Darpa's Smart, Mean, Off-Road Drone

By the time you read this, Carnegie Mellon roboticists and Darpa chieftains will be rolling out their latest mechanical warrior: a six-and-half-ton, six-wheeled unmanned behemoth called Crusher.

Back in October, I took a look at the bot as it was being built, in a restored brick-and-chestnut mill on the banks of Pittsburgh's Allegheny River. Even as an aluminum-titanium skeleton, the machine left an impression -- something that looked ready to chew up all kinds of terrain. The clever, almost leg-like way the wheels attached would allow Crusher (like its predecessor, Carnegie's Spinner robot) to climb steps bigger than four feet, and tackle slopes with a 40 degree grade. In-hub electric motors, powered by a VW Jetta's turbo diesel engine, wouldn't hurt, either.

Carnegie and Darpa will be talking up Crusher's off-road toughness today. And they'll crow about the robot's brains and eyes -- the machine is part of a $35 million, Darpa-backed effort to make robots more autonomous. A few weeks before I visited Pittsburgh, Spinner used eight laser range-finders and four pairs of stereo cameras to help travel 26 miles of tough terrain, completely on its own. Crusher's 18-foot, telescoping mast, packed with sensors, should only make this both more perceptive.

But what today's presenters probably won't talk about much is that Crusher is designed to be mean, too. It's an "unmanned ground combat vehicle," a prototype for the military's next generation of armed robots. Crusher has been equipped with a Rafael Mini-Typhoon gun mount, which holds a "simulated" .50 caliber rifle.

"We’re developing Crusher," Carnegie's John Bares said in a statement, "to show people what can be done and pave the way for the future."

And in that future, the robots can go anywhere, think for themselves, and carry guns.

UPDATE 6:04 PM: Alan Boyle reports on Crusher's "Hollywood-style rollout."

Two Crusher prototypes made their entrance amid music, video and flashing lights — and one of them proceeded over to the center's obstacle course, rolling over wrecked cars and other obstacles... Crusher also demonstrated a tight U-turn maneuver inside a garage.

Tongue = Battlefield Probe?

Ok, ok. I know the topic is a couple of days old. And I know it was mentioned in yesterday's Rapid Fire. When when Jimmy Wu sent in a short post about using tongues to make better sense of the battlefield, well, I couldn't resist.

In Starship Troopers, Robert Heinlein envisioned troopers using their heads and tongues to turn on/off the infrared snoopers, plasma and bomb aiming reticles, moving map overlays, jump jets, etc, of their powered armor suits

The future just got closer, reports the AP.

Researchers at the Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition developed a "Brain Port" that puts 144 electrods on the tongue. The pattern of electrode firing convey information such as sonar returns and compass headings. Michael Zinszer, a diver, described it as "Pop Rocks candies". The research team has built the system for sonar and compasses, and plans to integrate infrared sensors.

This is a logical next step, as the tongue has more nerve endings per inch than most other parts of the skin.

Modern human-machine interfaces are approaching the threshold of information overload. For example, fighter cockpits used to be full of analog gauges and TV screens. It takes a long time for pilots to learn which gauges were important when. Even with the advent of multi-function displays, pilots still struggle with information management. Infantrymen, and maybe a few German infantrywomen, will soon face the same problem. For example, the Land Warrior soldier ensemble gives soldiers outputs from GPS, text and voice comm links, LLTV and IR cameras, and moving map displays. And soldiers still have to contend with the regular inputs from their Mk I, Mod 0 eyeballs and ears.

It will be interesting to see whether the "Brain Port" will allow soldiers to process more information than before. If it will, the brain port will herald a revolution in human information processing. For example, in stock trading, the analysts can "look" at more data and make better decisions. And our soldiers will "see" better than our enemies.

-- Jimmy Wu

Cruise Missiles do Recon?

You can't blame 'em for trying, I guess. Defense contractors want to sell a bigger pile of their gear to the Pentagon. So, from time to time, they come up with all kinds of, shall we say, sub-optimal explanations why their hardware should be used more often. Like jamming IEDs with supersonic fighters. Or delivering commandos with 14,000-ton destroyers.

Here's the latest brainstorm, courtesy of Raytheon: Use Tomahawk cruise missiles to handle reconnaissance. That's right. $750,000-a-shot Tomahawks. Never mind the fact that a Predator drone can handle hundreds of spy missions, for a $4.5 million price tag. (For argument's sake, let's say it costs $45,000 per flight, when you throw in maintenance money and pilot pay.) The Pentagon should spend 750 large for a one-time, one-way unmanned flight.

Now, Tomahawks are certainly faster than Predators -- 528 miles per hour, as opposed to 135. But we've got plenty of fighter jets doing supersonic recon already. And the idea that, somehow, a Tomahawk could be a "cheaper... alternative to unmanned aerial vehicles," as National Defense magazine tries to argue this month? C'mon, guys. I know you've got sales targets to make. But this is taxpayer money here. You need a better explanation than that.

Rapid Fire 04/28/06

* "Dogs Go Where Satellites Can't"

* Secrecy hurting CIA studies

* Ridge in homeland budget shenanigans

* Listen up, Darpa!

* Missile defense radar breaks in four days

* Global info grid gags

* San Clemente Isle's sound wave mystery

* Mad scientists need drugs, quick

* Navy taps Vietnam "river rats"

* "After suffering paralysis, brain damage, lost limbs and other wounds in war, nearly 900 soldiers have been saddled with $1.2 million in government debt because of the military's 'complex, cumbersome' pay system."

(Big ups: DS, NOSI)

Stroke Me, Stroke Me

Oh, this is gonna be good. Ryan Singel, the man behind a zillion data-mining scoops, and cracker-legend-turned-editor Kevin Poulsen have teamed up for a new blog over at Wired News. 27B Stroke 6 (named for Brazil's most famous form) will "scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty, in a daily briefing on security, freedom and privacy in the wired world," according to Poulsen. I can't wait.

So Much for "Force Fields"

A few weeks back, buzz was building, fast, for Trophy, an Israeli "active protection" system that stops rocket-propelled grenades in mid-air. At the Naval Surface Warfare Center, demonstrations of the vehicle-mounted defender a went well, with the Trophy's four radars picking out out RPG threats, and firing a kind of buckshot at the incoming shells. In Israel and here in the States, test vehicles were getting equipped. Fox News got so fired up, it declared Trophy to be a "top secret... futuristic force field." Which lead some commenters on the lunatic fringe to cheer for the new "barrier of invisible energy fragments (perhaps light particles charged by lasers)."

But all the heavy-breathing didn't help the system, in the end. "The Army is passing up [on Trophy] ... to pursue an alternative system that won’t be fielded until 2010 or later," Defense News ace Greg Grant reports.

The Army won't say why, exactly -- only that "the issue with any [active] armor protection system is the 60 percent solution is not acceptable," says Maj. Gen. Roger Nadeau. But here's a guess: What happens when Trophy confuses a kid with a rock and an RPG-carrying insurgent? How does that look on Al-Jazeera?

The free-thinkers at the Pentagon's Office of Force Transformation -- the folks who sponsored the Trophy trials, and who are planting the system on their experimental Project Sheriff vehicles -- have an alternate theory, however. The Army, in their view, is worried that Project Sherriff and Trophy might compete with its massive vehicle modernization program, Future Combat Systems.

The Army knew about Trophy — some 60 officers and FCS officials visited Israel for briefings, but not a single one asked for more information on the system. The OFT stumbled onto the system last summer and immediately moved to negotiate a government-to-government technology agreement allowing American officers unprecedented access to all the top-secret data on the system...

In fact, Army acquisition officials are lobbying [higher-up Pentagon] officials to allow the service to remove the active protection system and the millimeter-wave “active denial” [pain ray] systems that are at the heart of the [Project Sherriff] vehicle.

"Instead, the Army wants to field a Sheriff that eschews the active armor system for slat armor," Grant notes. And that's a big problem. Because insurgents in Iraq have started using a new, powerful RPG that shreds the cage-like defense.

The RPG-29... packs two shaped-charge warheads: a small one to blow up the reactive armor or blow through the slats, clearing a path for a larger charge to strike the vehicle’s hull. [The weapon] poses such a threat to American armor that the U.S. military has refused to allow the newly formed Iraqi Army to buy them, fearing they will fall into the wrong hands, the top Iraqi ground-forces general told The New York Times last August.

There is only one currently available active armor system designed to defeat RPGs: Israel’s Trophy system, according to OFT officials.

UPDATE 12:55 PM: Last week's Inside Defense had more on the Army's active protection reservations. "It is not just about giving [soldiers] an APS system. How do the soldiers work with it? How does it tie into the network? How do you know when to turn it on? When not to turn it on?" said Future Combat Systems program manager Brig. Gen. Charles Cartwright. "We could put something over there . . . overnight but have I got the logistics to be able to support," the technology.

In recent months, service officials -- not directly involved in the development of APS technologies -- have warned against waiting for a 100 percent solution. During a March 28 Institute for Defense and Government Advancement defense acquisition symposium, Edward Bair -- the Army’s program executive officer for intelligence, electronic warfare and sensors -- spoke in detail about how acquisition reform could better support the warfighter. Included in Bair’s presentation was the term "Good Enuf," at which time he explained that good enough today is better than optimum five years from now.

UPDATE 1:09 PM: Alabama National Guard LT and missile defense engineer Jimmy Wu says some of the Army's hesitancy is legit. But only some.

The cloud of projectiles from the active protection system is bound to hit people in addition to its target RPG. In addition, in an urban fight, the RPG gunners will try to get inside the minimum range of a Trophy system such that it does not have the time to shoot down the RPG.

On the other hand, there are situations where the Trophy is useful. For example, during the approach march [eg, highway convoys], where everyone is under armor, the Trophy will minimize losses from an RPG ambush.

Both sides have merit. However, if I was deciding, I would deploy the Trophy. By adding an off switch, the Trophy operator can turn off the system when there are many people outside the vehicle. Training is not a big factor because the small fleet deployed is too small to cause future training problems. Supply should not be an issue either because of the small fleet. We need to encourage experimentation on the battlefield instead of quashing initiatives like the Sheriff.

Censorship's Silver Lining

By now the numerous slights – both deliberate and accidental – during Chinese President Hu Jintao’s visit to Washington are well known: mixing up Taiwan and China when introducing the National Anthem; the Falun Gong heckler; President Bush unceremoniously tugging President Hu around by his coat-sleeve; administration officials dozing through Mr. Hu’s statements. What's less understood, though, is the official Chinese reaction – or really, lack of reaction --to these gaffes.

The slip-ups, and their possible implications, have all been widely discussed in the US and international media. But in the Chinese press, they haven’t been mentioned at all.

In the West, the censorship has been seen as a measure of how serious these insults are. The argument is that the assorted incidents are so shaming and embarrassing that “keeping the incident off Chinese screens was to save Hu Jintao from humiliation,” in the words of one Beijing-based analyst.

Maybe. But the far more important point this censorship communicates is the value China places on its relationship with America, and the direction the government wants that relationship to go.

China’s government could have easily used these incidents to spur anti-American, patriotic sentiments within the population. They didn’t hesitate to do so a year ago, when demonstrations over revisionist Japanese textbooks engulfed the nation, or 7 years ago in the aftermath of America’s bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade. In both of those instances, it would not have been difficult for the government to keep the population from learning of the issues. However, stirring up nationalist, anti-Japanese or anti-American sentiments suited the government’s agenda at the time, and it didn’t hesitate to do so. However shaming or embarrassing last week’s gaffes may have been, they pale in comparison to having your sovereign territory (the Embassy) bombed and offering only a few student protesters in response. But in the past, the government was willing to swallow the shame of these events in the interests of its agenda. They almost certainly would do so again if it furthered their plans – few things will rally a population to support you like rallying them against someone else. That they have chosen not to, and have rather gone to great efforts to hide the gaffes, indicates a desire to maintain and improve their relationship with America.

Broadcasting the insults would almost certainly have given fodder to hardliners within China to rail against the slap in the face. And it’s easy to imagine the reaction of our own China hawks to any anti-American demonstrations that may have resulted. If China’s censorship of last weeks events indicates the government’s desire to keep the ball away from these hardliners on both sides of the Pacific, it may be the silver lining to last week’s exhibition of America’s inept diplomacy and China’s continuing free speech issues.

[My thanks to Ms. Lauren Keane in Beijing for helping develop this analysis.]

-- Matthew Tompkins

Rapid Fire 04/27/06

* Border patrol drone crashes

* MIT mini-sats take off

* The Army's $25-billion repair bill

* House bill: CIA, NSA can make arrests for "any felony"

* MRE containers = combat coffee

* Mmmmmm... taste that warzone

* Moon race!

* Tanker war!

* Cop fires bullet into gunman's barrel

* Navy gets blimpy

* Lords of Kobol, thank you!

(Big ups: /., Nick)

Happiness is...

...wandering around Paris for a week, and coming home to discover that, if anything, your blog is in better shape than it was when you departed. David Axe, David Hambling, Jason Sigger, Steven Snell, Geoff Edwards: Thanks for taking such good care of the ranch while I was gone. I should leave more often!

NBC Reconnaissance Vehicles -- Coming Soon

I hadn't seen a picture of the Stryker NBC Reconnaissance Vehicle (NBCRV), but now it's up at a few sites now (here and here). Word is that General Dynamics got the contract in January to start modifying the basic Stryker chassis to manufacture 17 NBCRVs under a low rate initial production contract for test and evaluation through FY2007.

This Army Chemical Review article offers more details on the advances of this system over the existing M91A1 NBC Recon System (Fox), including an upgraded chemical standoff sensor (you can make it out -- it's to the left of the remote weapons system in the picture), a biological agent detector, a CB mass spectrometer for sampling, and of course, the standard chemical and radiological point detectors. Plus there's the advantage of having a standard military vehicle instead of a German vehicle (which was always tough to get spare parts and maintenance for).

This might be the last dedicated Army NBC recon vehicle for a long time. Currently, there are no plans to have a Future Combat Systems NBC recon variant. Rather, the proposed FCS recon and surveillance vehicle will include the NBC defense systems, and one would hope that the chemical specialists would be an integral part of the future scout platoons. No offense to the infantry, but the scouts I knew had trouble keeping their protective masks clean, let alone operating sophisticated CB defense sensors.

--Jason Sigger, crossposted at Armchair Generalist

F.O.B.s Afloat

There's a quiet revolution afoot in the Navy and Marine Corps, a new way of doing things that promises massive leaps in capability. It's called Seabasing, and nobody outside of the services seems to know anything about it.

In a nutshell, Seabasing involves grouping together cargo ships and amphibious assault ships into a huge offshore logistics and aviation base. Think traditional amphibious operations times ten, and sustainable for a month or more. Or think a huge Forward Operating Base (FOB), only afloat.

The idea behind Seabasing is to avoid the diplomatic complications of basing ground troops and aircraft in host countries. Turkey showed us back in 2003 that even seemingly staunch allies can waver at the last minute when they blocked the 4th Infantry Division from opening a northern front in Iraq. Seabasing sticks to international waters and grants us flexible, sustainable access to most of the world's trouble spots.

Seabasing hinges on hardware, oh yes, but it's mostly old hardware. In contrast to the pet projects of other services like the Air Force's F-22 or the Army's Future Combat Systems, there is no single Seabasing budget line to attract the attention of critics. Rather, Seabasing calls for using existing big-deck assault ships -- the Tarawas and Wasps and their eventual replacements, the LHA(R)s -- to support the aviation component, and San Antonio-class LPDs and Maritime Prepositioning Ships (MPSs) to support the people and cargo part. Lewis and Clark-class logistics ships, designed to support carrier battle groups, will shuttle between ports and the Seabase with fuel, dry goods and ammo. You see? Every piece of the puzzle has a traditional use that disguises its future major role in the Seabase. Clever, huh?

Besides the big ships, the most important component of the Seabase is what the Navy-Marine Corps team calls "connectors". These are the smaller platforms that shuttle people and stuff between the Seabase ships and between the Seabase and the beachhead. There are some connectors already in widespread use in the fleet, such as Landing Craft Air Cushion (LCACs), traditional landing craft and helicopters. Emerging connectors include catamarans and V-22 tilt-rotors. There has been some talk of designing new tilt-rotors and air-cushions for the connector role, too.

Really, Seabasing is a concept -- or, to use an Army phrase, a "system of systems". The inherent modularity of the idea means you can swap new platforms into the Seabase as necessary. Want a larger aviation component? Add an aircraft carrier or two. Want more forcible entry in a dense air-defense environment? Plug in some submarines carrying SEALs plus more LCACs and Expeditionary Fighting Vehicles. Need to sustain ground operations against an armored opponent? Base an Army division aboard your amphibs in place of the traditional Marine Expeditionary Force. Is it a natural disaster you're dealing with and not some rogue state? Convert berthing into medical wards, detach medevac choppers to the assault ships and maybe even add a hospital ship.

The possibilities are endless.

One problem: Just one quiet, lurking diesel sub could mean serious trouble for your big, fat immobile Seabase. That means work for flotillas of Littoral Combat Ships equipped with anti-sub modules, I imagine.

In March, Marine Commandant Michael Hagee addressed the Senate Appropriations Committee on the subject of connectors. Read his testimony ...

High-speed connectors will facilitate the conduct of sustained sea-based operations by expediting force closure and allowing the persistence necessary for success in the littorals. Connectors ... will link bases and stations around the world to the Seabase and other advanced bases, as well as provide linkages between the Seabase and forces operating ashore. High-speed connectors are critical to provide the force closure and operational flexibility to make Seabasing a reality.

* Joint High Speed Sealift. The Joint High Speed Sealift (JHSS) is an inter-theater connector that provides strategic force closure for CONUS-based forces. The JHSS is envisioned to transport the Marine Corps’ non self-deploying aircraft, personnel, and high demand-low density equipment, as well as the Army’s non self-deploying aircraft and personnel, and Brigade Combat Team rolling stock and personnel, permitting rapid force closure of this equipment. Additionally, the JHSS will alleviate the need to compete for limited strategic airlift assets, and reduce closure timelines by deploying directly to the sea base rather than via an intermediate staging base or advanced base. The JHSS program is currently in the early states of capability development and has merged with the Army’s Austere Access High Speed Ship program. Current fielding of the JHSS is projected in Fiscal Year 2017.

* Joint High Speed Vessel. The Joint High Speed Vessel (JHSV) will address the Combatant Commanders’ requirements for a forward deployed rapid force closure capability to support the Global War on Terror. The JHSV will enable the rapid force closure of fly-in Marine forces to the sea base from advanced bases, logistics from pre-positioned ships to assault shipping, ship-to-ship replenishment, and in appropriate threat environments, maneuver of assault forces to in-theater ports and austere ports. Army and Navy programs were recently merged into a Navy-led program office with an acquisition strategy intended to leverage current commercial fast ferry technology, and acquisition of a modified non-developmental item (NDI). Contract award for new vessels is expected in Fiscal Year 2008, with delivery in 2010. To meet the current and near-term Combatant Commanders’ requirements, the Department of the Navy continues to lease foreign built vessels until the JHSV is delivered.

* Westpac Express (WPE) is providing support to III MEF and other Okinawa-based forces, enabling III MEF to expand off-island training and engagement while reducing battalion-training days spent off island. Additionally, WPE played a key role supporting the Indian Ocean tsunami relief effort. HSV-2 Swift provides a test bed for research and development prototypes as well as an operational platform in support of current real world requirements. Most recently, HSC-2 played a key role in support of JTF Katrina, providing high-speed delivery of supplies, equipment, and personnel to ships and ports along the US Gulf Coast.

* Joint Maritime Assault Connector. The Joint Maritime Assault Connector (JMAC), previously known as the Seabase-to-shore connector, will replace the venerable legacy landing craft air cushion (LCAC) as a critical tactical level platform supporting Marine Corps assault forces, as well as joint forces operating within the Sea Base. In comparison to the LCAC, the JMAC is envisioned to have many enhanced capabilities, such as the ability to operate in higher sea states, increased range, speed, and payload, increased obstacle clearance, and reduced operating and maintenance costs. The JMAC is planned for fleet introduction in Fiscal Year 2015.

Marine aviation will undergo significant transformation over the next ten years as we transition from 13 types of legacy aircraft to seven new platforms. We developed a new transition strategy to better balance numbers of assault support and TacAir aircraft based on operational requirements. This strategy supports our Seabasing concept and enables Ship-to-Objective Maneuver utilizing the Joint Strike Fighter, MV-22, and Heavy Lift Replacement, recently designated CH-53K. At a distance of 110 nautical miles, a squadron of MV-22s will lift a 975-Marine battalion in four waves in under four hours. Similarly, the CH-53K will replace our aging, legacy CH-53E helicopter, lifting more than twice as much over the same range and serving as the only sea-based air assault and logistics connector capable of transporting critical heavy vehicles and fire support assets. An Assault Support Capability Analysis is underway to determine the optimal mix of MV-22 and CH-53K aircraft required to support Ship-to-Objective Maneuver and Distributed Operations. Similarly, the Short Takeoff and Vertical Landing variant of the Joint Strike Fighter represents a transformational platform that will generate 25 percent more sorties and provide a multi-spectral engagement capability for the Expeditionary Strike Force.

* CH-53K. The CH-53K is our number one aviation acquisition priority. Consequently, the CH-53K received full funding in 2005 and has reached "Milestone B" status—initiation of system development and demonstrations. Our current fleet of CH-53E Super Stallion aircraft enters its fatigue life during this decade. The CH-53K will deliver increased range and payload, reduced operations and support costs, increased commonality with other assault support platforms, and digital interoperability for the next 25 years. The CH-53K program will both improve operational capabilities and reduce life-cycle costs. Commonality between other Marine Corps aircraft in terms of engines and avionics will greatly enhance the maintainability and deployability of the aircraft within the Air Combat Element. The CH-53K will vastly improve the ability of the MAGTF and Joint force to project and sustain forces ashore from a sea-based center of operations in support of EMW, Ship-to-Objective Maneuver, and Distributed Operations.

* Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle. The Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV) is our number one ground acquisition program, and it replaces the aging Assault Amphibious Vehicle (AAV) that has been in service since 1972. It will provide Marine surface assault elements with better operational and tactical mobility both in the water and ashore, and will exploit fleeting opportunities in the fluid operational environment of the future. Designed to launch from amphibious ships stationed over the horizon, it will be capable of carrying a reinforced Marine rifle squad. The EFV will travel at speeds in excess of 20 nautical miles per hour in a wave height of three feet. This capability will reduce the vulnerability of our naval forces to enemy threats at sea and ashore. Our surface assault forces mounted in EFVs will have the mobility to react and exploit gaps in enemy defenses ashore. Once ashore, EFV will provide Marines with an armored personnel carrier designed to meet the threats of the future. The EFV has high-speed land and water maneuverability, highly lethal day/night fighting ability, and enhanced communications capability. It has advanced armor and nuclear, biological, and chemical collective protection. These attributes will significantly enhance the lethality and survivability of Marine maneuver units.

Parthenon in a Pouch

If I were to ask you to name your all time favourite iconic concrete structure, you'd probably come up with the same answer as me: the Seattle Kingdome.

But what if I were to ask you to name your favourite "low mass, strengthening fibre matrix temporary concrete shelter"? -- again you'd probably think Kingdome -- but you'd be wrong.

Aside from the Ministry of Defence's recent efforts to populate downtown Baghdad with giant blocks (presumably to be chipped away in reconstruction to reveal tribute art) some British designers see an alternative future for concrete. The UK has its very own pair of Frank Lloyd Wrights -- and they need your help.

You may have heard of the Concrete Canvas. The idea has received more press coverage than Janet Jackson's left boob, but oddly, remains as famous as the right one. (Check out this Wired article written over a year ago).

The idea is simple. Create a temporary hardened structure that can be transported across the globe and erected with minimal effort, training and supply in areas that need it most.

Literally, a "building in a bag" (or my own terms: "Vatican in a valise", "Kingdome in a container" etc) -- each unit weighs about 500 pounds, making it light and easy enough to transport in a variety of platforms. The bag is an inflatable plastic inner bubble, wrapped in a specially treated fabric and packed in plastic. The bag is then filled with water allowing the cement to hydrate, after which you cut, unfold and inflate. Inflation is achieved via a small chemical pack which moulds around the bubble, setting over a period of 12 hours. The shelter covers about 170 square feet of floor space and cost is estimated at $2,100 per unit.

The aid benefits are clear, but could the Concrete Canvas, (or CC01), benefit troops? Current living conditions seem varied depending on where or who you are, and Defensetech's own plethora of experts can provide first-hand experience of living in the kiln. Perhaps combining CC01 and the US Army's own ideas about the sun would assist in the current cable quagmire?

The Department of Defense has just annouced a juicy $120-million contract for Anchor Inc.'s party-size shelters and the less-than-attractive Battle Boxes are already used by some European forces. Reconstruction efforts in Iraq require temporary housing for residents, as do the countless disaster and conflict zones. So why can't you buy one?

Critics argue that the 145 liters of water needed to fill the thing is too valuable a resource in remote areas and others argue that CC01 is too permanent for relief efforts which should be helping people secure housing rather than shelter. Personally I think its a great idea, like the Life-Straw, and wish Pete and Will luck trying to get their idea to those who need it.

Designers Peter Brewin and Will Crawford both have impressive track records for innvoation and industrial design and the Concrete Canvas has recently won (among others) the Saatchi and Saatchi award for World Changing Ideas. Peter and Will are currently seeking further funding to bring CC01 into production and can be contacted via their website.

--Steven Snell

Update, 04/26/06: Peter Brewin has kindly contacted me to offer some specifics about the military aspects of CC01:

The key advantage of CC from a military position is that as a compressive structure it can be earth bermed (i.e., sand, earth, etc. can be piled on top to a depth of up to six feet). This has two main advantages:

* Protection from shrapnel and blast.

* Thermal insulation –- this massively reduces the logistical footprint, particularly if air conditioning is required for accommodation, as is the current situation in the Gulf. Better insulation means fewer air-conditioning units, hence less generator capacity and fuel and fewer maintenance personnel at the front line. Also it means a lower thermal signature.

Rapid Fire 04/25/06

* New Scientist's top ten weapons of the future

* Failing grade for missile defense

* How will airliners evade shoulder-fired missiles?

* Sex with robots!

* Air Force recon aircraft are getting really old

* Ad-hoc armor units in Iraq

* Intelligent infantry?

* Crash grounds drone program

* Army artillery: piss off!

* What does the human genome have to do with bio-energy?

(Thanks, Matt, Victoria)

hybrid sailors for hybrid ships

The Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) will revolutionize the way the Navy operates. Designed to accomodate a wide range of "mission modules" equipped with different sensors, weapons and unmanned vehicles, LCS will bring unprecedented flexibility to the fight. But there's a catch: to save money, the 3,000-ton ship will be crewed by just 75 sailors. That ain't many.

The trick to pulling off efficient manning of a multi-mission vessel is training your sailors to perform a wider range of tasks than ever before. The Navy's got a plan to do this. It involves lots of schooling, higher standards and a work environment that encourages personal initiative. It calls the product a "hybrid sailor".

The first LCS won't join the fleet for a couple years, but the Navy is already training up its first hybrid sailors. The test cases are the 30-man crews of the Navy's 8-vessel coastal patrol boat community. Check out my story in today's Military.com Warfighter's Forum for more:

One hundred and eighty feet long and displacing just 320 tons (versus more than 8,000 tons for a destroyer), the patrol boats, called PCs by their crews, are among the smallest Navy fighting ships. Their small size means they can maneuver in waters that are too shallow and too crowded for destroyers and cruisers, making them ideal for operations on the Arabian Gulf and in other littoral waters where the world's pirates, smugglers and insurgents hide. But for their crews of just 30, the PCs are a lot to handle -- and so are their diverse and dangerous missions.

PC sailors must wear many hats. Besides the gunner's role indicated by his rank, [Gunner's Mate 1st Class Jacob] Frasier also serves as assistant section leader, master helmsman, ammunition administrator, conning officer and small boat coxswain -- and he's working on his officer-of-the-deck qualification. This is far more responsibility than most big-ship sailors bear, but it's typical of PC sailors, and it's a preview of things to come for the Navy-at-large. Today's destroyers have more than 300 people aboard, but to save money, the new 3,000-ton Littoral Combat Ship, or LCS, is designed for a crew of just 75. Manning an LCS will demand the same flexibility and broad responsibility that today's PCs sailors demonstrate every day.

Read the whole story here.

loving the bomb detector pt. 2

Vehicle and Cargo Inspection Systems (VACIS) do more than scan cargo entering the borders. "There are a large number of our products deployed to military bases where they are concerned about sensitive material entering or leaving certain facilities," says SAIC executive Terry Gibson.

Mr. Gibson wouldn't reveal whether these bases include FOBs in Iraq or Afghanistan but the move towards non-intrusive inspection (NII) technology has been underway at the larger facilities since 2004. In January of that year Central Command requested twelve Mobile Vehicles Inspection Systems (MVIS) platforms for Iraq and four for Afghanistan. And with good reason: MVIS platforms like the Mobile VACIS greatly improve the quality of checkpoint searches (especially at night) while reducing the risk to soldiers.

--Geoff Edwards, crossposted at Eephus.

not your daddy's strike fighter

There's a sea change taking place in air combat. Gone are the vast air armadas that waged largely independent campaigns over Kuwait and Iraq in 1991 and over Serbia in 1999. Today's aircraft fleets are much smaller, albeit more capable individually. And in this age of insurgencies, air power is increasingly an adjunct of ground power.

These trends plus breakthroughs in podded sensors, agile radars and datalinks have turned tactical aircraft into extensions of the ground-pounder's eyes and hands. Air Force F-16s, F-15s and A-10s, Navy and Marine Corps F/A-18s and Marine AV-8s fly over Iraq and Afghanistan in two-ship sections carrying infrared sensor pods and small GPS- and laser-guided bombs. They scout out ahead of the ground troops, deliver accurate fires when called upon and hang around to assess the damage while retaining the (rarely-needed) ability to fight other aircraft. In short, two-jet sections perform the entire range of air combat functions in single sorties. Just ten years ago that would've required a dozen jets.

By far the most important function these days is the scouting part. In mil-speak this is called Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance, or ISR. My coverage of Marine Corps All Weather Fighter Attack Squadron 332 in Iraq touched on their ISR role. Now the Navy is in the game too, with two new F/A-18E/F Super Hornet squadrons flying from the equally-new U.S.S. Ronald Reagan aircraft carrier.

Sea Power has the story:

"Almost every flight that goes off the Reagan right now does nothing [over Iraq] but ISR with ATFLIR [sensor pod] systems,” said Capt. “BD” Gaddis, the Navy’s program manager for the Super Hornet.

Gaddis described a typical scenario over Iraq, with a new helmet-mounted capability as part of the situation. A Super Hornet pilot on a forward air controller mission spots enemy activity on the ground. His helmet, fitted with the Joint Helmet-Mounted Cueing System — a system that slews a sensor on the aircraft to focus on whatever the pilot is looking at — automatically slews the electro-optical sensor in the ATFLIR pod. He designates the target on his cockpit display and its latitude and longitude are transmitted over the radio data link. Whoever is on the data net receives the target information.

“When they select ‘target designate,’ their radar, their ATFLIR, their helmet, all slew to that same point on the ground, and there is no talking,” Gaddis said. “It’s all machine-to-machine.”

The ATFLIRs have joined in combat over Iraq with similar sensor pods on the Marine Corps’ AV-8B Harrier II [and F/A-18D -- ed.] attack aircraft, the Navy’s F-14 strike fighters, and the Air Force’s F-15E and F-16 fighters.

Actually, cross the F-14 off that list, as the old bird flew its last operational sortie early this year. Today's Naval air force is built around the Super Hornet, which thanks to its helmet-mounted sight, Advanced Electronically-Scanned Array radar, generous power supply, sensor interfaces and large number of weapons hardpoints is more flexible and therefore better suited to today's operational environment than the hotrod F-14.

As far as tactical air forces go, these days the Navy is way ahead of the Air Force. Thanks to the flexible, $60-million Super Hornet, which the Navy has been building at the rapid clip of 40 per year since the mid-1990s, the Naval air force is healthy and useful. The Air Force, meanwhile, has struggled to build 20 $180-million F-22s annually in just the last few years and as a result is seeing the average age of its fighter force climb higher by the day. And while Super Hornets are supporting the troops in Iraq, F-22s are sitting on the tarmac at Langley Air Force Base without the sensors and weapons the ground troops need.

Read the whole Sea Power story here.

Squishy Sacks of Goo ...

... is really all we are. And on the battlefield, there are lots of hot pokey objects that can puncture our squishy sacks, letting out all the goo. To put this problem in more clinical terms: blood loss is the first and most immediate danger to injured troops. Therefore, finding ways of staunching the flow of blood from battered bodies is one of the military medical community's major priorities.

There's been a lot of advancements on this front in the past couple years, much of it motivated by the high proportion of bleeding limb injuries in Iraq and Afghanistan. Several advancements have been mentioned on this site before. Here's a comprehensive survey:

* One-handed tourniquets that soldiers can apply in seconds to wounded comrades

"Approximately 200,000 of these tourniquets have recently been ordered and shipped to theater," says Colonel Robert Vandre from Army Medical Department (AMD). "It is starting to be used now and reports are coming in from our surgeons that they are receiving patients with these tourniquets on damaged limbs."

* A pair of new bandage designs -- one based on desiccants (like you find in the pockets of new coats) and another on crushed crustaceans -- that encourage rapid clotting of wounds

Vandre again: "Since the beginning of the Afghanistan conflict, the Department of Defense has fielded two new bandaging technologies for stopping bleeding: the Chitosan Bandage, [made by] Hemcon, and QuickClot, [made by] Z-Medica. The Chitosan bandage is made of shrimp shells and sticks to the wounded area, sealing it off much like a tire patch. The QuickClot is made up of desiccant granules that physically adsorb the liquid from blood, thereby concentrating the clotting factors and encouraging rapid clotting to stop the bleeding."

* A new medicine, developed by Defense Advanced Research Programs Agency (DARPA), that helps organs survive temporary blood shortages

"The focus in this program is using the consequences of blood loss," says DARPA spokeswoman Jan Walker. "What we want to be able to do is protect the organs from the impact of oxygen loss and ensure that the wounded soldier can recover fully. What that allows us to do is it gives us more time to get the casualties to a hospital."

* A sonic blood coagulator, another DARPA project

Walker: "We have another program that is looking at acoustic energy to stop bleeding -- that is, deep bleeding, not in an extremity, not in some place where you can apply pressure. It's called Deep Bleeder Acoustic Coagulation. It uses sound waves to encourage clotting. It's a device that could be used by a layperson, a medic on the battlefield. It's portable, light and automated."

* Another clotting agent, Recombinant Activated Factor VII (RFVIIA), developed by AMD

"Through an extensive collaboration with the Israelis, we promoted the first use of RFVIIA in for the treatment of severe surgical bleeding in trauma patients," Vandre says. "RFVIIA stops bleeding in trauma patients when their own clotting mechanisms are not working properly. As a result of this collaboration, RFVIIA is now being used in major trauma centers throughout the world and has been used on over 400 wounded patients in Iraq. Currently the drug's maker, NovoNordisk, is pursuing clinical trials to gain a trauma indication for this drug with the Food and Drugs Administration (FDA)."

* New ways of freeze-drying replacement blood to facilitate transport and storage

"The Army is actively developing freeze-dried plasma and hopes to have a product available within five years," Vandre says. "Plasma is the liquid part of blood which contains the majority of its clotting factors and is highly desirable for early resuscitation of patients. Currently it exists on the battlefield only as frozen plasma and, as such, cannot be given any place but at our field hospitals. DARPA and the Navy have both pursued freeze-dried platelets, another clotting product. The Army has also developed a process to allow red blood cells to be kept refrigerated for up to 12 weeks, which is twice as long as they currently can be stored. We are working now to get funding to push this product through advanced development and FDA certification."

* A new container, developed by AMD, for transporting perishable replacement blood

Vandre: "To allow medics to bring blood products far forward on the battlefield, our researchers developed the 'Golden Hour' Blood Transport Container which can keep four bags of red cells at 10°C for 72 hours with no electricity or wet ice. This container is being used in theater on evacuation missions where red blood cells may be of help to the wounded patients."

The survival rate of troops injured in Iraq and Afghanistan is better than ever. Thanks to these technologies and others, even more soldiers will survive their injuries on future battlefields.

Air Force's Secret Drone Program Revealed

Sharp-eyed Nick Cook of Janes has spotted a new classified UAV program. He refers to this Pentagon budget document which says "the J-UCAS program to split into two separate programs: one Air Force classified program and a navy UCAV [unmanned combat air vehicle] program". Some $1.7 billion is to be spent on these developments over five years.

The new craft is referred to as Penetrating High Altitude Endurance (PHAE), and is thought to be able to cruise at 70,000-80,000 ft, similar to the U-2 (Global Hawk has a ceiling of 65,000 ft). ‘Penetrating’ means operating over defended territory, so unlike Global Hawk high degree of stealth will be essential. Being derived from the armed J-UCAS program, strike missions and SEAD are also possible. Cook says:

One report refers to the aircraft using engines from an inventory that has been in storage since the 1970s. This almost certainly refers to the General Electric J97-GE-3 engine for the Teledyne Ryan AQM-91 Compass Arrow UAV (a project terminated in 1971). In 1998, a NASA paper reported that 24 J97 engines were in storage at the agency's Ames research centre...the J97 was rated at around 25 kN and the new UAV is probably a twin-engine design.

Compass Arrow, otherwise known as the Ryan Model 154 Firefly, weighed in at 5,000 lbs with a wingspan of 48 feet and carried a payload of over 300 lb. It was very stealthy for its day, with rounded fuselage and inward-canted tailfins, with a coating of RAM (radar absorbing material) to reduce radar returns. The engine was mounted above the fuselage to minimize the infrared signature.

Compass Arrow could cruise at 80,000 feet, and was intended to be used over China. For political reasons it was mothballed without ever being used.

Compass Arrow Arrow was single-engined, so a twin-engined PHAE is likely to be somewhat bigger.

The PHAE concept has been studied before , with a view to roles including countering WMD, attacking fixed and mobile targets, and suppressing air defences. It’s not clear what weapons might be used from this sort of altitude, though a guided kinetic penetrator would make quite an impact from sixteen miles up. A stealthier approach would be for PHAE to act as a ‘mothership’ for smaller UAVs (such as the 100 lb Dominator) killer UAV or miniature munitions. The US Navy has already experimented with launching the FINDER UAV from a Predator drone for close-in reconnaisance, as well as the miniature CICADA Close-in Covert Autonomous Disposable Aircraft which would be dropped in large numbers for electronic attack.

The endurance of PHAE will be limited by fuel supply; serious long-endurance drones with mission times measured in weeks or months will be solar powered. High-altitude long-endurance drones will find many more applications in both the civilian and military worlds - there’s more on this topic in my book Weapons Grade.

-- David Hambling

UPDATE – Check out the new Special Report on Weapons & Warfare on the New Scientist magazine website, a feast of dozens of weapons tech articles with an ‘instant expert’ overview by a DefenseTech regular.

How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb Detectors

Hey, everybody -- say hi to Geoff Edwards. He's a former Army medical service officer, an Iraq veteran and a grad student in urban policy at Georgia State University. He's also a new single-issue blogger focusing on trafficking at www.eeph.us. Give him some clicks to thank him for this post, okay?

When undercover teams from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) used rental cars to smuggle nuclear material into the United States last December, it wasn't because they foiled detection technology. Instead they used phony shipping documents, ”the fake ID of traffickers worldwide”, to slip past human inspectors alerted to the nuclear material by radiation portal monitors (RPM).

Given seemingly effective radiation monitors and ineffective document verification systems, it's no surprise that a GAO report released last month warns that the deployment of the former has fallen behind schedule. "As of December 2005," the report states, "DHS had deployed 670 of 3,034 radiation portal monitors -- about 22 percent of the portal monitors DHS plans to deploy." In order to meet the program's goals by the September 2009 completion date, "monthly deployments would have to increase by almost 230 percent." At the current pace, Customs and Border Protection will install the final RPM sometime in late 2014. By then the current generation of portal monitors will be ineffective against the ingenuity of rapidly adaptive traffickers. But are they effective now?

When available, yes.

SAIC produces the most effective solution in current use, the Integrated Container Inspection System (ICIS). ICIS brings together several complementary technologies including an RPM and a gamma ray imaging system known as VACIS, which produces a clear radiographic image of a container's interior.

This image is often overlayed with container information gathered by the RPM. "By fusing the information from the two devices together, we get a lot of helpful data," explains SAIC executive Terry Gibson, "It takes a whole lot of lead shielding to prevent the RPM from finding nuclear material and the VACIS will find that shielding for us."

ICIS is the architecture that allows information about the container to be put together like this. But once all the information is assembled, a skilled human operator still needs to examine the shipping manifest for discrepancies. For instance, she might see that tennis shoes are on the manifest but the radiographic image shows a container full of watermelons. Bam, the container receives a secondary inspection.

In another container the RPM may detect the signature radiation for Cobalt-60, a potential dirty-bomb ingredient. If the container manifest declares medical waste and the VACIS image indicates medical waste, the customs officials might decide there is no reason to inspect the container since Cobalt-60 is commonly used to sterilize medical equipment.

And don't get me started on bananas.

So should we worry? Well, yeah. Uranium, the baddest of radioactive materials, emits gamma rays that are easily absorbed by wood shielding, making it almost undetectable to current technologies. New devices such as those using Passport Systems' nuclear resonance fluoresce imaging (NRFI) will detect contraband at the elemental level. It's virtually impossible to hide uranium in a container that will eventually be sifted through, atom by atom.

The Department of Homeland Security is watching. Last year it awarded Passport Systems a $1.6 million research contract to further develop NRFI technology.

--Geoff Edwards

Predator Educates Global Hawk

Every Army battalion commander, Air Force targeting cell and special operations team in Iraq wants access to a Predator drone at all times. The demand for these versatile little birds has skyrocketed in recent years. To meet the demand, General Atomics is rolling Predators off the production line as fast as it can. But there's a mismatch on the Air Force side of things. The Predator squadrons have suffered chronic manpower shortages, meaning they've got the birds, but no one to fly them.

It's a matter of planning. The Air Force didn't foresee just how popular Predator would be, so it didn't lay the groundwork for a rapid expansion of Predator infrastructure. Now the service is playing catch-up, struggling to meet warfighter's requirements for on-station Predators while training up new operators and forming new squadrons to fly factory-fresh aircraft. It's a huge mess.

"I learned a lot from Predator and what they were doing," says Col. Christopher Jella, commander of the new 18th Reconnaissance Squadron at Beale Air Force Base, Calif. This year the 18th became that second operational squadron to fly the Global Hawk, Predator's high-altitude, long-endurance, unarmed cousin. According to Jella, the Global Hawk community has had none of the Predator's problems. The two Global Hawk squadrons are, if anything, over-staffed. "We've gotten ahead of the wavefront."

It helps that the Global Hawk community has fewer aircraft and needs fewer operators. Still, Jella explains, proper planning is vital when you're standing up any new system: "We said several years ago, this system is coming, it's got a lot of steam behind it. I can see where the production line drops airplanes. I said we need to get ahead of this. So I started hiring folks two years ago and bringing them here."

Predator and Global Hawk promise to greatly improve the U.S. military's ability to get intel into the right hands at the right time -- but only if the Air Force can keep operators in seats and birds in the air. The service has plans to iron out Predator's problems, according to Pentagon spokespeople. The plan seems to include throwing a lot of money at the problem. For the sakes of all those battalion commanders and their soldiers on the ground in Iraq, I hope it works.

Rapid fire 04/21/06

* Super Hornets got kick-ass radars

* Secret Soviet sub base ... creepy!

* C-17 becomes operating room

* Brits' cool new drones

* Land Warrior heads to Iraq

* "Send stuff into space for only $99!"

* Stryker troops too self-reliant?

* The psychology of living on a Forward Operating Base

* A sober look at the Chinese Navy

* Why is this F-22 pilot not smiling?

(Thanks, Nick)

Sim Iraq

There's a little piece of Iraq in the Louisiana swamps. Shambling buildings, forlorn Arabs, pesky media, insurgents and BOOM! -- even suicide bombings. At the Army's Joint Readiness Training Center (JRTC) at Ft. Polk, what was once a Vietnam War-style training ground for light infantry has, since 2001, transformed into a high-fidelity simulation of urban counter-insurgency operations.

Brigades bound for Iraq rotate through JRTC for month-long exercises. They perform pre-planned missions and react to changing circumstances. They're observed and graded every step along the way.

The detail is amazing. Actors portray everyday Iraqis and tribal leaders. Reporters from local papers fill in for the international media, filing stories that appear in newspapers published within the simulation. If the news is good, the populace stays calm. If the news is bad, you might have bombings, snipers, riots. Or the local insurgent cell might just decide to mix things up, drop a mortar on your base or assault your outposts. There's realistic pyro for everything.

And did I mention that everyone is equipped with MILES gear -- basically military-grade Laser Tag -- so that soldiers know when they've been hit or when they've accidentally gunned down a French reporter or an Iraqi baby? When somebody gets hit, the observers send him to a holding area and stick a sensor-equipped medical dummy in his place. The dummy gets evacuated and treated just like a real patient. And if the docs screw up and the dummy "dies", then the brigade personnel shop has to file the paperwork to get a replacement soldier, at which point the guy in the holding area gets to re-enter the fight.

Amazing.

Jason Hartley's blog Just Another Soldier has some great anecdotes from JRTC:

Tomorrow we go into “the box” for our final training exercise before going into combat. Here at the Joint Readiness Training Center (JRTC) at Fort Polk, the scenarios that units go through are all pretty much unwinnable. I don’t think anyone has ever beaten JRTC. But that’s kinda the point. You will lose. It’s just a matter of how long you can hold out before losing and how gracefully you lose. This, apparently, is a good way to assess the battle-readiness of the brigades that come to be given a stamp of “deployable” before going over seas. The guys that are posted here, the “Geronimo Joes” as there’s known, spend the better part of the year in the field playing the opposing force (OPFOR) for unit after unit that comes down here to be tested including the Rangers, Special Forces and all manner of bad ass. Even these elite units get their asses handed to them most the time. Geronimo Joe knows how to play the game really well. They know these training areas like the backs of their hands, their MILES laser equipment is zeroed perfectly and they know how to fight in such a way that will inflict the maximum amount of damage with the minimal amount of effort. The mission we are taking part in involves my entire brigade and is going on right now. My company will be relieving the guys that are out there now. So far a key logistical bridge has been destroyed, the Brigade Sergeant Major has been killed, three Bradley fighting vehicles have been destroyed by IEDs, two soldiers have been captured and a massive car bomb recently killed 47 soldiers. (Just so things are clear here, none of this is real, it’s all a training simulation.) My job will essentially be to keep a small town safe. This entails quite a bit of work and the way they have things scheduled, I don’t think they expect us to eat, sleep or poop for five days straight.

If all goes well, I'll be headed to Polk in June to play in JRTC. And in July I should be going to Twentynine Palms, California, to participate in Mojave Viper, the Marines' version of JRTC. Stay tuned.

P.S. -- The Brits have their own, somewhat humbler JRTC at a place called Catterick. Check out my story in The Village Voice.

Noah & David Cast Pods!

I'm still not exactly sure what a podcast is ... but Noah and I did one with Military.com editor Ward Carroll. The topic: the so-called "general's revolt" against SecDef Donald Rumsfeld. Here's the URL.

Eagles Forever

With F-22 production slashed to just 180 from the 380 the Air Force says it needs, the service is scrambling to figure out how to fill the gap.

The problem is that the current air superiority force of F-15C Eagles numbers more than 300 jets. To keep watch over the U.S. and South Korea plus provide enough jets for contigencies, the Air Force is going to have to fly some of its Eagles longer than expected.

Considering that the last C-model Eagle rolled off McDonnell Douglas' St. Louis production line 20 years ago and that the last major update was the Multi-Stage Improvement Program (MSIP) in the mid-90s, maintaining the F-15C is going to require structural mods and upgrades.

Aviation Week explains:

A roadmap of options for the remaining F-15Cs and Strike Eagles is nearly complete, [according to Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. T. Michael "Buzz" Moseley]. That document is expected to outline needed upgrades, such as active electronically scanned array (AESA) radars, for some F-15Cs that would allow them to detect cruise missiles. Raytheon officials have been pitching upgrades to the existing radars as well as new systems for the F-15.

Some folks in the Air Force figure, Hey, if we're going to tear these jets apart for major surgery, why not give them a ground-attack capability while we're at it? The idea is to turn old Eagles into 'Raptor Lites' (my term, not the Air Force's).

Aviation Week outed this plan in its infancy as far back as 2004:

To provide a "bridge" to the F/A-22's ground-attack capability, [then-Air Force Secretary James] Roche said the Air Force is considering upgrading part of its F-15C Eagle fleet to give the air-to-air fighter an improved ground-attack capability. Unlike the newer F-15E Strike Eagle, which performs air-to-ground as well as air-to-air missions, the F-15C Eagle saw little action in Iraq because there was almost no air-to-air combat.

"We found in the last conflict that we had C's flying around looking for Saddam Hussein's airplanes which never flew," he said. "Effectively, the C's were taking up ramp space."

The Air Force is looking at adding weapons and improving the radars on some of its F-15Cs so they could do air-to-ground missions in future conflicts. The upgraded F-15Cs might be called "Golden Eagles."

Air Force Times says as many as 200 F-15s could receive the modifications.