 |
KC-X...And the Winner Is!
BREAKING NEWS:Northrop Grumman/EADS...the KC-45/A330.
Huge win for US/EU team.
-- Christian
MORE:
Pentagon picks EADS/Northrop for tanker contract: report (AFP)
The Pentagon has chosen Europe's EADS, parent of Airbus, and US partner Northrop Grumman for a massive refueling tanker aircraft contract, the Wall Street Journal said Friday.
The newspaper, citing a person familiar with the situation, said the partnership won a heated contest against US-based aerospace giant Boeing for the contract of some 40 billion dollars.
Boeing, the second leading US defense contractor after Lockheed Martin, has been considered the heavy favorite to snare the contract to provide 179 twin-engine planes that essentially are flying gas stations, used to refuel in-flight war planes and troop transporters.
The contract is one of the Pentagon's largest in recent years and the first order on a tanker market estimated at more than 100 billion dollars in over 30 years.
The outcome of the competition is being closely watched not just because of the enormous size of the contract. There are domestic and geopolitical implications at issue in the US Air Force's choice between an all-American contractor or a mainly US team that includes a foreign contractor.
An EADS victory would give the European firm its first major foothold in the world's largest defense market.
Boeing proposed a version of its long-haul cargo plane the 767-200.
EADS offered a modified version of the Airbus 330. The commercial plane would be militarized by Northrop Grumman and its American partners to prevent the transfer of sensitive technology to a foreign entity.
BAE/Navistar JLTV Prototype Unveiled
Be sure to check out first impressions from the annual Association of the U.S. Army Winter Symposium on the unveiling of BAE Systems/Navistar's Joint Light Tactical Vehicle prototype.
Our friends at Aviation Week have an army of reporters down there (oh, darn...in Ft. Lauderdale in February) covering the latest in Army equipment. You all know I'm a big fan of the JLTV and I'm glad it was saved from the budgetary axe due to some sober minds prevailing over MRAP buys.
And be sure to check out the promotional video of the truck below...One criticism: why the flat undercarriage?
-- Christian
More B-2 Crash Speculation
You can look this one up. See FY 09 budget request, justification materials, US Air Force, Aircraft procurement-Vol. 2, page 71.
You'll find on that page a detailed description for not one, but two potential mechanical problems that could cause a B-2A to crash.
Here's a sampling (read highlighted text):
The problem is caused by the B-2A's distorted engine inlets.
The distortion causes excessive wear on the stage 1 fan blades for the F118-GE-100 engines. Take that and an unplanned "foreign object damage event", and, voila, your $1.1 billion bomber may experience a "catastrophic in-flight emergency".
But there's another problem. A loose fan blade also can spark an "uncontained titanium fire". According to the same document, the titanium fire -- whatever that is -- may cause a "Class A event", or what normal people call a "crash".
The problem is listed in the budget justification documents because the USAF is buying repair blades this year to fix the problem. I'm sure it will be interesting for the investigators to find out whether the "Spirit of Kansas" had received the repairs before the crash, among other items of interest, of course.
-- Steve Trimble
Mughniyeh Done in by Hezbollah
Killing off your [erstwhile] allies...?
Our friend Aharon Etingoff sends me this from the JP:
'Arabs helped Mossad kill Mughniyeh'
Syrian sources claim that several Arab nations conspired with Mossad to assassinate Hizbullah chief of operations Imad Mughniyeh earlier this month, the London-based Al-Quds Al-Arabi daily stated on Wednesday.
According to the report, which could not be confirmed by any official source, Syria was making significant progress in the investigation of Mughniyeh's death, and would publish the results of its inquiry following the Arab league summit in Damascus in March.
Meanwhile, Kuwaiti newspaper Al Seyassah reported Wednesday that Hizbullah was preventing Syrian investigators from questioning three senior members of the organization, fearing that Syria would blame the Lebanese terror organization for the assassination.
The paper asserted that Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah may have had a motive to have Mughniyeh killed, due to what it said was an attempt by Iran to strengthen the latter at the expense of Nasrallah following what Teheran termed Hizbullah's "failures" under Nasrallah during the Second Lebanon War.
This seems to me to be the most plausible explanation so far. And the most conspiratorially Machiavellian....
-- Christian
Marines Don't Want Their MTV
Something told me this would happen.
Saw a great report last night from Fox News reporter Jennifer Griffin who's been traveling with Marine Commandant Gen. James Conway in Iraq.
She knew news when she saw it and reports that Marines are complaining mightily about their new body armor vest, the Modular Tactical Vest or MTV.
The Pentagon and Marine Corps authorized the purchase of 84,000 bulletproof vests in 2006 that not only are too heavy but are so impractical that some U.S. Marines are asking for their old vests back so they can remain agile enough to fight.
Marine Commandant Gen. James Conway wants to know who authorized the costly purchase of the nearly 30-pound flak jackets and has ordered the Marine procurement officers at the Quantico base in Virginia to halt the rest of an unfilled order, FOX News has learned.
Now, the MTV is the replacement for the Point Blank-manufactured Interceptor and was billed as a more comfortable, better fitting, more protective vest than the Interceptor. The Marine Corps was looking at two other designs during evaluations in 2006. I know one of them was a variation of the Crye Precision-built "Armor Chassis" and I still don't know what the third one was, though I suspect it was a Point Blank design.
I have a source who was at one of the trials at Quantico and he said people were raving about one, and thought the other two were dogs. When I saw the design the Marine Corps picked, I was pretty sure which one the leathernecks in the field were NOTraving about: the MTV.
Too many bells and whistles. Too complicated to put on and adjust. Heavier than the Interceptor. Ugh...
But...and this is a big but...The company that makes the MTV, Protective Products, has two former Marine Corps body armor program officials at its top ranks. The body armor community is a small one, so that's not surprising at all. But it sure doesn't look good on the surface...especially since Conway told Griffin: "I’m not quite sure how we got to where we are, but what I do know is it is not a winner.
I think it is foolish to buy more."
Man, there's no worse endorsement than that.
-- Christian
Big Changes for the Defense Budget
My former colleague at Marine Corps Times, Gordon Lubold, has a great story that ran a couple days ago in his new paper, the Christian Science Monitor.
He's taken a look at an initiative dreamed up on Capitol Hill to redistribute the nearly half-trillion (if you don't count wartime supplementals) DoD budget away from roughly equal shares and dole out more funds to the service that deserves them most.
Lubold writes:
A bipartisan House panel is nudging the Pentagon to begin a conversation on how to reform itself in many ways. But at the Pentagon, talk of change usually has a budgetary impact.
And, despite the past several years of "nation-building" and counterinsurgency operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, there has been virtually no change in the way the defense budget is carved up in at least 40 years, says Rep. Jim Cooper (D) of Tennessee, who chairs the panel.
"That right there is a statistical indictment of the process," Representative Cooper says. "There had to be a year in which there were greater needs in one area or another, and the system was unable to accommodate it."
The fiscal 2009 budget request released this month, for example, shows the Army requesting a 27 percent share, the Air Force asking for a 28 percent share, and the Navy, which includes the Marine Corps, wanting a 29 percent share of the proposed $515 billion budget.
Cooper's seven-member panel is expected to release a study this week on each of the branches' "roles and missions" that may threaten services that are seen to perform more conventional warfare. With the focus on the ground wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, that makes some in the Navy and Air Force worry.
There's a part of me that thinks this is a good idea...that it's kinda f-ed up for the Army to get a smaller share than the Air Force or Navy.
But, by the same token, I can understand the argument that Air Force planes and Navy ships are more expensive than most Army gear. And I'm not one of those ascetics that thinks the Air Force should only fly A-10s and F-16s and the Navy should trash its aircraft carriers for small patrol boats.
Lubold continues:
Cooper hopes the study will spark a broader debate about the need to reform national security, with new emphases on cybersecurity and nonmilitary government agencies. The panel isn't recommending specific changes to the budget as much as it is raising concerns about the Pentagon's historical aversion to change. More specifically, some services are clinging to a version of warfare the panel believes is dated.
"There should be vociferous support from inside the services, since the military has been left carrying the burden of the failures of our national security institutions," reads a draft of the report, to be released Thursday. "Instead, our military has resisted change just as they have past efforts at reform. The Air Force and Navy are reemphasizing more traditional threats and downplaying the unexpected
threats we face today."
In fact, the Navy has tried to emphasize its so-called soft-power capabilities to combat terrorism, and senior Air Force officials seek to remind Congress that conventional threats, like those presented by China, still remain.
Congress is asking the same questions that many in and out of uniform have raised for some time. "After seven years of war, that we haven't budged one inch away from the cold war apportionment of the budget to me is Kafka-esque," said Robert Scales Jr., a retired Army major general, speaking last week at a think tank. "I just can't
explain it. I don't understand."
The Pentagon has begun its own internal review of roles and missions. But with budgetary planners essentially in limbo until a new administration arrives next year, it's unclear how much impact such discussions will have, says Loren Thompson, a senior analyst at The Lexington Institute, a think tank outside Washington.
It may serve to create a debate in anticipation of the broader effort to review the nation's strategic planning document, the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR). But when all is said and done, it's likely that things will remain largely the same, Mr. Thompson says.
Insofaras Cooper is trying to spark a debate on reapportionment of the DoD budget (one I'm sure the 4-percenters will want in on), it's a great move and long in coming. I'm a huge fan of Bob Scales and am tracking with him when it comes to budget frustration.
But don't count the Iron-Triangle out...they don't want any part of it.
But such talk of budgetary reform can sound like fighting words to some inside the Pentagon, as Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, acknowledged earlier this month during hearings on Capitol Hill.
"What I worry about in this ... is that, not done well, it has a tendency to turn services against each other," Admiral Mullen said.
And moving money from one service to another can be politically insurmountable. Each service, with its own political constituency on Capitol Hill, carefully guards what belongs to it.
You got that right.
-- Christian
MALD Paves Way for Swarm Ops
A DT tipper, who prefers to remain anonymous (and who has proffered some pretty good stuff in the past), sent me this little tidbit with his analysis:
The Miniature Air Launched Decoy, a Raytheon Company (NYSE: RTN) state-of-the-art, low-cost, modular air- launched programmable flight vehicle, successfully completed government and Raytheon seamless verification team flight testing Jan. 11. This sets the stage for the MALD to enter low-rate initial production (LRIP) later this year.
The testing, which began in June 2007, put the MALD through a series of flight profiles including jettison and powered flight tests from both F-16 and B-52 aircraft. The MALD, which weighs less than 300 pounds and has a range of approximately 500 nautical miles, succeeded in 33 of 35 tests...
"Completion of this flight testing brings the versatile MALD platform one step closer to becoming a staple in the warfighter's arsenal," said Harry Schulte, vice president of Raytheon Missile Systems' Strike product line. "MALD is more than just a decoy -- we designed it with modularity in mind to evolve as the warfighter's needs evolve. We're ready to get the MALD to LRIP."
MORE:
The Miniature Air Launched Decoy is a low-cost, air-launched programmable craft that accurately duplicates the combat flight profiles and signatures of U.S. and allied aircraft. In addition to protecting valuable aircraft, MALD offers counter air operations to neutralize, if not destroy, air defense systems that pose a threat to U.S. and allied pilots.
Our DT reader and tipmaster comments:
In addition to the stated benefits, the successful design and implementation of efficient miniture engines will allow the US to perfect swarming techniques, develop aAAV missions (attack atonomous air vehicles) and drive the development of associated information exchange necessary to exploit the application of this technology.
Plus, they are relatively cheap.
Keep 'em coming boys.
-- Christian
KC-X Decision!...Not
Friday's the big day, it seems. An insider tells me the decision has been made, but that the memorandum is making its way around the Pentagon to get all the signatures it needs.
Our boy Steve Trimble reports that Northrop Grumman shares went up slightly today while Boeing shares went down (NorGrum is partnered with EADS/Airbus against Boeing). A stock trader buddy of mine (who has no inside knowledge on this contract award at all but it's still a good point nonetheless) says "why do you think the entire military drives Chevy and Ford trucks?" That is to say, there ain't no way a European company will win the bid.
I'm not so sure I agree...But we'll keep you posted.
Tanker Announcement Expected Friday: U.S. Official
WASHINGTON, Feb 27 (Reuters) - The U.S. Air Force's top weapons buyer said on Wednesday her best bet was that the winner of a potential $40 billion refueling aircraft contract would be announced after U.S. markets close on Friday.
"That's my best bet for now," Sue Payton, assistant secretary for acquisition, told Reuters after a hearing of the House of Representatives Armed Services Committee on the Air Force 2009 budget request.
Boeing Co. is vying for the contract against a team made up of Northrop Grumman Corp and Europe's EADS.
"It's absolutely not going to happen today," Payton said. "We're really making sure all the 'i's' are dotted and 't's' are crossed."
Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne earlier told Reuters he hoped an award would be announced "any day now," once the Pentagon's top weapons buyer, John Young, has signed off on he plan to buy 179 tankers, used to extend warplanes' operating range.
"You don't have a decision until all the paperwork is done and complete," Wynne said during a break in testimony to the House panel.
The Air Force presented its acquisition plan on Monday to a top-level panel chaired by Young, the deputy undersecretary for acquisitions. (Reporting by Jim Wolf, editing by Mark Porter)
-- Christian
Intel Community Recognizes Cyber Threat
In the 2008 Annual Threat Assessment of the Intelligence Community for the Senate Armed Services Committee for the first time the threat of cyber attacks were addressed (well, the first time in the report available to the public). [EDITOR: The threat assessment was delivered by Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell and Defense Intelligence Agency chief, Army Lt. Gen. Michael Maples, in testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee Feb. 27]
The intelligence community listed "the vulnerabilities of the US information infrastructure to increasing cyber attacks by foreign governments, non-state actors and criminal elements" as the fourth major bullet of the fourth page in the opening of the forty-five page testimony delivered to the Senate by DNI McConnell. The testimony goes on to state that due to the significance of computers and telecommunications to our country's security, defense and economy, threats to our IT infrastructure are an important focus of the Intelligence Community.
Also stated were the trends seen over the past year, which included cyber exploitation activities that grew more sophisticated, more targeted and more serious. Finally, McConnell stated that the Intelligence Community expects these trends to continue in the coming year. Most concerning was the following statement excerpted from the report.
"We assess that nations, including Russia and China, have the technical capabilities to target and disrupt elements of the US information infrastructure and for intelligence collection. Nation states and criminals target our government and private sector information networks to gain competitive advantage in the commercial sector." The report went on to state that terrorist groups, including al-Qaeda, HAMAS, and Hezbollah have expressed the desire to use cyber means to target the United States.
Criminal elements continue to show growing sophistication in technical capability and targeting, and today operate a pervasive, mature online service economy in illicit cyber capabilities and services available to anyone willing to pay.
The information contained in the testimony represents the cumulative views of highly skilled professionals working on this critical issue. All the warning signs are there.
The intelligence community has confirmed our fears. The "Cyber Arms Race" has begun.
-- Kevin Coleman
New Army Field Manual Preview
In a conference call with bloggers this morning, the Army outlined the newest version of its Field Manual (FM 3-0 Army Operations), the first revision of Army doctrine since 2001. According to LTG William Caldwell IV, Commander of the Combined Arms Center, the manual has finally taken the step of elevating stabilization operations to the level of offensive and defensive ops.
An Executive Summary was passed out beforehand that outlines the chapters of the manual, which goes like this:
-- Chapter 1 establishes the context of land operations in terms of a global environment of persistent conflict, the operational environment, and unified action. It discusses the Army's expeditionary and campaign capabilities while emphasizing that it is soldiers who accomplish missions.
-- Chapter 2 describes a spectrum of conflict extending from stable peace to general war. From that spectrum, it establishes five operational themes into which various joint operations fit. Borrowing heavily from emerging NATO doctrine, this chapter helps Army leaders to understand where diverse operations such as peacekeeping and counterinsurgency fit and shape supporting doctrine.
-- Chapter 3 is the most important chapter in the book; describing the Army's operational concept -- full spectrum operations. Full spectrum operations seize, retain, and exploit the initiative through combinations of four elements: offense, defense, and stability or civil support operations. Mission command is the preferred method of exercising battle command.
-- Chapter 4 addresses combat power, the means by which Army forces conduct full spectrum operations. It replaces the older battlefield operating systems ("BOS") and elements of combat power with six warfighting functions tied together by leadership and employing information. Combined arms and mutual support are the payoff.
-- Chapter 5 reviews the principles of command and control and how they affect the operations process -- plan, prepare, execute, and assess. The emphasis is on commanders and the central role that they have in battle command. Commanders understand, visualize, describe, direct, lead, and continually assess.
-- Chapter 6 discusses operational art, offering Army commanders a bridge between military theory and practice.
-- Chapter 7 is about information superiority, particularly information operations. Information operations divide into five Army information tasks, with particular emphasis on information engagement.
-- Chapter 8 addresses the significance of strategic and operational reach to the force, articulating how the Army capitalizes on unique expeditionary and campaign qualities to promptly deploy forces into any operational environment worldwide, even the most austere regions...
Read more on this and other defense insider news from our friends at Aviation Week on Military.com.
-- Christian
Iraqi Army Trading AKs for M-16s
Hard to believe, I know, but here's a story from today's headlines at Military.com that's sure to get some of you all riled up:
In a move that could be the most enduring imprint of U.S. influence in the Arab world, American military officials in Baghdad have begun a crash program to outfit the entire Iraqi army with M-16 rifles.
The initiative marks a sharp break for a culture steeped in the traditions of the Soviet-era M-16 is superior to the AK ... it's more durable," said Army Col. Stephen Scott, who's in charge of helping the Iraqi army get all the equipment it needs to outfit its forces.
"The Iraqis have embraced that ... and the fact that it is U.S. manufactured and supplied. They are very big on U.S.-produced [foreign military sales] materials," he said in an interview with military bloggers this month.
So far, the U.S. military has helped the Iraqi army purchase 43,000 rifles - a mix of full-stock M-16A2s and compact M-4 carbines. Another 50,000 rifles are currently on order, and the objective is to outfit the entire Iraqi army with 165,000 American rifles in a one-for-one replacement of the AK-47.
"Our goal is to give every Iraqi soldier an M-16A2 or an M-4," Scott said. "And as the Iraqi army grows, we will adjust."
Scott added the mass of AK-47s from various manufacturers floating through the Iraqi army's inventory could cause maintenance and reliability problems. Getting both U.S. and Iraqi forces on the same page when it comes to basic weaponry is part of the argument for M-16 outfitting.
"I'm also a fan of AKs," Scott said. "But keep in mind most of these AKs have been sitting around in bunkers or whatnot for 30 or 40 years [and] are in various stages of disrepair."
A variety of U.S. troops, including SEALs, Marines and Soldiers - and even civilian contractors - are training Iraqis on the M-16 and M-4 throughout the country. One civilian trainer told Military.com during a brief interview in Iraq that the Iraqi soldiers are a little behind the average American trooper when it comes to learning the various parts and breakdown of the M-16, but they're enthusiastic and quick learners on the range.
After seeing some of the firing range training himself, Scott added that he "asked the Iraqis how they liked the weapon and they said it was far superior, it was more accurate ... and more reliable."
"I think the transition is almost transparent from those older AKs," he said.
A system that registers each rifle with the individual who receives one that uses biometric data such as thumb prints and eye scans is meant to address concerns over U.S. weapons winding up in enemy hands. A July 2007 Government Accountability Office report concluded that as many as 190,000 weapons delivered to the Iraqi army were not accounted for and could've wound up in terrorist caches.
That's something Scott isn't going to allow on his watch.
"These Iraqi soldiers know that this weapon becomes part of their person," he said. "And they also know that they are responsible and accountable for that weapon."
And from the looks of it, Iraqi soldiers aren't willing to hand them over to the bad guys.
"Most of the soldiers think they will be just like the Americans, and that is making them very happy," said Capt. Rafaat Mejal Ahmed, the Iraqi 1st Division weapons and ammunition officer, in a Marine Corps release. "They think the modern technology will make them more powerful."
-- Christian
B-2 Suffers Fire in Crash
One of the pilots of the B-2 stealth bomber, Spirit of Kansas, reported a fire at takeoff from Andersen AFB, Guam which was followed quickly by loss of control of the bomber, according to a senior Air Combat Command official.
The stealth bomber rolled uncontrollably to the right and fell between the taxiway and the ramp at 10:45 am Feb. 23 Guam time just after passing the control tower. It was attempting a takeoff toward the seaward end of the runway. The two pilots ejected with one being hospitalized. A dark plume of smoke rose from the crash site and civilians outside the base reported a second explosion about 30-min. after the initial impact.
The aircraft can lose one or even two of its four General Electric F118-GE-100 17,300-lb. thrust engines and still take off, so it’s unlikely that engine failure was to blame, says a retired U.S. Air Force pilot who has flown the B-2. Moreover, early suggestions that the aircraft struck birds or stalled in a steep takeoff climb also have been dismissed as unlikely. Also, the weather was reported as clear.
The Spirit of Kansas, tail no. 890127, was the second in a four aircraft flight that was ending its deployment and taking off for return to home base at Whiteman AFB, Mo. They were being replaced by six B-52s as a forward-based, heavy-bomber force in the Pacific. The loss cuts the number of combat coded B-2s to 15 from 16 out of the total force of 21. The force has a minimum aircraft requirement of 19 airframes.
The other three B-2s later returned to Whiteman where the wing commander has declared a “safety pause” for the fleet, says ACC officials. During the pause procedures are being reviewed with the pilots and training is at a standdown. However, if the stealthy bomber is needed for an operational mission it is cleared to fly.
The aircraft that crashed rolled off Northrop Grumman’s line in 1989 and had accumulated 5,176 flying hr. at the time of the crash.
Early testing indicated that the aircraft would remain structurally intact for about 40,000 flying hr. Analyses also posited that the rudder attachment points would be the first structural failure item.
Read more on this story and others from our friends at Aviation Week on Military.com.
-- Christian
Air Force at a Crossroads
The U.S. Air Force -- plagued by a recent series of F-15 fighter crashes and the loss of a B-2 stealth bomber -- is fighting to maintain its approved force levels and to move forward with several aircraft programs. And, the Air Force has initiated a controversial move into Unmanned Aerial Vehicles.
In the fiscal year 2009 budget request the Air Force is asking for $117 billion to sustain the existing force, modernize the force, and provide for increasing personnel costs. The request is up $8.6 billion, or roughly eight percent, compared to the $108.4 billion that Congress provided for the Air Force in the current fiscal year. That amount may not be enough to maintain and modernize the 86 combat wings that Air Force officials refer to as the "required force."
The increasing costs of fuel and the invariably higher-than-predicted costs of new aircraft threaten the force level unless Congress provides additional funds. But the Army and Marine Corps, both being expanded and both suffering major material problems after several years of conflict in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the Navy’s massive ship cost problems make a substantial increase for Air Force programs unlikely.
Of the several aircraft programs being discussed the most critical in the view of senior Air Force commanders is the F-22 Raptor, the "next generation" stealth fighter aircraft. The Department of Defense has approved only four more F-22s after the fiscal 2009 budget which would provide a total of 187 aircraft. Previously the Pentagon has stonewalled buying more F-22s when Air Force studies indicated that at least 250 are needed with a goal of 381 aircraft. Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England has written that "in depth" reviews by the Pentagon show that buying F-35 Lightning II multi-role aircraft for the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps "provides more effective capability to the joint force commander than concentrating investments in a single service by buying more F-22s."
There are 20 F-22 aircraft in the fiscal 2009 budget, which reaches the 183 number (the 20 being part of a three-year, 60-aircraft multiyear contract). The four aircraft provided under Mr. England’s plan enable the Lockheed Martin production line to remain (barely) open until a key decision point in early 2009, when the new administration could make the decision about continuing F-22 production.
Beyond the F-22 issue, the Air Force is seeking more C-17 Globemaster III cargo aircraft (although none are provided in the basic fiscal 2009 budget request) while the forthcoming tanker aircraft procurement and the initiation of a new bomber aircraft will also demand more funding. And, there is the UAV issue. Of the 93 aircraft requested in the Air Force’s fiscal 2009 budget, more than half are unmanned aerial vehicles:
20 F-22 Raptor
8 F-35 Lightning II
6 CV-22 Osprey
4 MC-130 Combat Talon (Hercules)
2 HC-130 Hercules
1 C-29A
52 UAV
The unmanned aircraft are: 38 MQ-1B armed Predators, 9 MQ-9 Reapers (Predator B), and 4 RQ-4 Global Hawks.
Meanwhile, the Air Force and Army have agreed to cooperate on procuring and supporting Predator and Sky Warrior UAVs, which is expected to save money for both services. But the Air Force is concerned that the Army is using "software" to fly its UAVs as opposed to trained aircraft pilots, as does the Air Force. The Air Force does use non-pilots for controlling micro-UAVs (similar to the Army's five-pound Raven, which are used for base security functions). The Air Force uses rated pilots for the larger UAVs, being concerned about mission flexibility and the potential for collisions with other UAVs or manned aircraft.
The Air Force is expanding its UAV qualification and training programs, with a major effort underway to increase the number of pilots being transferred to UAV programs. The Army -- which uses mainly warrant officers as pilots for its thousands of helicopters -- cannot provide rated pilots to man the planned force of several hundred UAVs.
Thus, the Air Force is facing major challenges in several important areas.
-- Norman Polmar
No More Hydrazine
The Pentagon just put out a release saying "debris analysis" indicated the SM III hit on that wayard spy satellite had done its job...
"...officials are confident the missile intercept and destruction of a non-functioning National Reconnaissance Office satellite, achieved the objective of destroying the hydrazine tank and reducing, if not eliminating, the risk to people on Earth from the hazardous chemical.
"By all accounts this was a successful mission. From the debris analysis, we have a high degree of confidence the satellite's fuel tank was destroyed and the hydrazine has been dissipated," said Gen. James E. Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Now, that's interesting...but...(queue up the conspiracy theory montage here...) I'm wondering A.) just how did they do a debris analysis when it either burned up in the atmosphere or is still floating in suborbital space, and B.) what exactly does "reducing, if not eliminating, the risk to people on Earth from the hazardous chemical" mean? It's either gone, or it's not gone...Which is it?
Anyway, I think this whole satellite shootdown was a high-profile test of the ABM architecture, and we'll have to wait and see when the brass starts to testify on Capitol Hill over next year's funding outlay for the Missile Defense Agency if they start using this "one off" event as a rallying cry for more ABM money.
-- Christian
Dragon Skin Theft...Or Not...?
Here's an item that's actually a pretty interestinjg mystery. I was tipped off by Pinnacle Armor president Murray Neal, who sent me a link to the Soldiers for the Truth site (a huge backer of Neal's Dragon Skin armor) where they're looking into a hullabaloo that's erupted over some wayward DS vests.
It seems that a couple of the 30 Level IV Dragon Skin vests Neal sent to PEO Soldier back in 2006 for that series of first article tests the Army claimed (and we agreed) failed miserably have wound up on eBay. Soldiers for the Truth reports the vests showed up in February with a list price of $3,500.
The plot thickens with a local TV station in Fresno, Calif., taking Neal's bait and doing an in-depth report on the mysterious armor sale. They contacted none other than the Army's "Mr. Body Armor," Karl Masters, who says his office is being investigated over the eBay armor.
I contacted sources in PEO Soldier who clammed up, saying: "The Army, in cooperation with law enforcement agencies, is currently investigating the alleged theft of U.S. Government property and it would be inappropriate to comment on the progress of the investigation at this time."
That's a convenient way of saying "no comment" but I can understand, with their backs against the wall, why the Army would take a pass on throwing fuel on the fire.
I have no idea how this would have happened, but it sure is weird. The government is obligated to hold onto those items forever -- and certainly it is unethical, and maybe illegal, to sell them over an online auction site. The idea that Karl Masters, who I know pretty well from years of covering this, would sell these items on eBay is pretty far fetched in my mind. I know he is the root of all evil to DS backers, but in my experience, he's an intellect to be reckoned with, but no crook.
Could someone down the line in the Army testing chain have done something stupid like this? Surely.
I'd welcome any inside scoop our readers have on this. I'll keep kicking over some rocks to see if I can drum up more.
(Photo: Soldiers for the Truth)
-- Christian
Stealth Bomber Down!
For the first time in its history, a B-2 has crashed. The mishap happened as the bombed was attempting to take off from a base in Guam. Both pilots ejected safely. Here's part of the report from Military.com:
The aircraft was taking off with three others on their last flight out of Guam after a four-month deployment, part of a continuous U.S. bomber presence in the western Pacific. After the crash, the other three bombers were being kept on Guam, said Maj. Eric Hilliard at Hickham Air Force Base in Hawaii.
At least one B-2 bomber had taken off safely from Andersen Air Force Base but was brought back when another aircraft plunged to the ground.
There were no injuries on the ground or damage to buildings, and no munitions were on board. Each B-2 bomber costs about $1.2 billion to build.
Thick, black smoke could be seen billowing from the wreckage at Andersen, said Jeanne Ward, a resident in the northern village of Yigo who was on the base visiting her husband.
Ward said she didn't witness the crash but noticed a rising plume of smoke behind the base's air control tower.
She said crowds began to gather as emergency vehicles arrived. "Everybody was on their cell phones, and the first thing everyone wanted to know was did the pilots make it out in time," she said.
The Air Force, without identifying the pilots, said one was medically evaluated and released, and the other was in stable condition at Guam Naval Hospital.
Read the entire article here.
-- Ward
An Interview With Gen. P
Sometimes I can pull a rabbit out of a hat...
I had this scheduled for the last day of my embed in Iraq but was grounded in Baqubah because of weather and missed it. But he graciously rescheduled, and we're happy to bring it to you literally hours after we spoke with the man in charge on the ground in Iraq.
Click HERE to listen to the PodCast from the Editor's Desk with Gen. David Petraeus.
-- Christian
Osprey Gets Its Gun
I know there's some debate around these parts on whether or not the Osprey is combat effective with or without a defensive weapon.
We all know the MV-22 has a ramp-mounted gun pointing aft, which gives the plane very little in the way of fire supression in a hot LZ (that is, if the gun works. On my last flight on the Osprey in Iraq one of the planes' guns malfunctioned)...
My impression from flying around in several Ospreys in Iraq is that the speed and agility make up for a lack of defensive firepower...you don't see a door gun on a C-130 do you? But I can still understand why the SOF community wants a little more bang bang given its mission. And it seems to me that if you can then why don't you put a lead-spitting gatling gun on the darn thing. Better safe than sorry, I say.
So BAE Systems has been working with the SOF CV-22 folks to design a defensive weapon that sits under the Osprey's belly and can swing 360 degrees for covering fire. They just sent me a release yesterday that showed the company is well on its way to flight testing the gun, a modified GAU-2B minigun. It's an version of the company's Remote Guardian system which is intended for a variety of rotary aircraft in the US inventory.
I know our friends at Aviation Week reported the official "unveiling" of the system last fall at Modern Day Marine, but this marks the first time the system has been installed on an actual plane, readying it for the first test flight and aerial fire...
(PHOTO: BAE Systems)
-- Christian
Analyzing the Threat of Cyber Attack
Did you know that the Bush administration is pushing to spend $6 billion on cyber security in 2008? (Wall Street Journal)
Would you like to know why? If so read the facts below.
Did you know that AL QAEDA'S top cyber terrorist used phishing schemes and other cyber attacks to steal credit card accounts and buy $3 million worth of terrorist equipment? (FBI)
Did you realize that in the past minute over 5,000 significant incidents were reported to HackerWatch.org? (Hackerwatch.org)
Did you realize that the financial impact of computer viruses in 2005 was over $14 billion and continues to grow? (Computer Economics)
Did you know the busiest day of the week for vulnerability disclosures continued to be Tuesday with 1,361 new vulnerabilities disclosed on this day of the week in 2007? (IBM)
Did you know that nearly 90 percent of all the 2007 vulnerabilities could be remotely exploited? (IBM)
Did you know there was a new software vulnerability reported every 82 minutes? (CERT)
Did you know that Symantec recorded an average of 5,213 denial of service (DoS) attacks per day in the second half of 2006? (Symantec)
Did you know that in 2006 of the individuals who reported hard dollar losses the largest median losses were from the Nigerian letter fraud ($5,100) followed by check fraud ($3,744) and other investment fraud ($2,695). (Internet Computer Complaint Center)
Did you know that only about 1% of users follow corporate data and computer security policies? (Absolute Software Research Survey)
Did you know that 27% believe their company has experienced a data security breach? (Absolute Software Research Survey)
Did you know that so far this year there have been 44 corporate and governmental data breaches (reported)? That is about 1 per day when I collected this data. (Privacy Clearing House)
Did you know that all three branches of the military have cyber warfare /information warfare units, including: Navy – Network Warfare Command; Air Force – U.S. Cyber Command; Army - TRADOC G2.
Did you know that in a two week period five cables were severed in various parts of the Mediterranean Sea, leading to large scale disruption of the Internet and telecom services in the Middle East and parts of Southeast Asia. Two of the five cables were cut in two different places. (Reuters)
Did you know that organized crime has used the internet for criminal activity for some time. Recently, (2 years ago) there has been a huge increase in mob based attack sophistication that has moved organized crime over the internet from an irritation to a serious problem. (IT Security)
After reading the above information, how could anyone dismiss the threats we face in cyberspace? Yet some do, and some on here think I am overstating the threat. It has been my experience the one of the biggest security threats to an organization is the attitude of their Chief Security Officer. Most of the individuals I work with wake up every morning and ask themselves three questions.
1. What has happened that I don’t know about?
2. What do I need to know that I don’t?
3. Who are my new adversaries today?
The “I know everything” attitude of many of these individuals, increase the risk of a successful attack significantly. I was in one such meeting in the DC area where the CSO actually stated, “I have it all under control” yet they have lost three laptops in about a year and none of the hard drives were encrypted. And they contained sensitive data.
Consider this point: if the information provided here is publically available, what do you think the threat looks like to those of us with security clearances and who work in the area of international cyber warfare and attacks? You can be sure it is not better looking.
-- Kevin Coleman
Navy 1, Hydrazine tank 0
The lead story at Military.com covers the Navy's shoot down of the errant spy satellite and by all indications, it appears the shot went off without a hitch. Here's the AP video news coverage:
Noteworthy is the fact that the missile didn't have a warhead. Now whether it was about the hydrazine or the possible compromise of spy tech is another matter . . . and one that seems somewhat moot now. In any case, a DT high five to the Pacific Fleet blackshoes who pulled this feat off.
-- Ward
AF Has KC-X Backup Plan
Lt. Gen. Don Hoffman, the three-star in charge of U.S. Air Force budgeting, said Feb. 15 that although he will not speculate on the likelihood of a protest in the upcoming KC-X tanker award, the Air Force is prepared for any contingency with a $240 million Tanker Transfer Fund.
The fund has grown since November, when Congressional appropriators decided to provide the Air Force a $150 million cushion (DAILY, Nov. 11, 2007). "[The Tanker Transfer Fund] could be deployed in a protest," Hoffman said. "If [the KC-X award] does end up in protest, we'll support the Government Accountability Office's outcome and process."
Hoffman said he vehemently opposed the idea of a split buy, saying the contract has always been "winner take all. A split buy would take another 18 to 24 months of re-do."
(Read more on this and other inside news on planes, copters and blimps from our friends at Aviation Week on Military.com).
-- Christian
And Now a Way to BE Seen
From this morning's headlines at Military.com...
New Clothing Item IDs Friendlies
When Taliban forces attacked a police checkpoint in central Afghanistan under dark of night in late 2006, special-operations Master Sgt. Andrew Martin called in air support and then slapped a high-tech cloth-like device on his helmet for protection.
Fresh from labs at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, the device transmitted light from a powerful light-emitting diode, or LED, that pulsed through a fiber optic bundle, giving off infrared signals visible to pilots wearing night-vision goggles.
"The pilots were able to very quickly pick it up," recalled Martin, who has since retired from the Air Force. "What didn't happen was additional questions from the pilots asking me my location."
The new technology - called Target Recognition Operator Notification system - was designed to easily identify friendly forces and avoid casualties from friendly fire.
Martin liked the equipment so much he used it on about 35 missions over six months. He said it is better than strobe lights, which can be mistaken for machine-gun fire, or reflective tape, which is difficult to see from the air.
"U.S. forces have been dogged by the difficulty of finding each other in the fog of battle," said Loren Thompson, a defense analyst with the Lexington Institute in Arlington, Va. "What this new innovation allows is easy identification of friendly forces without helping the enemy do the same thing."
Read more on the TRON system at Military.com.
I have plenty of that IR glint tape -- and it's stitched all over my jackets and gear -- but I gotta tell you, I'd rather have something a lot bigger like this.
(PHOTO: AP)
-- Christian
The Invisible Cloak
A very cool story in today's Washington Post.
My understanding is that early attempts at this "light bending" technique required bulky power sources and crazy optics. But from this Washington Post piece, it looks as if materials science is beginning to catch up.
Seems to me at least in the early stages, vehicles and aircraft could use the technology since they can carry more weight and generate a lot of power.
And heck, I could sure use some of this stuff on my hunting forays...those damned deer keep spotting me...
From the Post...
Their Deepest Darkest Discovery
Black is getting blacker.
Researchers in New York reported this month that they have created a paper-thin material that absorbs 99.955 percent of the light that hits it, making it by far the darkest substance ever made -- about 30 times as dark as the government's current standard for blackest black.
The material, made of hollow fibers, is a Roach Motel for photons -- light checks in, but it never checks out. By voraciously sucking up all surrounding illumination, it can give those who gaze on it a dizzying sensation of nothingness.
"It's very deep, like in a forest on the darkest night," said Shawn-Yu Lin, a scientist who helped create the material at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, N.Y. "Nothing comes back to you. It's very, very, very dark."
But scientists are not satisfied. Using other new materials, some are trying to manufacture rudimentary Harry Potter-like cloaks that make objects inside of them literally invisible under the right conditions -- the pinnacle of stealthy technology.
Both advances reflect researchers' growing ability to manipulate light, the fleetest and most evanescent of nature's offerings. The nascent invisibility cloak now being tested, for example, is made of a material that bends light rays "backward," a weird phenomenon thought to be impossible just a few years ago.
Known as transformation optics, the phenomenon compels some wavelengths of light to flow around an object like water around a stone. As a result, things behind the object become visible while the object itself disappears from view.
"Cloaking is just the tip of the iceberg," said Vladimir Shalaev, a professor of electrical and computer engineering at Purdue University and an expert in the fledgling field. "With transformation optics you can do many other tricks," perhaps including making things appear to be located where they are not and focusing massive amounts of energy on microscopic spots.
U.S. military and intelligence agencies have funded the cloaking research "for obvious reasons," said David Schurig, a physicist and electrical engineer at North Carolina State University who recently designed and helped test a cloaking device. In that experiment, a shielded object a little smaller than a hockey puck was made invisible to a detector that uses microwaves to "see."
The first working cloaks will be limited that way, he said -- able to steer just a limited part of the light spectrum around objects -- and it could be years before scientists make cloaks that work for all wavelengths, including the visible spectrum used by the human eye.
But even cloaks that work on just a few key wavelengths could offer huge benefits, making objects invisible to laser beams used for weapons targeting, for example, or rendering an enemy's night goggles useless because objects would be invisible to the infrared rays those devices use.
The Defense Department did not fund development of the new blacker-than-black material, created by Lin and his colleagues. But military officials were among the first to call after a description of the work appeared in this month's issue of the journal Nano Letters, Lin said in an interview.
Substances that absorb every smidgeon of incoming visible light could complement existing stealth coatings that absorb radar waves, Lin said. He and others emphasized, however, that there are also peaceful and more immediate applications for the blackest stuff on Earth.
Solar panels coated with it would be much more efficient than those coated with conventional black paint, which reflects 5 percent or more of incoming light. Telescopes lined with it would sop up random flecks of incidental light, providing a blacker background to detect faint stars.
And a wide array of heat detectors and energy-measuring devices, including climate-tracking equipment on satellites, would become far more accurate than they are today if they were coated with energy-grabbing superblack.
That helps explain why Lin has been fielding queries from solar-energy companies such as SolFocus of Mountain View, Calif., and the European Space Agency.
"The more black the material the better," said Gerald Fraser, a physicist at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the federal agency that specializes in fine measurements and industrial standards.
That agency offers scientists a chemical mix it calls "standard black," which for years has been the defining measure of blackness. Photographers and printers use it to calibrate their gray scales. Industrial radiologists use it to calibrate X-ray imaging systems that detect radiation or hidden defects in building materials.
That black reflects about 1.4 percent of incoming visible light, and in recent years it has become somewhat outmoded. In 2003, scientists developed a substance made of nickel and phosphorus that reflected just 0.17 percent of visible light, winning it a Guinness World Records listing and kudos in Time magazine as one of that year's 300 "coolest inventions."
The newest black -- which when held next to something conventionally black, such as a tuxedo jacket, is noticeably blacker -- reflects just 0.045 percent of visible light.
It is made of carbon nanotubes: microscopic, hollow fibers whose walls are just one atom thick. Importantly, the fibers are widely spaced, providing plenty of space to allow light in and almost no surfaces to bounce it back out.
"There are a lot of materials that are very absorbing of light so that once the light gets in, very little is reflected. That is not the big issue," said John Pendry, a physics professor at Imperial College London. "The big issue is persuading the light to go in there in the first place" -- something the New York team accomplished by spacing the nanotubes so widely...
While Lin and his colleagues, including Pulickel Ajayan, now at Rice University, pursue applications for their superblack, Pendry and others are hoping to go further by perfecting complete invisibility. The big difference is that a superblack object, even if invisible to the eye, still casts a shadow behind it, while an object shielded by an invisibility cloak does not.
Pendry pioneered much of modern thinking about how to attain full invisibility using "metamaterials" -- substances engineered to manhandle light. Ordinary matter, such as glass or water, slows and bends light as it passes through. Metamaterials contain bits of metal or other substances embedded in precise patterns to make the light bend in an opposite direction from normal paths.
"In a sense you have some negative space," Pendry said. "The light appears to go backward in space."
The first generation, metamaterial "cloaks" are not thin and flexible like Harry Potter's imagined version but are inches thick and solid, resembling canisters, making them able to hide a stationary object but not a moving person. But the science is progressing quickly, physicist Schurig said.
To make a thin, flexible metamaterial cloak, Schurig said, "is technically challenging but not fundamentally impossible." And although no cloak can yet make objects fully invisible to the human eye, he added, it may not be long before scientists can bend the visible spectrum enough to make an object hard to see...
Read the rest of this fascinating story at Washingtopost.com.
-- Christian
Spy Satellite Not the First to Fall
As reported in the press, a Navy Aegis missile cruiser in the Pacific Ocean will try an unprecedented shoot-down of the out-of-control, school-bus-size U.S. spy satellite loaded with a toxic fuel as it begins its plunge to Earth. Marine General James E. Cartwright, the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that the Navy missile will be fired as the satellite re-enters the atmosphere and "has a reasonably high opportunity for success." The Navy has been developing -- and has successfully tested -- a ballistic missile intercept capability aboard several of its Aegis cruisers and destroyers.
Aegis is an advanced radar/fire-control system that was originally developed to destroy incoming anti-ship cruise missiles. The Navy has 22 cruisers and some 60 destroyers with the Aegis system and between 90 and 122 vertical-launch cells for surface-to-air and Tomahawk land-attack missiles. The Navy is upgrading several of these ships for the ballistic missile defense role.
The three previous spy satellites that fell to earth with nuclear reactors on board were Soviet Radar Ocean Reconnaissance Satellites (RORSAT). The RORSAT was part of the world's first satellite system orbited for ocean surveillance to detect warships on the high seas. The Soviet Union began tests of the system in 1967 and the first operational RORSATs went into orbit in 1974.
Two types of satellites were used in tandem: Electronic Intelligence (ELINT) satellites that were "passive" and sought to "lock on" to electronic signals emanating from ships, especially radar transmissions. The 18,400-pound EINT satellites became operational about 1970. Pairs of ELINT satellites were coordinated with a single RORSAT, guiding the latter to a suspected target ship. The 10,000-pound RORSAT could then use active radar to precisely locate and target Western warships. Later RORSAT satellites could send targeting data directly to missile-armed ships, surface ships, and submarines as well as to ground stations (as did the early RORSATs).
The power requirements for the RORSAT's radar was provided by a small nuclear reactor that carried some 110 pounds of enriched uranium (U235) to produce up to ten kilowatts of power for some 90 to 120 days in space. When the service life of these Kosmos-series RORSATs was complete the reactor section carrying the radioactive fuel and weighing about one ton was designed to be boosted into higher orbits -- more than 550 miles -- where they would circle the earth for more than 500 years and then cause no danger when they did come down and burn in the atmosphere. (They normally orbited at an altitude of about 130 miles.)
But three reactor sections malfunctioned and plunged into the atmosphere: Kosmos 954 in January 1978, with portions of the craft landing in Canada; Kosmos 1402 in February 1983, which fell into the Indian Ocean; and Kosmos 1990 in February 1989. Apparently no significant pieces of the last survived reentering the atmosphere.
No attempt was made to intercept those SPYSAT reactor sections when they plunged to earth.
-- Norman Polmar
Cyber Attack: Online Bank Heist
If someone enters a bank and hand the teller a note, demanding money, it is on the evening news. If someone does the same thing in five banks, it hits the national news. If someone does it to 400 banks online – NOT A WORD. This is not a hypothesis it is a fact.
The cyber weapon used in the 400 bank robberies is called SilentBanker. Security professionals are concerned over the discovery of a banking Trojan which steals user data that impact more than 400 banks worldwide. The information that SilentBanker collects gives it the ability to reroute money to another account owned by the attackers or who they represent. This is done without the user's knowledge until he receives his bank statement.
Trojan: (short for Trojan Horse) is a piece of malicious software which appears to perform a certain action but in fact performs another. In addition, trojan horses are notorious for installing backdoor programs.
This appears to be just the beginning of the attack. The Trojan first appeared in December 2007 and continues to spread around the world. SilentBanker is more powerful that originally thought. The malicious code is so smart that if it is missing information needed to complete the transaction, the trojan enables the attackers to add extra code to the authorization page asking the user for that missing data. The rapid increase in sophistication and complexity of the latest cyber attack tools is a clear trend that is challenging the cyber security industry to stay ahead of the criminals and terrorists.
No one knows who is collecting the money, nor how they intend to use it. Could it be for drugs, terrorist attacks, purchasing of weapons or just very sophisticated bank robbers? One thing is for sure, this is just another example of our vulnerability.
PROTECTION: Make sure your anti-virus software is updated and operational. Vigilance is also a powerful defense. Check your bank statements and balances regularly and report any suspicious activity to your bank immediately.
-- Kevin Coleman
More on the Air Force "Star Wars" Over F-22
Our friend and sometimes DT poster Bob Cox of Fort Worth Star-Telegram fame had this piece on Saturday:
General reprimanded for disagreeing on F-22
A senior Air Force general picked a bad time to publicly disagree with Defense Secretary Robert Gates over his opposition to buying more F-22 Raptors.
After weeks of debate over the future of Lockheed Martin's high-priced stealth fighter jet, Gates sent Air Force leaders a message to tone down the rhetoric by having a top general reprimanded for suggesting that the service would find a way to circumvent Pentagon and White House objections.
Experts don't expect Air Force officials to change their minds about the need to buy more F-22s after the disciplining of Gen. Bruce Carlson. But a Washington insider said Friday that service leaders will turn down the volume.
"The secretary of the Air Force has sent a message to all of his four stars [generals] saying they need to be more circumspect in their language," said Loren Thompson of the Lexington Institute, who has close ties to the Air Force and is a consultant to Lockheed.
Leaders of the Air Force and the Pentagon have been engaged for weeks in an unusually public and testy disagreement about the future of the F-22 program.
The latest developments were spurred by Carlson's comments published this week in the trade journal Aviation Week.
The general, speaking to reporters Wednesday, said the Air Force was "committed to funding 380" F-22s regardless of the Bush administration's budget policies. "We're building a program right now to do that. It's going to be incredibly difficult ... but we've done this before."
Carlson's comments came as Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England was testifying before congressional committees.
In an exchange during a Senate Budget Committee hearing Tuesday, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, asked whether the Pentagon would buy F-22s to replace aging F-15s, some of which have been grounded because of structural defects.
"I do not believe the F-22 will be the replacement for the F-15," England said. "I would expect instead to try and accelerate the [F-35] joint strike fighter," which he called a capable and far less costly replacement.
The Air Force has long insisted that it needs at least 381 F-22s, which cost about $175 million each, according to budget documents. Bush's 2009 defense budget provides funds to buy 20 F-22s, which would bring the total force to 183 planes.
England and Gates have insisted that they do not see a compelling need to buy more than a few additional F-22s, especially with the government facing the costs of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as developing and procuring future weapons.
"The reality is, we are fighting two wars ... and the F-22 has not performed a single mission in either theater," Gates said in an appearance before a Senate committee last week.
Without an additional multiyear order for F-22s, Lockheed says it will have to begin shutting down the assembly line.
The company builds the plane's midfuselage in Fort Worth, where about 1,800 people work on the program. It assembles the plane in Marietta, Ga.
About 8,000 people at Lockheed's Fort Worth plant are working on the F-35 program, which is expected to provide most of the facility's work for the next 20 to 30 years.
Winslow Wheeler, an analyst with the Center for Defense Information in Washington and a critic of the F-22 program, said Gates' rebuke would have little effect on the argument over the F-22 because Congress will likely grant the wishes of the Air Force and Lockheed and provide money for more F-22s.
"There's 44 states where there's F-22 production," Wheeler said, adding that even liberal Democrats such as Wyden like to preserve defense jobs.
The office of Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne released a statement late Friday saying that the "F-22 program is critical for the nation's defense" but that Carlson's comments "misrepresent the position of the U.S. Air Force. The Air Force wholeheartedly supports the President's budget request for the F-22 program."
-- Christian
A Piece of the Mughniyah Puzzle...
Here's a story forwarded by Defense Tech contributor Aharon Etengoff, our mideast expert.
From the Sunday Times (of London)
NOTHING seemed very remarkable about the short, bearded man who mingled with other guests on Tuesday evening at a reception in Damascus, the Syrian capital, to mark the 29th anniversary of Ayatollah Khomeini’s Iranian revolution.
Yet before the night was over he was dead in the twisted wreckage of his car and the inevitable assumption was that Mossad, the Israeli foreign intelligence service, had killed him with an ingeniously planted bomb.
The news spread rapidly that the dead man was Imad Mughniyeh, an elusive figure known as “the Fox” who had been one of the world’s most feared terrorist masterminds.
Robert Baer, a former CIA agent who spent years on his trail, said Mughniyeh was “probably the most intelligent, most capable operative we’ve ever run across”.
As the Israelis rejoiced, Iran and Hezbollah, the militant Shi’ite group, which together had harnessed Mugniyeh’s expertise, mourned his death at a huge funeral in Beirut, where he established his terrorist network.
Mughniyeh’s mother, Um Imad, sat amid a sea of black chadors, a lonely, sombre figure as mourners held their hero’s picture aloft.
“If only I had more boys to carry on in his footsteps,” she sighed, confessing that she did not have any pictures of him, even from his childhood, as he had taken them away. He was the third of her sons to die in a car bombing.
With a price of $25m (£12.7m) on his head, he was always vigilant. Some say he had had plastic surgery to alter his face in an effort to elude the Americans and Israelis who blamed him for plane hijackings and other bloody attacks which killed hundreds of their citizens in the Middle East and as far away as South America.
He had grown accustomed to living dangerously and there was no reason he should have feared for his safety last Tuesday as he sipped fruit juice at the party at the Iranian cultural centre. Mughniyeh was on fairly good terms with everybody present – almost all the leaders of the Damascus-based militant groups were represented.
At 10.35pm he decided to go home. Having exchanged customary kisses with his host, Hojatoleslam Ahmad Musavi, the newly appointed Iranian ambassador, Mughniyeh stepped into the night.
Minutes later he was seated in his silver Mitsubishi Pajero in a nearby street when a deafening blast ripped the car apart and killed him instantly.
According to Israeli intelligence sources, someone had replaced the headrest of the driver’s seat with another containing a small high-explosive charge. Israel welcomed his death but the prime minister’s office denied responsibility. Hezbollah accused the “Zionist Israelis” of killing its “brother commander” but believed the explosive had been detonated in another car by satellite.
Read the rest of the Times story HERE...
-- Christian
AF Gen. Gets Slap-Down from the Big Boss
I LOVE it!
From today's LA Times:
In an intensifying dispute over weapons priorities, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates on Thursday privately rebuked a four-star general for suggesting the Air Force intended to buy twice as | |
