton, Peter Pao and others fromindustry and major customer areas to beannounced. A separate track features vendors, Raytheon booths and other associated organizations.

For more information visit the Systems andSoftware Engineering symposium Web siteat http://home.ray.com/rayeng/technetworks/tab6/se_sw2004/index.html

6th Annual Raytheon RF SymposiumCall for Papers Coming Soon

May 2 – 5, 2004Marriott, Long WharfBoston, Mass.

Sponsored by the RF SystemsTechnology Network.

2003 Symposia Successes– The following Raytheonsymposia were successfullyconducted in 2003

Joint Systems and Software Symposium– April 8-10

5th Annual RF Symposium – April 21-24

6th Annual Electro-Optical SystemsSymposium – May 20-22

6th Annual Processing SystemsTechnology Expo – September 9-11

3rd Annual Mechanical and MaterialsEngineering Technology Symposium– October 7-9

Presentations from each symposium areavailable at the following Web site:http://homext.ray.com/rayeng/technetworks/tab5/tab5.htm

The NEW Rotational Engineering Leadership Development Program (RELDP)

Future Events

The first class of five RELDP participants hasbeen selected and started this rotational pro-gram in September. This group will changepositions or “rotate” through at least twobusinesses over the course of this program.They join an existing Engineering LeadershipDevelopment Program (ELDP) that consists ofapproximately 120 participants who typicallydo not rotate positions. George Lynch servesas the program manager for both programs.

The ELDP, a two-year program, waslaunched in 2000. Approximately 60 of ourmost promising engineers are recruited eachyear from within Raytheon to participate inthis program. The RELDP will become a sub-

set of this program. Each RELDP class willeventually consist of 10 engineers with grad-uate degrees who are annually recruited oncampus. This group will have three, eight-month assignments across different Raytheonbusinesses prior to permanent assignment.

Based on his own experiences throughoutvarious Raytheon businesses, Bill Swansonrecognized the rotation process as an invaluable development tool for engineers.The rotational experience will complementthe cross-functional training, leadershipdevelopment, and mentoring that is alreadyprovided in all Leadership DevelopmentPrograms (LDP).

Job rotation is a common practice inLeadership Development Programs atRaytheon. In addition to the RELDP, there aresix other Leadership Development Programswhich provide rotation options for their par-ticipants. The addition of RELDP to the LDPcommunity further supports our goal ofmaking Raytheon One Company.

For more information about the EngineeringLeadership Development Program, go to theELDP home page athttp://home.ray.com/rayeng/eldp/

Copyright © 2003 Raytheon Company. All rights reserved.