JSF Program Chief Talks Competing Engines

Now, I've been dead set against the idea of spending money on an alternate engine to the JSF -- seeing it purely as a jobs program for GE/Rolls and their congressional benefactors.

And now it seems our friends from Av Week have added to the long standing Pentagon policy, quoting the program's top official saying "we don't want the engine...but I know I'm going to get it anyway"...(my quotes not his)...

And I love this "competitive advantage" argument...If there are efficiencies found in competition of this scale, why not just bring Boeing back into the picture and compete all the parts of the plane? In any case, I liked the look of the Boeing concept demonstrator anyway.

Without further ado, our Av Week installment:

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

The top Joint Strike Fighter official says he unequivocally supports President Barack Obama's fiscal 2010 budget request, which does not seek funds for a second JSF engine -- but he is still planning for the F136 and suggests Washington consider the risk otherwise.

Citing the potential for "competitive advantage" from alternate engines for the single-engine F-35, and noting that there could be an operational risk some day from having just one engine, Marine Corps Brig. Gen. David Heinz told reporters at the JSF Joint Program Office June 2 that there might be considerations beyond the financial cost of funding dual powerplant efforts.

"Do we still believe that's acceptable?" Heinz asked rhetorically.

Meantime, the general -- selected for his second star after his promotion from deputy program chief -- says it would be irresponsible for him not to plan for both engine efforts. "I have to," he asserts, adding it would be "downright reckless" not to after Congress has earmarked funds for the second engine several times already. And besides, military officials spend a lot of their time planning for things that do not happen, he joked.

Heinz explained to the roundtable of reporters that funding development of a second engine from within the existing F-35 budget would cut production by 50 or more aircraft and push up program costs -- a point he made to Aviation Week last week. But the program executive officer also stressed that economic modeling was difficult, and that a competition for the engines would likely drive down costs.

Heinz further asserted that the primary Pratt & Whitney F135 engine has yet to truly compete with the General Electric/Rolls-Royce F136, regardless of what Pratt and some supporters may suggest.

Assuming the program's planned ramp-up and a 50-50 split engine order during the sixth low-rate initial production tranche, fiscal 2013 would be the first genuine year of the rivalry. Such a race could bring technology advancements too, the general notes. "They are just beginning in that competition," he says.

Read the rest of this story, check out DARPA's 'jump jeep' and listen to a sweet podcast from our good friends at Aviation Week, exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

Pentagon Seeks More Power From Vehicles

This article first appeared in Defense Technology International.
A strong argument could be made that given the recent innovations in ground-vehicle armor, and vehicle-mounted communications and sensor equipment brought about by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. military is in a "Golden Age" for tactical vehicles.

It's jarring to think that just a few years ago, U.S. forces entered Iraq in thin-skinned, often doorless or roofless Humvees, vehicles that now seem more appropriate for museums than combat zones. The unforeseen needs of extra armor, especially underbelly armor to deflect roadside bombs, and the exponentially greater power-generation requirements of a force that increasingly relies on sensors and communications gear, has strained the fleet to its limits, and led to a revolution in vehicle technology.

Many of the changes this has spawned can be seen in two new development projects: the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV), envisioned as the battlefield replacement of the Humvee, and the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) All-Terrain Vehicle (M-ATV), an interim replacement for Humvees in the rugged terrain of Afghanistan until the JLTV is fielded in 2015.

But while the attention of the military and industry is fixed on these two designs, with their electronics, sturdier suspension systems, lightweight composite armor and increased payloads, Brig. Gen. Brian Layer, commander of the Army's Transportation Center, calls attention to the Expanded Capacity Vehicle-2 (ECV2) from AM General, an upgraded and improved Humvee that he says is the "middle piece" that will get the military through until the JLTV is fielded. The ECV2 incorporates lessons learned in Iraq and Afghanistan, and so offers better power production capabilities, an engine moved forward, raised profile, more room in the crew compartment and electronic controls -- features that take into account the growing power needs and space requirements of sensors and communications gear.

The ECV2 isn't slated to hit the dirt until 2010, but one selling point is that it provides the same 3,500-lb. payload Humvees had before being weighed down with bolt-on armor in-theater. For whatever reason -- probably due to its flashier JLTV, MRAP and M-ATV cousins -- the ECV2 has been largely ignored in the rush to get new vehicles to troops in the field. Considering that it comes in at roughly half the cost of the JLTV (but without most of its technological upgrades and cutting-edge armor), it seems to be a capable vehicle that might get another look in budget-conscious times.

Throwing a little drama into the mix, Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Conway warned in April that the service would not participate in the JLTV program if prototypes do not get lighter. The Marine Corps, he said, "will not buy a vehicle that's 20,000 lb." Depending on what the "evolution of development looks like, we may have to depart that buy and rehabilitate what we've got," Conway said. But to add all of these capabilities to existing or in-development programs requires the vehicles to produce much more electrical wattage than they have been able to generate. Requirements for the JLTV, for example, call for each vehicle to have a 30-kw. generator.

Michael Gallagher, program manager for expeditionary power systems for the Marine Corps, says the service is trying to meet the need for juice by retrofitting 400-amp. alternators with reduced-diameter pulleys on Humvees to generate more electricity. "One of the key incentives for this was that more power is needed, but more power was really needed at lower speeds, when vehicles are idling, or [moving slowly]," he said at a tactical vehicle conference in April.

Gallagher reported that his office received economic stimulus funding for the project, and is using the cash to bring the system to a reasonable level of maturity before turning it over to industry later this year in an open competition, with the goal of testing it in 2010 and 2011. Gallagher admitted, though, that "400 amps can only get us so far for so long -- in the future 400 amps will not be enough power," especially considering that he was talking about DC power. One approach the Marines are looking at is giving Humvees 20 kw. (800 amps) of onboard power.

To put this in perspective, when Humvees were first fielded in the 1980s, they had 60-amp. alternators. Compare that to the 600-800-amp. alternators the M-ATV and JLTV are expected to use. But even that exponentially enhanced requirement, Gallagher admitted, might not be enough on a future battlefield. Vehicles today are expected to support a mix of military and commercial off-the-shelf electronics, he said, all with different power requirements. And the need will grow.

There is concern as well in the Stryker vehicle community about power generation. The 8 X 8 infantry vehicle, made by General Dynamics, doesn't generate enough power to run all of its electronics simultaneously, according to Robert Hobbs, deputy capability manager at the Army's Training and Doctrine Command. The vehicle uses an analog system, which the Army wants to replace with digital technology.

Hobbs also spoke about suspension issues the vehicle could face if more armor is added to an already-stressed frame, which is "at the edge" of the weight the suspension system can accommodate. Originally designed at about 38,000 lb., with various armor packages Strykers now clock in at about 52,000 lb. Program managers, as a result, are looking at a semiactive suspension to handle the weight.

All of this work on power generation and suspension gear, and meeting the urgent battlefield needs of Iraq and Afghanistan, is siphoning cash away from other vehicles. Hobbs said work on the Stryker M1133 Medical Evacuation Vehicle (MEV) was "moving forward," and General Dynamics had been given the go-ahead to build the MEV to replace M113s. That order, however, was put on hold. "We took the money that was scheduled to go into the 113 divesture and moved it to buy equipment for a Stryker brigade going to Afghanistan."

With all this movement across the wheeled tactical vehicle fleet, Col. Mike Smith, director of training doctrine and combat command at the Army's Armor Center, didn't inspire much confidence when he called into question the next big-ticket tactical vehicle, the JLTV. Smith told the conference that he's "not sure" if the Defense Dept. "has figured out what it really wants us to do with JLTV yet. The lighter family of vehicles crapped out on us and is no longer cost-effective." He said the Defense Dept. is trying to get ahead of the issue, "but I'm not sure if we've figured out what it is we want in terms of" how the vehicle should perform in combat.

Read the rest of this story, check out spooky Skunk Works' plastic plane, debate the cost of cancelling the Raptor and check out the KillerBee's tour de France from our friends at Aviation Week, exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

Schwartz Wish List: Boost F-35, Plan NGB

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

U.S. Air Force Chief of Staff Norton Schwartz said increasing production rates for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and developing the next-generation bomber are at the top of his wish list of projects to fund if the service had more money.

Testifying before the House Armed Services Committee on the Air Force's $160.5 billion fiscal 2010 budget request May 19, Schwartz said service leaders felt they had enough tactical aircraft capability despite Defense Secretary Robert Gates' plans to halt F-22 Raptor procurement at 187 aircraft.

The Air Force chief said the service's leadership believed it was a "prudent opportunity to accelerate the retirement of older aircraft." The FY '10 budget calls for retiring 250 F-15s, F-16s and A-10s, enabling the Air Force to redistribute more than $3.5 billion over the next six years to modernize combat air forces into a "smaller but more capable force," Schwartz and Air Force Secretary Michael Donley told lawmakers in joint written testimony.

Schwartz did say more money would make it easier and faster to upgrade remaining legacy aircraft and make modifications to the F-22 until the F-35 starts rolling off the line in large numbers.

Schwartz said the Air Force would like to see F-35 production boosted to at least 80 aircraft and perhaps as many as 110 per year before the F-16s start retiring in large numbers.

Committee members, including Chairman Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) and Rep. John McHugh (N.Y.), the senior Republican on the panel, worried about producing and flying an aircraft while it was still being tested.

Donley conceded budget constraints compelled the Air Force to make some difficult calls. If there was more money "we might have made some different choices," Schwartz added. But both leaders insisted the Air Force was not short-changing itself.

The chief of staff said his wish list also included developing plans for the future long-range strike capability. "We need, through the QDR [Quadrennial Defense Review] and the NPR [Nuclear Posture Review] to get our secretary of defense comfortable with the parameters of what we propose for that platform."

Read the rest of this story, see who's calling for more laser power, see if it's a drone or a toy and read the USAF wish list for 2010 from our friends at Aviation Week, exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

USAF Could Lose Next Tanker Duel Oversight

This article first appeareed in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

Pentagon officials have not yet decided whether an upcoming KC-X competition between Boeing and a Northrop Grumman/EADS North America team to build new aerial refueling tankers will be managed by the U.S. Air Force or the Defense Department's acquisition chief, according to David Van Buren, acting assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition.

The competition was called off last year by Defense Secretary Robert Gates after threats from Boeing that it would not compete under the parameters set forth at the time. In February 2008, Northrop Grumman/EADS won a $1.5 billion contract to develop an Airbus A330-200-based tanker, but Boeing's protest of the process turned up several missteps on the part of the Air Force in managing the duel. Northrop's contract was dashed as a result.

The Air Force's acquisition corps has fallen under scrutiny in part because of the tanker missteps, problems in managing the program to buy new combat-search-and-rescue helicopters and -- years ago -- an admission from former top procurement official Darleen Druyun that she unfairly steered contracts to Boeing prior to taking an executive position with the company.

While Air Force officials acknowledge problems in some competitions, they are defending their overall record. Out of 165,000 competitive contracts managed by USAF last year, 121 sparked protests. Two -- or just 0.07 percent -- were sustained, says Lt. Gen. Mark Shackelford, military deputy to the Air Force acquisition czar. "The notion that our process...is a broken process is not borne out by the statistics," he says.

If the service is empowered to manage the competition, Shackelford says officials are taking the steps to ensure the process is consistent and fair so that if another protest is filed, the service will not be found at fault and airframes can begin being delivered.

However, the stressing conditions leading up to the last fouled attempt have not changed. Boeing is likely to propose a 767 variant; during the earlier competition, Boeing proposed a 767-200LRF, a new variant that combined doors and floors, cockpit and tail sections from other commercial models. This made Boeing's development cost higher than Northrop and EADS', which was able to propose the A330-200 with lower up-front cost. And the Pentagon must still grapple with how to fairly compare two dissimilar commercially derived products on a level playing field.

During the course of past attempts at the competition, both contractors threatened not to bid, effectively holding the Pentagon hostage to shift acquisition parameters to fit their proposals or dash the hope of a competition.

Read the rest of this story, see NorGrum's Global Hawk sales pitch, watch the Panther stalking tangos and ponder how Israel might confront Iran's nuke program from our friends at Aviation Week, exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

Pentagon Budget Provides a Short-term View

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates was not in the room when the Pentagon unveiled its first budget request under the Obama administration on May 7, but he did not need to be, as his fingerprints are all over its themes of reform and unconventional warfare, as well as its omissions.

Those omissions include the absence of budget projections for the next five years. This is a budget for fiscal 2010 only, designed to start the Pentagon on its new path and carry it through to completion of the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), which will shape spending from FY '11 onward.

"We do not have a plan beyond 2010," said Robert Hale, the Pentagon comptroller, in unveiling the proposed $663.8 billion budget. "We will await the results of the QDR."

Also missing were the new program starts that might have been expected in the 2010 budget cycle. The biggest is a restart: $439 million to begin another competition to replace the U.S. Air Force's KC-135 tankers.

Procurement programs getting under way or accelerating in 2010 include the Boeing P-8A maritime-patrol aircraft, with six for the Navy; Boeing AH-64D Block III, with eight for the Army; and General Atomics MQ-1C Warrior unmanned aircraft, with 36 for the Army.

The Air Force gets its first eight L-3/Alenia C-27J Joint Combat Aircraft, and takes over the program from the Army, but planned procurement is cut to 38 aircraft from 78. "We expect to get synergy with the C-130J in the Air Force, because of their commonality," said Vice Adm. Steve Stanley, director of force structure and resources for the joint staff.

C-12s

The Army is to procure six additional Hawker Beechcraft C-12 manned surveillance aircraft in 2010, and the possibility of transferring the Air Force's 37 MC-12W Project Liberty aircraft to the Army is under examination, according to Lt. Gen. Edgar Stanton, military deputy for budget.

Most of the terminations were already known, thanks to Gates' unveiling of his overaching budget plans in April (Aerospace DAILY, April 7). Additions to the list are the Missile Defense Agency's Kinetic Energy Interceptor, terminated because of "technical problems," Hale said.

He defended the Pentagon's decision to defy Congress and attempt to cancel the General Electric/Rolls-Royce F136 alternate engine for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter for a third time. "We don't see a business case [for a second engine]. We think [cancellation] is the right thing for us to do."

Some of the terminations announced by Gates could lead to new programs after 2010, including a new presidential helicopter to replace the overbudget VH-71A. "We have restarted the requirements process to develop a proposal for a new competition," Stanley said. "We will work with the White House to better define the requirement and be more fiscally informed."

Read the rest of this story, check out the Phantom Ray, say your "aaaargh" and watch Eurofighters in Oz from our friends at Aviation Week, exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

AgustaWestland Pitches VH-71 Compromise

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

Stung by criticism in Washington over the VH-71 presidential helicopter program that U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates wants to scrap and reassess, AgustaWestland is firing back and arguing, essentially, that there is no reason to start all over.

Rather than junking the Increment 1 helos, which the Pentagon says only have 5-10 years of useful life and are therefore not worth fielding, AgustaWestland argues that the rotorcraft, with some certification activities, can be validated for at least 10,000 hours of useful life, not the 1,500 specified by the Navy. The baseline AW101 aircraft is already certified for that flight time.

Moreover, with about $3.3 billion already sunk into the program, AgustaWestland argues it can deliver 19 more Increment 1 variants for another $3.5 billion.

The total would roughly equal the original VH-71 program budget before costs more than doubled as requirements grew and the program raced ahead.

The helo maker further is floating the idea of building an upgraded version, a so-called Increment 1.5, which would be close to meeting the full program requirements but below the $13 billion price tag the program has now reached.

Meanwhile, AgustaWestland has delivered the fifth pilot-production VH-71 from its Yeovil, U.K., production facility.

Chief Executive Officer Giuseppe Orsi says that while program costs have doubled, the helicopter's portion is only a comparatively modest 8 percent over plan and six months behind schedule, which he attributes to 50 major and 800 other design changes.

AgustaWestland on April 28 finished delivery of Increment 1, with the last of nine VH-71s now bound for completion with integrator Lockheed Martin.

Read the rest of this story, give a listen to the latest Check Six podcast, get smart on the tanker tango and check out UK Globemaster IIIs from out friends at Aviation Week, exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

Close Encounters of the Pirate Kind

This article first appeared in Aviation Week & Space Technology.

The U.S. is exploring the use of commercial satellites to enhance ship identification and communication for the battle against piracy.

Long before the U.S.-flagged container ship Maersk Alabama was attacked by Somali pirates this month, a sister vessel, the Maersk Iowa, was plying the sea lanes between the U.S. East Coast and the Indian Ocean, testing a device that combines the information obtained from shipboard radar and identification transponders to give authorities a better overview of who is on the water and what they are up to.

Now, the U.S. Office of Global Maritime Situational Awareness wants to leverage that data fusion technology to create a spaced-based collaboration for International Global Maritime Awareness. Guy Thomas, the office's science and technology adviser, envisions a networked information system using commercial satellites to transmit a common operating picture to authorities, allowing them to monitor large ocean areas.

Thomas, a former Navy signals intelligence officer working for the interagency maritime situational awareness office, thinks navigational radar and other sensor data from thousands of merchant ships -- enhanced by commercial satellites rapidly relaying the information to authorities -- could help overcome the challenge of monitoring the vast maritime domain.

Using existing commercial satellite technology, such as synthetic aperture radar (SAR) and electro-optical and infrared imaging, could provide all-weather night-and-day surveillance, even in heavy cloud cover. The satellites and shipboard sensors would complement each other, either calling attention to anomalies or checking and verifying them. The time it takes to download information from a satellite could be as little as 5 min., says Thomas. The information would be made available to authorities in an unclassified format. L-band radar, less detailed but also less expensive, would be adequate to detect the wake of ships at sea from space, he asserts.

Probably the greatest obstacle facing the warships from more than a dozen nations patrolling the pirate-infested waters between the Indian Ocean and the Red Sea is that the area "is just vast, more than a million square miles," says Gordan Van Hook, the director of innovation and concept development for the U.S.-based Maersk Line Ltd. According to U.S. Central Command, 33,000 ships passed through the Gulf of Aden in 2008. The same year, 122 piracy events occurred, with 42 successful and 80 unsuccessful.

International maritime regulations require commercial ships weighing more than 300 tons to carry an Automated Information System. Initially intended as an anti-collision device, the AIS is similar to the transponders that FAA regulations require on civil aircraft. Broadcasting on VHF radio, it divulges a ship's identification number, navigation status, speed and course heading every 2-10 sec. Name, cargo, size, destination and estimated time of arrival are broadcast about every 6 min. Other vessels with AIS in range constantly receive those data. However, each vessel is its own information bubble, says Van Hook, and cannot share data about other ships it encounters with authorities when more than 50 mi. from shore.

In a test project funded by the Transportation Dept., Lockheed Martin put a prototype data fusion system, known as Neptune, on Maersk cargo vessels, starting with the Maersk Iowa in 2006. Neptune took the information obtained by the ship's radar, which has a radius of about 20 mi., and combined it with data from passing ships received through its AIS. The information was sent via an Inmarsat satellite to a Lockheed Martin fusion center in Eagan, Minn., says Van Hook.

Read the rest of this story, give your guess on how many tactical vehicles are needed, ponder the possibilities of the split tanker buy and see where Paris is looking to gas up from our friends at Aviation Week, exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

Marines Equipment Woes Increasing Problem

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

Due to the strains of simultaneously fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan while running other missions around the world, the U.S. Marine Corps is nearly tripling the planned utilization rates of many of its aircraft platforms, Gen. James Amos, Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps, told the Senate Armed Services Committee April 22.

The F/A-18C and D; the KC-130; the EA-6B; and the MV-22 Osprey are all "flying at utilization rates far beyond those for which they were designed," the general warned, adding that as the platforms begin to wear out from overuse, the Corps is looking at an increasing deficit of available aircraft for training and future employment.

"These shortfalls include all modifications, intermediate maintenance events, depot maintenance, transition/procurement aircraft, and aircraft damaged beyond repair," Amos said.

As far as all of the Corps' ground, sea and air gear goes, the general pointed to the recent experience of the 2nd Marine Expeditionary Brigade's deployment to Afghanistan as an example of how the Corps is currently sending units to fight.

Equipment assets were pulled from a variety of sources, including more than 55 percent coming via new procurement provided by Marine Corps Systems Command, 27 percent from within the Central Command area of operations, "including items made available from units retrograding from Iraq," and about 4 percent from the Logistics Command and the USMC's Prepositioned Program in Norway. Even with all that, "14 percent of 2nd MEB's equipment needed to be drawn from our nondeployed operating forces."

With the tempo of deployments likely to remain largely unchanged in the near-term, Amos warned that this mix-and-match approach isn't sustainable if the Corps is to maintain its readiness between deployments.

Make sure to check out the IQAF's new C2 bird, see where $300 million bones went and check out the laser gravity well from our friends at Aviation Week, exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

Army Shifts Focus to Helo Pilot Training

This article first appeared in Aviation Week & Space Technology.

The U.S. Army is short of meeting its annual requirement to train helicopter pilots by about 300, says Gen. Martin Dempsey, who oversees the service's Training and Doctrine Command.

With high demand for helicopters in Iraq and Afghanistan, this shortage is frustrating commanders abroad who have enough airframes to accomplish their missions, but lack the crews to fly them. Crew training has been hindered by insufficient funding in personnel accounts.

The Pentagon requests 1,498 pilots annually to graduate from training here. However, the service is now producing only about 1,200 pilots per year.

About 70% of the shortage is in the Reserve components, with the remainder among active duty personnel, Dempsey says.

If Congress approves a proposal from Defense Secretary Robert Gates to boost funding by about $500 million in Fiscal 2010 for personnel associated with helicopter operations, Dempsey says he can close that gap in about two years.

This money would support training for pilots, flight crews and maintenance staff. Additionally, it would help pay for more simulation time for helicopter pilots. Prior to the war, about 18-20% of a student's time was dedicated to simulator operations. Now, about 39% of the training is done in simulators. And, that number is expected to increase to 45%, according to Dempsey.

Meanwhile, Army officials have devised a new training process for helicopter pilots to ensure they are more proficient when they leave school and enter their operational units: Flight School XXI. Prior to the recent wars, Army officials used a three-phased approach to training helicopter pilots. The first, readiness level 3 (RL-3), provided flight skills but no tactics training. RL-2 provided skills and tactics tailored for a specific platform and RL-1 provided environmental training for the types of terrain where the soldier would be deployed. Ft. Rucker's training regimen provided only RL-3.

Now, however, through the Flight School XXI concept, pilots coming out of Ft. Rucker are proficient in their weapon systems (RL-2) and require only the additional environmental training for a forward deployment.

Read the rest of this story, see the USN's newest, biggest gator, check out the mysterious UAV of KAF and speculate on Israel's interest in Stealth Eagles from our Aviation Week friends, exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

CSAR Advocates Hope for Another Resurrection

This article first appeared in AviationWeek.com.

As the U.S. Air Force gets ready to recapitalize its current combat, search and rescue (CSAR) fleet, service and industry officials are hoping that history will repeat itself and the Defense Department will again realize the importance and need for a more modern dedicated CSAR fleet.

Almost immediately after Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced cancellation the Air Force's $15 billion CSAR-X program to replace the existing HH-60 fleet -- the service's number two acquisition priority -- the Pentagon issued a Resource Management Directive, according to industry and military sources. The directive would recapitalize the CSAR capacity at half of the Fiscal 2010 budget allotment, giving the service about $2.8 billion with which to work.

That will be a tough pill to swallow for the Air Force, as a major report from earlier this decade indicated. In its "Combat Rescue Analysis of Alternatives (AOA) Combat Rescue Future Recovery Vehicle Final Report," from February 2002, service officials were less than keen about continuing with the aircraft for CSAR missions.

"The expert panel identified four deficiencies: visual lookout, avionics, workload, self-defense in terminal area, and alternate insertion and extraction (AIE) with wounded crew member. Each of these deficiencies was ranked as critical," the AOA said.

At the same time, the Air Force is used to CSAR receiving short shrift.

"The tumultuous upswing and downswing of rescue forces throughout the last 50 years suggests that senior leaders' interest in combat, search and rescue has been purely reactive to current events and not based on meeting 'future' contingency operations," the AOA said. "Combat, search and rescue has always been marked by a lack of capabilities prior to hostilities due to decreases in force structure, followed by stop-gap thinking by military leaders and quick fixes to rebuild a rescue force only during times of combat or crisis."

According to the AOA, the Emergency Rescue Squadron was first established during World War II in 1943, but it wasn't until the Air Rescue Service began CSAR missions in the Korean War that the mission came into its own. By 1954, the ARS had 50 squadrons.

But after the Korean War it was cut down to 11 squadrons by 1961 -- only to be rebuilt again three years later to meet needs in Southeast Asia.

In 1966, the newly dubbed Aerospace Rescue and Recovery Service (ARRS) had a force structure of 10 helicopter detachments. By the early 1970s, there were 355 CSAR aircraft under the service.
But when Vietnam operations ended, that service was cut to 214 aircraft in 1976. A year later, the military started to buy the HH-60D Nighthawks.

In 1984, the budget called for 240 Nighthawks. Within three years the program would be canceled. After that, all remaining ARRS-assigned HH-53s were transferred to Special Operations and modified to Pave Low MH-53s.

Read the rest of this story, see how Gates is playing the split tanker buy proposal and putting up his dukes for a fight with Congress from our friends at Aviation Week, exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

China Adds Precision Strike to Capabilities

This article first appeared in Defense Technology International.

China has been developing and purchasing weapons for precision-strike warfare. This is the hard edge of the People's Liberation Army's (PLA) doctrinal drive toward using increasingly sophisticated information technologies such as C4ISR (command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance) to improve the capabilities of weapon systems. The PLA's near-term goals appear to be greater asymmetric capabilities to target U.S. naval assets in the western Pacific and in space as part of an anti-access strategy. Long-term, however, greater precision will be a feature of most new weapon systems.

China's growing C4ISR capabilities were demonstrated in March by its coordinated two-fleet operation to intercept two U.S. Navy ocean survey vessels. Chinese ships found and harassed the USNS Victorious, operating in the Yellow Sea, and USNS Impeccable, which was about 75 mi. south of Hainan Island. The fallout was diplomatic, as Washington and Beijing clashed over interpretations of the Law of the Sea Treaty, which Beijing contends gives it rights to deny access to military survey missions. This incident, though, was reminiscent in timing and scope to the April 2001 clash that saw China "capture" a U.S. Navy EP-3 electronic intelligence aircraft off Hainan.

China's aggressive challenge of Japanese claims in the East China Sea, plus Washington's refusal to cease its survey missions could be flashpoints. In February, a provincial Communist Party newspaper contained a threat to sink U.S. survey ships.

In this second of three articles on China's growing regional power, DTI examines the country's efforts to improve its ability to target and destroy threats.

Since the early 1990s, Chinese military scholars have been warning of the need for China to prepare to defend against, and if necessary, conduct military operations in space. In late 2006 reports emerged of China's use of high-power ground-based lasers to "dazzle" U.S. surveillance satellites. On Feb. 11, 2007, China launched the first successful intercept by its SC-19 direct-ascent antisatellite (ASAT) system, derived from its KT-1 solid-fuel space-launch vehicle, with an interceptor stage whose development was likely aided by China's micro-satellite programs. A target FY-2 weather satellite was probably illuminated by large phased-array radar developed for tracking Shenzhou manned space capsules. A far less-noted potential co-orbital ASAT demonstration occurred on Sept. 27, 2008, when the Shenzhou-7 manned spacecraft, which had just launched a BX-1 nanosatellite, passed within 45 km. (28 mi.) of the International Space Station. Following the U.S. Navy's shootdown of an errant satellite on Feb. 21, 2008, and a Mar. 5, 2008, announcement that Russia would resume ASAT development, it is likely that China will continue ASAT testing.

China's direct-ascent ASAT also proves that it is capable of developing a long-range antiballistic missile (ABM) system, a U.S. pursuit that China has opposed. China had an ABM program from 1963-80 that produced a short-range interceptor prototype and long-range radar. Chinese sources told DTI at the recent IDEX expo in Abu Dhabi that they have tested the new FD-2000 surface-to-air missile (SAM) in an antitactical ballistic missile (ATBM) mode. Developed with help from Russia's Almaz-Antey Co., the FD-2000 also draws from the earlier passive-guided FT-2000 SAM, which reportedly benefited from U.S. Patriot SAM technology. These indigenous SAMs are entering PLA service, and will complement about 1,000 Almaz-Antey S-300/PMU-1/PMU-2 SAMs purchased since the early 1990s, giving the PLA air force the most formidable air-defense network in Asia. The PLA has also developed short-range SAM systems -- including man-portable air-defense systems -- for tracked vehicles and trucks. Among these is the TY-90 Yitian for trucks and armored personnel carriers that was disclosed in 2005, but displayed for the first time at IDEX this year.

Read the rest of this story and see how Inhofe blasts the NLOS-C cuts from our friends at Aviation Week, exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

US Should Buy Only One Boost-Phase System

This article first appeared in AviationWeek.com.

Because of budget constraints, the U.S. should invest in just a single boost-phase missile defense system, the former director of the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) says.

"I don't believe we need to carry dual boost phase missile defense capability," "I think we need to have either an operationally effective Airborne Laser [ABL] or an operationally effective Kinetic Energy Interceptor [KEI]," retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Henry "Trey" Obering said April 3. "I would go with one of those, not both," he told a news conference organized by an advocacy group ahead of an announced rocket launch by North Korea.

Obering, who joined the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance shortly after retiring from the military, said he favored the ABL, a modified Boeing 747-400F equipped with a powerful chemical laser, "if it proves to be operationally affordable." Otherwise, "KEI is the only alternative," although it is still in development and not expected to be effective against missiles in all phases of their flight path. Obering noted Northrop Grumman's KEI was developed as an alternative to ABL because the flying laser was considered a high-risk technology. ABL is slated for a test of the entire weapon system against a ballistic missile later this year.

Obering also said he strongly favored investment in a satellite sensor system, like Northrop's Space Tracking and Surveillance System (STSS), to track ballistic missiles from launch to destruction or impact. "That's critically important in being able to deal with more complex threats," Obering said. For the same reason he favored funding the Multiple Kill Vehicle, calling it a good path to follow in the near term "even in a resource-constrained environment." Obering favors combining the ABL and STSS with the proven shipborne Aegis missile system and ground-based midcourse interceptors as part of a layered approach to missile defense.

Boost-phase defensive weapons that can destroy an attacking missile shortly after its launch, or boost, phase should be part of that layered approach, according to other missile defense advocates. At a gathering on Capitol Hill, defense contractors promoted their respective companies' answer to boost-phase missile defense.

Read the rest of this story, read about the NLOS-C's biggest defender and see how LockMart is pushing for Lightnings in Oz from our friends at Aviation Week, exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

Europe Warms to Missile Defense as US Cools

This article first appeared in Aviation Week & Space Technology.

This week's NATO summit was supposed to serve as a catalyst to drive missile defense activities forward in Europe. But with Washington still defining its policy stance, the brakes are being put on expectations.

In another key area of alliance concern -- Afghanistan -- U.S. efforts to enlist greater European force commitments are also not likely to materialize, says Robert Hunter, a former U.S. ambassador to NATO and senior adviser at the Rand Corp. The Apr. 3-4 summit in Germany and France comes about six months too early for the Obama administration to have worked out a number of issues, he indicates.

Arms control and disarmament constitute a concern that the alliance's strategic concept needs to address, says German defense minister Franz Josef Young. "We need new initiatives for conventional arms control," he argues.

But for European missile defense efforts, the summit had been regarded as a key venue in which to urge members to embrace the concept of continental defense. The Pentagon's push for a European site for the ground-based midcourse system -- with a radar in the Czech Republic and interceptors in Poland -- would be the centerpiece. But the Obama administration has yet to articulate a clear path forward on the third site, which Russia has strenuously opposed. As a result, the Czech government this month decided not to seek parliamentary endorsement for the radar construction.

In addition, it was hoped that working groups would be asked to study architectures for expanding the alliance's current emphasis on theater missile defense into a network covering all of Europe, and to begin cooperatively developing key new components such as early warning systems and interceptors. A German military official has warned that without U.S. sites in Europe, there would be no missile defense shield built on the continent.

However, not everyone shares that assessment. "Dropping the third site would have no impact from a capability standpoint; there are other solutions available," says Richard Deakin, senior vice president of Thales Air Systems Div., although he concedes there would be political repercussions from the U.S.'s backing away from the so-called third site (augmenting those in Alaska and California).

"We think BMD [ballistic missile defense] will be less important in Strasbourg than initially expected," says MBDA CEO Antoine Bouvier. "The likely result," he notes, is that there will be more of a focus on expanding air defense capability to cover a range of new threats, using a building-block approach, rather than a pure BMD program. MBDA is pursuing a dual-track approach, with the Aster 30 Block 1 for the SAMP/T system providing a capability against short-range ballistic threats. The Aster Block 2 design, with its high endoatmospheric-intercept capability, would be able to counter medium-range weapons.

Bouvier suggests that Aster Block 2 would be capable of engaging weapons such as the SS-26, which follows a flattened trajectory and can begin terminal maneuvers at altitudes of roughly 25,000 meters (82,000 ft.).

The Block 2 missile is intended to be compatible with both land and naval launchers for the Aster 30.

France, which is expected to fully return into the NATO structure, is stepping up its interest in missile defense. In contrast, European efforts are largely fractured, with countries having been unable to agree on a common approach. That leaves European governments charting different courses.

For example, at the end of the development period for the Medium Extended Air Defense System (Meads) lower-tier anti-missile program, the Italian air force will decide whether to acquire 2-4 batteries. The country's navy is more committed to missile defense but hasn't yet determined whether to embrace a European or U.S. interceptor.

Meanwhile, French President Nicolas Sarkozy has made missile defense a priority. The 2009-13 military spending plan, now before parliament, includes a number of items earmarked for this area. The most notable are an early warning satellite/radar network and a Block 2 Aster air defense system that are supposed to be operational by 2020.

Further funding is expected to come from a €2.3-billion ($3.1-billion) French government economic stimulus package for aerospace and defense projects approved last year, says Bouvier. With President Barack Obama willing to give U.S. allies a more equitable role in common defense, "it's an opportunity for Europe to make its voice heard and contribute in kind, not just with funding," he says.

"[Territorial BMD] will require no real technology breakthroughs, but it will be costly," says Michel Mathieu, CEO of Thales Raytheon Systems. Although it would make sense to split the burden without duplicating efforts, he says, U.S. technology restrictions appear to make this unfeasible -- at least for sensitive technologies such as radar, interceptors and seekers.

The cornerstone of territorial BMD will be NATO's Active Layered Theater Ballistic Missile Defense (ALTBMD) and notably its Air Command and Control System (ACCS), which is being supplied by Thales Raytheon Systems. ALTBMD is effectively the backbone to link NATO's disparate systems, ranging from Patriot and Meads batteries to ships and potentially a U.S. interceptor site in Poland.

After a long development period that ended with factory acceptance testing last year, NATO is preparing to deploy the ACCS at 15 sites in 13 countries, although the system's full functionality remains to be further enhanced. A framework contract for the deployment phase, known as Replication, will be issued in June and contracts let in batches, starting in November and continuing through 2012. The initial operating capability will be reached in 2010 or 2011, depending on which software version (factory acceptance or Block 1 upgrade) is used, says Mathieu. Upgrade 1 renders the system compatible with NATO's latest planning/tasking requirements and provides new automation, interactivity and real-time data features, as well as the ability to interface with existing hardware. Full operating lower-tier capability will be reached in 2013 and full upper tier in 2014-16.

The same architecture will be retained for territorial missile defense, according to Mathieu, although specific new functions, such as the full air picture, will be added.

Work on the Block 2 Aster, which will expand the defense capability to counter ballistic and cruise missiles, is already underway under a French technology development program, says Bruno Delacour, vice president of advanced weapon solutions at Thales's Air Systems Div. Block 2 will feature a long-range radar to be derived from France's M3R demonstrator. The M3R -- a fully distributed derivative of Thales's new Ground Master 400 S-band active-array radar family -- will begin tracking trials this year. Block 2 also will include a Ka- rather than a Ku-band seeker. It will be able to handle the faster speeds and smaller radar cross sections of longer-range missiles. This seeker is also set to start trials in 2009.

Read the rest of this story, take a look at Israel's drone dozers, see what GAO says is breaking the bank (everything...) and check out sat pics of the DPRK model rocket from our friends at Aviation Week exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

Bandwidth Demands Crowd Military Needs

This article first appeared in Defense Technology International.

If a multinational organization that few have heard of, headed by a Russian-educated citizen of Mali, managed to disable the radar of a major U.S. combat system, you would think someone would make a fuss. Apparently not: When the U.S. Federal Communications Commission, acting in accordance with the International Telecommunication Union, inadvertently sold the operating frequency band of the B-2 bomber's Raytheon APQ-181 radar to a commercial user, nobody panicked, even though installing new radar arrays on the 20 surviving jets will cost well over $1 billion.

While more information is stored electronically and shared, the radio-frequency (RF) bandwidth available to share it remains fixed. The pressure is increasing, as consumers trade voice telephones for video smartphones, computer users everywhere demand broadband and new applications emerge. But the concept of network-centric warfare and the wider use of unmanned vehicles are making militaries equally dependent on the availability of wideband wireless.

The B-2 radar is only one capability that has been lost since the information revolution kicked into high gear. The Joint Tactical Information Distribution System, the first attempt to create a network-centric environment (and currently the only way to get AWACS targeting data to an F-22) has "limited supportability outside the continental U.S.," according to a U.S. military presentation, because it was developed in an occupied band.

Global Hawk's satellite data link operates in a non-government fixed satellite service band—i.e., one of the bands used for communications between satellites and fixed ground stations—on a limited, noninterference basis. The Situational Awareness Data Link and Enhanced Position Location Reporting System can't be used in Germany or South Korea. Stealth systems present problems, because their emitters hop around the widest possible bandwidth to frustrate tracking.

Another, more subtle problem is getting closer at an alarming rate: encroachment on the spectrum for flight-test telemetry. Although you can fit more memory and processing on the aircraft itself, telemetry is more important than ever to flight testing. To test complex systems efficiently, you need to have the flight-test engineering team monitoring data in real time, so experts on the ground can determine if each test point was good and clear the pilot to proceed to the next. This calls for higher data rates. Another driver for telemetry is testing of increasingly sophisticated unmanned aerial vehicles.

There are two unalterable facts about RF bandwidth. More data takes more bandwidth, counted in hertz, and of course there are more hertz available at higher frequencies. The second law is that the higher the frequency, the harder it is to get range, since it takes more power.

Flight tests can't use a lot of high-technology compression. "This is not a cell phone—you can't ask the pilot to wait while you redial," says Darrell Ernst of Mitre Corp., a member of a U.S.-European delegation trying to raise international awareness of the bandwidth issue at last month's Aero India show in Bangalore. He reckons that with manageable compression and modulation techniques, 600 MHz. of spectrum will still be needed to fly one test in 2020.

So far, the only space walled off for flight testing is between 5091 and 5150 MHz. in the microwave band. This segment was reserved for the aborted Microwave Landing System project. "If [the flight-test community] can get in there and start using it, we can be established as the primary user and it will be hard for them to throw us out," according to Ernst.

Read the rest of this story, check out a cool JSF pic gallery, see if the DPRK is learning the lessons of Iraq and Afghanistan and take a gander at a HOT F-35 screed from our friends at Aviation Week, exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

Russia Seeks to Improve UAV Technology

This article first appeared in Defense Technology International.

The Russian military has been sparing in its use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), primarily because the models in service were designed in the Soviet era and are obsolete. Although local manufacturers are years behind the U.S. and Israel in UAV developments, some indigenous systems are being tested.

Russia's need to get on track with UAV development was made painfully clear during last summer's war with Georgia over South Ossetia. A Georgian air-defense crew shot down an ancient Tupolev Tu-22 bomber that was reportedly on a surveillance flight. Using a manned asset -- and a strategic bomber at that -- for airborne reconnaissance strikes many as the 21st century's version of a cavalry charge.

Most of the work being done is with small UAVs -- Reaper-size drones don't seem to be on the radar yet.

The Luch design bureau of Rybinsk delivered the first Tipchak reconnaissance UAV to the Russian army for testing in 2007. This is a 50-kg. (110-lb.) BLA-05 drone launched by catapult and powered by a 12-hp. piston engine. The aircraft is 2.4 meters (7.8 ft.) long and has a wingspan of 3.4 meters. It carries a combined TV/infrared camera and has an operating range of 70 km. (43 mi.), speed of 200 kph. (124 mph.) and 3-hr. endurance.

The military plans to use Tipchak for surveillance, target detection and to adjust the fire of multiple-launch rocket systems, say representatives of Luch. The company plans to deliver two more Tipchak systems this year, each with three unmanned drones. It has assembled a reserve of 20 UAVs.

A modified drone, the BLA-07, is also being tested. It is smaller, but reportedly has improved aerodynamics, folding wings and higher-resolution cameras.

Russia's border guard service is also in the market for UAVs to monitor the country's frontiers. The Transas company of St. Petersburg conducted demonstration flights with its Dozor-4 UAV for border guards last fall in Dagestan in the North Caucasus. The vehicle is a further development of the Dozor unmanned family. Its high-wing airframe has a wingspan of 4.8 meters and takeoff weight of 90 kg. The Dozor-4 is powered by a 19.2-hp. piston engine with pusher propeller and has 8-hr. endurance. Range is 1,200 km.

During the five-day trials at the Dzhepel frontier post in the mountainous region on the border with Azerbaijan, the Dozor-4 flew several sorties, taking pictures of the border and surrounding areas. Gennady Trubnikov, chief designer of the UAV, says the Dozor-4 can position itself with an accuracy of 15 meters. “We flew right above the border.”

The UAV has a static ceiling of 3,000 meters, but Trubnikov says that in Dagestan engineers were only flying the drone to 2,540 meters because of strong winds from the mountains. Another challenge was the unprepared field in use for takeoffs and landings.

Read the rest of this story, check out what the GAO has to say about the JSF, listen to a killer podcast and see how the Corps wants a robot resupply from our Aviation Week friends, exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

AESA Radars Are A Highlight of Aero-India

Active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar technology is a requirement for India’s Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) competition, the biggest in the world. Consequently, a lot of maneuvering was apparent at the Aero India show last month, as fighter manufacturers worked to define their AESA answers and (in some cases) stall competitors.

Boeing’s F/A-18E/F Super Hornet has the simplest answer. Raytheon’s APG-79 radar is standard on the Block 2 airplane, the current variant, and Boeing has not indicated it’s considering alternatives. This allows Boeing to wave a low-risk banner, offering, essentially, the aircraft flying with the U.S. Navy and on order for Australia.

Lockheed Martin had a choice of three radars. Raytheon’s Advanced Combat Radar (RACR) and Northrop Grumman’s Scalable Active Beam Radar (SABR) fit in an F-16, but Lockheed ultimately chose Northrop Grumman’s APG-80, in service in the United Arab Emirates’ F-16E/F. Two reasons are behind this, says Northrop Grumman: The proposed F-16IN for India is similar to the E/F and can accept the APG-80, which needs more power and cooling than RACR or SABR, and is lower risk. Northrop Grumman says no APG-80 antennas have had to be repaired, in normal use, since tests started over four years ago. “The antenna will outlast the airframe,” the company says. A few modules might fail over its lifetime, but they won’t affect performance enough to make it worth unsealing the radome and replacing them.

Eurofighter holds a unique view of the AESA issue. Executives say the Selec Captor mechanically scanned array (MSA) beats any in-service AESA for the Typhoon’s mission. A clue to their thinking emerged at an Aero India seminar. Peter Gutsmiedl, senior vice president of engineering at EADS Military Air Systems, pointed out ways in which an AESA could be integrated into Typhoon, including small side arrays, an azimuth gimbal and the so-called “swashplate” radar, a canted antenna on a rotating mount. The goal is to overcome drawbacks of a fixed AESA: narrower field of view than an MSA and diminishing effective aperture and performance at the edges of that field.

Meanwhile, a spat between France and Sweden is developing. In 2007, Saab struck a deal with Thales to provide an AESA antenna for the Gripen Demo program, to be mated with the signal processor from the JAS 39C’s Saab PS-05 MSA radar. The Thales AESA replaced the passive-scan antenna of Rafale’s RBE2.

But three things happened: Thales and Dassault were given the go-ahead to develop and produce the AESA for Rafale; Dassault has taken a large shareholding in Thales; and the Gripen NG has emerged—in India and Brazil—as a competitor to Rafale. Thales will honor the Gripen Demo contract but its AESA will not be available for a production NG.

Sweden has talked about RACR, but would prefer the PS-05/A’s "back end" modules for ease of integration and to stay away from control issues associated with U.S. components. The answer may lie with Selex, which, first as Ferranti, then as GEC-Marconi and subsequently as BAE Systems, was Sweden’s partner on the original PS-05/A.

Read the rest of this story, get into a knife fight with a Switchblade, see how the Dutch are pulling the gloves off and read about EADS's A400M dilemma from our Aviation Week friends exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

DoD Fixed-wing Aircraft Spending Shrinking

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

While fixed-wing aircraft spending still remains perched at the top of the list of leading Pentagon expenses, it is shrinking as a percentage of overall military spending, an Aerospace DAILY analysis shows.

At the same time, fixed-wing aircraft contracts are becoming fewer and more expensive, according to the analysis of data gleaned from a federal contracting database released by the National Institute for Computer-Assisted Reporting.

Fixed-wing spending accounted for 14 percent of the top 21 Defense Department expenses, compared to 16 percent in 2007 and 22 percent in 2001. Healthcare costs, meanwhile, are taking a bigger bite of the pie.

For 2008, the Pentagon tallied about 1,841 fixed-wing aircraft contracts and modifications for a total of about $18.6 billion. That's a mere $200 million -- or about 1 percent -- more than the Pentagon rang up for those expenses in 2007, when the Defense Department reported 2,191 transactions, the analysis shows.

The mean, or average, cost per contract or modification in 2008 was about $10.1 million, compared to a mean 2007 cost per transaction of about $8.4 million, an estimated 20 percent increase. The average for all 1.5 million 2008 Pentagon transactions is about $236,000 per transaction.

For 2008, fixed-wing contracts or modifications worth about $617,000 or lower represented about 75 percent of the transaction base, while in 2007 transactions worth about $400,000 or lower represented the top three-quarters of the base -- a difference of about 54 percent.

Part of the reason for the overall increases is the maturity of major fixed-wing programs, such as Lockheed Martin's F-22 Raptor and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, as well as the Boeing-Bell V-22 Osprey, which is included in this expense category.

Lockheed benefited from the $4.4 billion in multiyear fiscal year 2008 funding for the F-22, as well as the $6.4 billion during that time which the Defense Department put toward the F-35.

The contractor jockeyed itself into the top position of fixed-wing contractors in 2008, with 506 transactions for about $7.8 billion in deals, leapfrogging over Boeing, last year's leader. In 2008, Boeing tallied 543 transactions for $6.4 billion, landing the company in second place.

Read the rest of this story, hear about radar sats for the Gulf, see how China looks at IDEX and read about how missile defense might be tested in a DPRK launch from our friends at Aviation Week exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

European Contractors Worry About Slowdown

This article first appeared in Aviation Week & Space Technology.

Concerns are mounting at European defense companies that the global economic downturn will drive down military spending.

Although such cuts by major European nations have not yet emerged, there are signs among smaller states that budgets will be affected. Croatia has deferred its fighter competition, Romania may do the same, and Estonia already has slashed its allocations for defense.

Kongsberg CEO Walter Qwam says there is "a lot of fear that defense spending will be cut." Moreover, the current economic climate could drive protectionist procurement practices, he notes.

Estonia, with its economy in sharp decline, has already moved to trim annual military spending by around 14%. The defense ministry has to give back approximately $54 million and bring the top line down to roughly $345 million.

The budget action will mean Estonia will fall short of its target of raising defense spending to 2% of gross domestic product by 2010, says Defense Minister Jaak Aaviksoo. This is also undermining planners' efforts to bring more stability to the defense arena. Several procurement programs are being put on hold as a result of the budget adjustment.

In Sweden, financial uncertainty surrounds the budget and its potential impact on industry. Saab -- the country's largest defense and aerospace contractor -- is worried about the government's spending plans. Company officials also are pondering how Saab's bottom line may be affected as a result of its supplier role to Airbus and Boeing.

The Swedish government is expected to put forward a new spending bill next month, although discussions about long-term defense allocations could drag on for much of the year, says Saab CEO Ake Svensson. The government is trying to align funding priorities with the need to protect certain defense industrial capabilities, he adds.

In parallel with its budget review, Stockholm is looking at other reforms that could be implemented to support industry. Changes in the acquisition organization and procurement processes may result, as well as greater support for Swedish manufacturers in defense exports. Local industry often grumbles about receiving less backing from its government than some of its rivals.

Because of ambiguities in both its defense business and commercial activities, Saab management hesitates to give an outlook for the year, beyond noting that sales are likely to be flat. The civil aircraft business pummeled last year's earnings, with a fourth-quarter writedown of 953 million Swedish kronor ($108.6 million) related to delays Airbus and Boeing experienced on some of their programs. Saab also took a 232-million-kronor provision for further anticipated losses. That does not yet reflect the potential fallout from the cancellations and deferrals that Airbus and Boeing are experiencing.

Compounding the financial charges on the commercial front were ongoing problems in the defense sector. The combined effect was 1.8 billion kronor in nonrecurring financial items in 2008 that drove Saab's full year results to a 242-million-kronor loss. Saab is making adjustments as a result of repeated write­downs because of problems in development programs. The company intends to be more judicious in how it accounts for such projects, which will have the near-term effect of depressing the 2009 profit margin by four percentage points.

Read the rest of this story, hear a great podcast, see vid from a French drone and check out operation DIESEL from our friends at Aviation Week, exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

US Navy Plan Suffers Deficiencies

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

The U.S. Navy's aggressive 30-year shipbuilding and modernization plan suffers from serious deficiencies and could become a victim of its own ambition, according to highly regarded Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA) analyst Robert Work.

Named for the number of ships the Navy wants by fiscal 2020, the so-called 313-ship fleet plan would leave the service lacking in important capabilities to meet the operational demands of current strategic challenges, Work says in his new report. "Specifically, [the Navy] lacks the range to face increasingly lethal, land-based, maritime reconnaissance-strike complexes or nuclear-armed regional adversaries," Work wrote. "Moreover, it does not adequately take into account the changing nature of undersea warfare, or the potential prospect of a major maritime competition with China."

The former Marine Corps colonel also says the Navy's plans are "far too ambitious" given likely future budget constraints. According to Work, between FY '03 and '08, the Navy spent an average $11.1 billion per year on new ship construction. But the Congressional Budget Office projects that cost will nearly double, to between $20 billion and $22 billion. And those costs do not factor in the funds required to build 12 replacements for the current strategic ballistic missile submarine force. "It seems clear, then, that the Navy needs to scale back its current plans," Work wrote.

Recommendations

Work offers numerous recommendations, including:

• After completing the ongoing midlife refueling cycle for the first 12 of 14 Ohio-class SSBNs, immediately reduce the strategic deterrent fleet to its final target of 12 boats and start work on the SSBN(X) design immediately;

• Begin a concerted research-and-development program for small, manned undersea vehicles, autonomous underwater vehicles and other unmanned underwater systems, as well as a new generation of littoral anti-submarine warfare weapons;

• Slow the production rate of nuclear-powered carriers (CVNs) from one every four years to one every five years, and consider accelerating the current unmanned combat air system (UCAS) demonstration program and planned operational debut;

• Halt production of DDG-1000 destroyers at three ships and restart the DDG-51 production line in FY '10 while putting the futuristic CG(X) cruiser off until at least FY '15;

• Ramp up production of the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) to four per year; and

• Build six Joint Multimission Submersibles as rapidly as possible.

Work also suggests a variety of additional detailed recommendations covering naval special warfare/Navy Expeditionary Combat Command ships and craft, naval maneuver and maneuver-support ships, joint sealift ships and combat logistics force and support ships.

p>Read the rest of this story, check out how the Dutch are thrifting the Pentagon, hear the Canadian DM's sharp words for NATO and see some killer Sabra tech from our friends at Aviation Week, exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

First F-35 Squadron Plans Detailed

This article first appeared in AviationWeek.com.

The first three squadrons of F-35s -- with at least 59 aircraft -- will be formed at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla., between 2010, when the first aircraft arrives, and mid-2013 when No. 60 is due.

Of the three training squadrons to be stood up, one will be U.S. Air Force with 24 conventional takeoff aircraft, one will be Marine Corps with 20 short-takeoff-and-vertical-landing aircraft and the last, with 15 aircraft, will belong to the Navy.

The Air Force's bed-down decision involves temporary operational limitations on flight training to minimize noise impact in the nearby town of Valparaiso. Meanwhile, supplemental environmental studies will be conducted as the Air Force works on a final study on F-35 noise.

Details have yet to be pinned down, but the Joint Strike Fighter is expected to be louder than the F-15 and F-16 and about the same as the F/A-18E/Fs and F-22s, says USAF Maj. Gen. Charles Davis, the current F-35 program manager and the incoming commander of Eglin's Air Armament Center.

As part of a two-tier, environmental agreement -- after the first 59 aircraft are in place -- the Navy and the local community will consider increasing the number of F-35 training aircraft on the base to 113, according to Davis. Along with the integrated pilot school house, all JSF maintenance training will be conducted at Eglin.

The first Marine aircraft arrives in 2011. The fleet is expected to grow at the rate of about one per month. By 2014 the unit also will begin establishing its relationship with the Air Armament Center where the armed service develops its new kinetic and non-kinetic weapons and studies the introduction of new missions. For example, all initial F-35 Block 0.5 aircraft, because of their advanced electronically scanned array radars, will arrive capable of training for cruise-missile defense, Davis says.

To keep down the noise impact for Valparaiso, operations will be largely restricted to Eglin's East-West runway. Later, the North-South runway may be re-oriented away from the town and extended to the south to allow limited use, according to Kathleen Ferguson, deputy assistant secretary for installations.

If the number of training aircraft isn't allowed to expand, the Corps will likely establish its own flight training center at Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort, S.C. The first F-35 operations base will be established by the Marines in 2013, Davis says.

Read the rest of this story, sob over JSF cuts, check out the Sing armor, and see where German troops are going from our friends at Aviation Week exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

Marines Explore New UAS Designs

This article first appeared at AviationWeek.com.

The U.S. Marine Corps is drafting a wish list of capabilities associated with two future unmanned aerial systems (UAS).

The first is notionally called the Group 4 UAS, the first of its kind as the Marine Corps shifts from its old "tiered" system of classifying into new groups, according to Maj. Thomas Heffern, of the service's UAS Capabilities Office. He spoke Feb. 3 at the AUVSI's annual Program Review conference in Washington.

Group 4 would likely be the only one of its kind solely procured by the amphibious-assault-oriented service, and thereby optimized for its future mission needs. The trade space is wide as the Marines examine their options. The system's mission isn't yet defined, but it is possible it could pick up some electronic warfare, electronic surveillance and - possibly - electronic attack missions after the retirement of the EA-6B, Heffern says.

Endurance is desired at between 14-30 hours, with a notional radius of 350-450 nautical miles. This system might be weaponized to reduce the time to engage targets, and would need to haul at least 1,500 pounds of payload. The Marines place an emphasis on developing a UAS that emit less noise at operating altitude to help hide their operations.

One major question ahead as the Marines define the Group 4 UAS is whether it will conduct vertical takeoff and landing or require short, austere runways for operation, Heffern says.

The Corps is also exploring a requirement for a future cargo lift system. The Office of Naval Research and other military labs have released a myriad of requests for information on this capability, but Heffern says various options are on the table. Notionally, this system would be shipboard capable, haul from 1,000-6,000 pounds, travel up to 250 knots and execute a range of 300 nautical miles. The speed requirement is prompting the Corps to examine whether a tiltrotor is its only option for this future cargo lift system.

Read the rest of this story, check out DoD's response to the budget battle, find out if there will be Raptor sightings in Paris and take the Afghanistan driving test from our friends at Aviation Week exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

Italian C-27Js Complete Afghanistan Ops

This article first appeared in AviationWeek.com.

Two Italian Air Force C-27Js Spartan tactical transport aircraft returned home on Jan. 27 after completing a deployment in Afghanistan which started on Sept. 12th, 2008.

The aircraft have carried out more than 200 operational flying hours, completing 50 missions and transporting 1,500 passengers and 30,000 pounds of cargo. The aircraft, which made up the Task Group Albatros, part of the Joint Air Task Force (JATF) that controls all the Italian air assets in theater, have been employed in a variety of roles, including medevac, cargo and personnel transportation. They have been operating from both the main Kabul airport as well as from regional airport and from tactical strips in support of the four remote PRTs (Provincial Reconstruction Teams) in the Western Regional Command area.

The C-27Js belongs to the Pisa Air Force Base 46th Aerobrigade, which has so far received 10 of the planned 12 C-27Js. The last two aircraft are to be delivered before the end of the year.

Read the rest of this post, see the first deployed Y-Hueys, check out a tip on the Central Asian drug trade and see how the Israelis foiled a major Hamas plot from our friends at Aviation Week exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

Pentagon Wanted Sole-Source Search, Rescue

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

The Pentagon attempted to force the U.S. Air Force to forego an open competition for the service's $15 billion combat, search and rescue (CSAR-X) helicopter replacement program and wanted the service to conduct a directed buy of Bell-Boeing CV-22s, Boeing MH-47s, Sikorsky MH-60s, or a mixed fleet of these types, Aerospace DAILY has learned.

A Defense Department study guidance and the supporting e-mail trail show that the department was pushing for sole-source procurement for the mixed CSAR-X replacement fleet as late as the fall of 2005 and well into 2006 -- even though Air Force CSAR-X requirements ruled out MH-60s, and concerns over costs, downwash and sufficient weaponry dropped the CV-22 out of the running. This meant only one aircraft in the analysis would likely meet the Air Force requirements -- the MH-47 Chinook.

A Chinook variant wound up winning the first go-around of the eventual CSAR-X competition in 2006, but that effort is now being rebid after multiple industry protests.

In a telephone interview with Aerospace DAILY, DOD acquisition chief John Young questioned the validity of the entire CSAR-X process prior to his 2007 appointment as acquisition chief, saying Air Force and even Pentagon officials failed to ask some of the most basic questions, including: should the service even have a dedicated CSAR force, and if so, what should the aircraft's requirements truly be?

DOD has declined to comment about moves made before Young's tenure.

The Air Force started looking for a CSAR helicopter replacement about a decade ago. The service said it needed a better-armed aircraft that was more agile, networked, powerful and modern to survive the high-threat missions it would perform.

After the service formed and vetted its requirements through the Pentagon process, the three remaining potential replacement helicopters were variants of the Boeing H-47, Lockheed US101 and Sikorsky S-92. The three prepared timely and expensive proposals for the program.

But service documents and related e-mails show the Pentagon was looking to bypass the required selection route. An Air Force briefing dated Sept. 26, 2005, about the Pentagon guidance says: "Selection of OSD-recommended mixed fleet solution would require sole-source acquisition strategy."

The briefing also says the Pentagon's plan would most certainly lead to protests, including by contractors like the Northrop Grumman-EADS team, which had pulled its NH-90 out of the running because of requirement issues.

"Any competitor that bids to CDD [capabilities development document] requirement but loses will claim that they would have won had they been allowed to bid less than CDD offering," the briefing says.

Congressional staffers also have confirmed they pushed the Air Force toward a Chinook variant because lawmakers wanted an aircraft already in production.

The Pentagon interference set up a questionable parallel procurement track outside the one the service had already started with CSAR-X bidders, the e-mail trail and other documents show.

So concerned was Gen. T. Michael Moseley in March 2006 when he was Air Force chief of staff that he wrote to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff that he was "troubled" by all the "discussions" of a program "path" that has been twice approved by DOD's Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC).

Young said he thought the JROC acted too hastily with its CSAR-X approvals, failing to ask the appropriate questions about the real need for a dedicated CSAR force and the true requirements for such aircraft.

Read the rest of this story, learn why the Euros are out of the Air Force One business, see the first shots fired since Gaza's cease fire and get a glimpse of German defense from our friends at Aviation Week exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

F-22s Deployed To Guam and Okinawa

This story first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

In the fourth and largest F-22 deployment so far, a squadron of the U.S. stealth fighters has shifted from Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska, to Andersen AFB, Guam.

Another 12 fighters from Langley AFB, Va., flew to Kadena AFB in Okinawa, Japan, earlier this month.

The first F-22 deployment was from Langley to Elmendorf, the second was from Langley to Okinawa and the third was from Elmendorf to Guam. All were temporary single squadron moves to test the new aircraft’s logistics and reliability and — in the last two moves — to participate in the rotation of units to the western Pacific Ocean.

Moving the F-22s to non-U.S. bases, like Kadena, which belongs to Japan, is considered risky because intelligence gathering can be conducted from both the island and from ships in the area. Of particular concern are electronic and signals intelligence (sigint) that might be gathered by the extensive Chinese merchant fleet, according to senior U.S. intelligence officers. Russian Tu-95s with sigint capabilities recently flew close enough to Guam to create an operational stir.

U.S. officials say the two units are part of an ongoing rotation of forces to ensure security and stability throughout the Asia-Pacific region. In case of a military emergency in Asia, U.S. fighters from Hawaii, Guam, Alaska and Kadena would shift to forward bases in Japan, South Korea or Singapore. Then additional aircraft from the continental United States would shift to the intermediate bases, ready for further deployment.

Read the rest of this story, see more about the USMC/F-35/Obama nexus, find out of the French are going to nab Gaza smugglers and see how they're upgrading fighting vehicles in Afghanistan from our friends at Aviation Week exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

US Army Looking Hard At Modernization Plan

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

The U.S. Army is engaged in a holistic evaluation of its modernization and procurement plans, including Future Combat Systems (FCS), its vice chief of staff asserts.

Gen. Pete Chiarelli says the so-called midcourse review includes a "soup-to-nuts" look at FCS. The Army needs to "understand where we are and where we need to go," Chiarelli told reporters at a Defense Writers Group breakfast Jan. 21. He would not predict the outcome of the review, which he said should be complete by late February and would incorporate lessons learned from combat in Afghanistan and Iraq.

"We've done a lot to FCS since its inception," the four-star general said. "The Manned Ground Vehicles are not the same today as they were envisioned five or six years ago."

The Army's second-highest officer stressed survivability is an issue reframed by the current conflicts. "We have a 360-degree war," he said. "Survivability is not just an issue for tanks and Bradleys. It's an issue we've had to address with the entire force."

The review encompasses numerous other aspects of Army modernization, including procurement. Chiarelli said he supports an acquisition approach with faster results: "As I look at the amount of time it takes us to move from requirements to a fielded system, does [the 1960s-era procurement system] really work in today's world?"

Read the rest of this story, see how the ten pound brains are building new tank tactics, watch Hamas smuggle more weapons and read about Willie Pete in Gaza from our Aviation Week friends exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

Dutch Analysis Reaffirms F-35 Choice

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

The Netherlands has followed Norway in recommending procurement of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, both defense ministries ranking the aircraft's mission capabilities higher and costs lower than competing multirole fighters.

"The F-35 best meets the requirements drawn up by the Netherlands for the successor to the F-16," says the Dutch defense ministry, citing its better mission capability and operational availability, and lower price and anticipated lifecycle costs.

JSF-maker Lockheed Martin welcomed the report, noting "the Netherlands is already a major industrial partner on the F-35 program, and substantial work opportunities remain."

The Netherlands, like Norway, is participating in JSF development, but the Dutch parliament ordered another comparative analysis of the candidates before the government committed to the purchase of two F-35 test aircraft, expected by April 2009.

Unlike Norway, which last month recommended the F-35 over the Saab Gripen Next Generation, the Netherlands did not conduct a full competition, but instead evaluated the candidates based on non-binding information supplied by the manufacturers.

The Dutch report is "no surprise," says Gripen International general manager Johan Lehander. Although the Dutch were provided information, it never rose to the level of a formal offer, he says, noting the report does not represent a final government decision and that the Dutch military, in particular, has been pro-JSF.

The F-35 was pitted against Lockheed's Advanced F-16 and the Gripen NG, and all three were evaluated on mission effectiveness, operational availability, price and delivery, with the Netherlands aiming for initial operation capability around 2015.

According to the defense ministry, the comparative evaluation was baselined on the initial Block 3 version of the F-35 but also analyzed the improved Block 4 standard, which the Dutch expect to be available around 2015.

The JSF beat the other two candidates on mission effectiveness, the ministry says, scoring higher on five of the six mission profiles evaluated. The Gripen NG was ranked first on non-traditional intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, but was judged unable to perform four of the missions to the desired operational level. The Gripen NG was also judged to have insufficient growth potential.

The F-35 will perform four of the missions to the desired level in initial Block 3 form, and all six missions successfully when updated to Block 4, the evaluation concluded.

Read the rest of this story, check out some pics of Aussies in The Stan, listen to a podcast and see who's getting their Christmas MiGs from our Aviation Week friends exclusively at Military.com.

-- Christian

Lifecycle Costs Key in Latest CSAR-X RFP

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

The revamped request for proposals (RFP) for the U.S. Air Force's $15 billion Combat, Search and Rescue (CSAR-X) helicopter replacement program puts greater focus on the lifecycle cost calculations that derailed the service's previous procurement effort.

But the latest RFP, issued Dec. 5, also seems to address some of the criticism raised over the Air Force's inability to properly consider such costs in its acquisition decision. The solicitation -- which the three bidders will have to work on through the U.S. holidays to make an early January deadline -- says lifecycle costs must be included in the evaluation.

Bidders say that wasn't the case the first time.

Boeing's HH-47 Chinook variant was initially chosen for CSAR-X over bids from Lockheed Martin and Sikorsky, but multiple bid protests upheld by the congressional Government Accountability Office have delayed the program since 2006. GAO focused on the lifecycle costs both times, saying the Air Force failed to give those costs their just due in awarding Boeing.

Still, the new RFP also says those lifecycle costs will rank at the bottom of the procurement decision - making it more difficult for GAO to uphold another protest on those issues.

Sikorsky officials said they were pleased to see the Air Force require lifecycle costs in the procurement decision but "puzzled" as to why those cost considerations would rank so low. "We're not sure why one dollar in that area is less important than it is in another area," said John Pacelli, Sikorsky's vice president of marketing and business acquisition manager for the CSAR-X program.

Of greater import though -- and a potential positive development for Sikorsky and Lockheed -- is the fact that the Air Force is much more focused on the operational requirements of the aircraft. Executives at both companies feel their helicopters should fare better in comparison to Boeing's Chinook in the combat area - a view not shared by Boeing, of course.

Indeed, Boeing officials say the Chinook has proven itself time and again in war zones. "We are pleased the competition for this critical capability is moving into its final phase and are confident Boeing's HH-47 will again be selected as the warfighter's CSAR platform," the company said.

Lockheed officials have cited CSAR work in Iraq by a British variant of its HH-71 offering.

Read the rest of this story, see sea trials of the Bunker Hill, find out who could win the wearable power prize and delve into the missile debate with our Aviation Week friends exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

Pentagon Eyes Orbiting Power Station

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

Military planners responsible for finding space resources to support troops on the ground think the time may be ripe to advance the 40-year-old space solar power concept to help reduce the logistics train behind forward-deployed forces.

The concept of collecting solar energy above the atmosphere and beaming it to the ground as microwaves or lasers has long been seen among military freethinkers as a way to get electricity to remote airfields, fire bases or other distant outposts without having to haul fuel for diesel generators.

But that out-of-the-box concept may be gaining new life as the incoming administration looks for "green-energy" technologies to reduce reliance on foreign oil, and technologists home in on the hardware that would be needed to orbit deployable sunlight collectors measuring kilometers across and get power down from them to troops on the ground. Engineers studying space solar power (SSP) believe a pilot plant could be orbited fairly soon.

"The end game needs to have a pilot plant in operation within 10 to 12 years," said John Mankins, chief operating officer of Managed Energy Technologies and a longtime SSP advocate. "By pilot plant I mean a small but full-scale operational system delivering megawatts of power to the Earth."

The price tag would be relatively small by Pentagon standards, at least initially. Mankins estimates an end-to-end systems study, with some early lab work and low-cost flight-tests, would cost about $100 million and take about three years.

The Pentagon's National Security Space Office proposed just such a study in a report on SSP as "an opportunity for strategic security" released in October 2007. "It's being talked about," said a defense official, speaking on condition of anonymity in the absence of policy guidance. "Part of the problem has to do with perception... It's [about] roles and responsibilities, and having people get over the giggle factor, that this is actually something that's real."

Mankins said a pilot plant delivering 5-10 megawatts "does mesh nicely" with a notional military requirement for a system to deliver power from space to forward-deployed forces. To meet the 10-year timeline for a pilot plant, he said, it would take another three years after the systems study to put together a flight demonstration in low-Earth orbit, and another four to six years after that to get a pilot plant in geostationary orbit.

The National Security Space Office concluded that "while significant technical challenges remain, space-based solar power is more technically executable than ever before and current technological vectors promise to further improve its viability," according to the 2007 report. "A government-led demonstration of proof-of-concept could serve to catalyze commercial sector development."

For the Pentagon, there would be distinct tactical benefits even from a pilot plant. It could be a "disruptive game changer on the battlefield," the report said, providing "energy on demand" across a military theater and potentially supporting "entirely new force structures and capabilities such as ultra long-endurance airborne or terrestrial surveillance or combat systems to include the individual soldier himself."

Read the rest of this story, see whether Donley will stay on as USAF Sec and read why the Swiss aren't into the whole used fighter market from our friends at Aviation Week exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

Aussie AF Wants 100 F-35s

The Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) is stepping up its lobbying efforts for a full order of 100 F-35 Lightning IIs, a number that has been officially endorsed but could easily be trimmed in a defense white paper due next year.

The chief of the air force, Air Marshal Mark Binskin, strongly defends the choice of Lockheed Martin's F-35 as its next fighter, arguing that it will be part of an integrated airpower system and the country could not hope to find better.

He also endorses the Boeing 737 Airborne Early Warning & Control Wedgetail and Airbus A330 tankers -- both on order for Australia but running late -- as the best equipment available.

The F-35 will be the best multirole fighter in the world, Binskin says, and will be able to beat advanced Russian fighters because it will be backed by other superior equipment and superior personnel.

"It will have the best radar, the best defensive system of any of those aircraft in the world," Binskin said in a speech reported by the Australian Associated Press.

"It will be supported by the best airborne early warning and control aircraft and the best tanker in the world and flown, maintained and supported by the best people in the world," he reportedly said. "I've got to tell you: the system ain't going to get any better than that."

The air force regards the Wedgetails as critical. As Boeing has suffered delays in developing the electronics, including an e-scan radar and advanced passive radio detection equipment, the service has said that it cannot afford to get less capability from them than it has specified –- a clear sign that the six aircraft on order are at the center of its planning.

While holding F-35s in high esteem, the air force also says its studies show a need for a large quantity of them. "No matter how you model it, the modeling keeps coming back to 100," Binskin said.

Read the rest of this story, learn how to drive to your mom's house without, well, driving; see the latest in armed guard towers and check out the Army's balloon drones from our friends at Aviation Week exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

Dogfight Over F-22 Reveals DoD Schisms

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

The battle over how many F-22 Raptors the U.S. Air Force requires is revealing some nasty infighting as the White House administration change nears.

The Defense Secretary staff has told Air Force planners not to talk to congressional staffers and to work only through the offices of Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England and acquisition chief John Young.

Insiders on Capitol Hill contend that the Defense Department has been and is continuing to withhold F-22 funds -- in defiance of the law and the intent of Congress -- in an attempt to punish the Air Force. England is still angry about the service's success in getting Congress to approve long-lead funding for 20 more aircraft, which would bring the service's total to 203 stealthy fighters.

However, the Office of the Secretary of Defense has released funds for only four aircraft, which brought howls from aerospace analysts that it is too few aircraft to avoid a shutdown of production between administrations.

The U.S. Air Force's new chief of staff, Gen. Norton Schwartz, is soon supposed to tell the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Carl Levin (D-Mich.), how many F-22s the service needs beyond the 183 that are already in the budget.

Schwartz's budgeters and planners are expected to recommend a force of 250-275, a cut of more than 100 aircraft from the service's current requirement of 381. The 250 would allow a force of seven squadrons with 24 aircraft each or 10 squadrons with 18 Raptors.

Young points out that there is no money in the Air Force's budget plans for fiscal 2010 for F-22s. Neither Congress nor the defense secretary want to keep funding F-22 and C-17 production through supplemental defense budgets.

"John is stuck taking direction from England, which I think he agrees with in this case, unlike with the alternative engine for the F-35 [which England attempted to kill]," says a Washington-based official with insight into the affray between the Air Force, Congress and senior Pentagon civilians. "Plus John has people around him who have their own agenda, or are not competent. They had John believing that the numbers being used by Lockheed and the Air Force late last week were from a Rand study on F-22 that has nothing to do with the current circumstances.

"I don't know where all the [defense] money is going to come from," he says. "But at least with the F-22 we know what we are getting and have some grasp of the cost."

A new study from the Center for Strategic and International Studies -- whose CEO, John Hamre, has been mentioned as a possible candidate for President-elect Barack Obama's defense secretary -- contends that war costs, manpower costs, underfunded operations and procurement crises in every service will force the new administration to reshape almost every aspect of current defense plans, programs and budgets.

Obama will be faced with contracts worth $70 billion (Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter, Transformational Satellite, the Combat Search and Rescue Helicopter and a new tanker aircraft) that would be added to current procurement and force modernization plans that total more than $183 billion in the fiscal 2009 defense budget, say Anthony Cordesman and Hans Kaeser, authors of "Defense Procurement by Paralysis."

Read the rest of this story, check out the battle over F-16 radar, see why Aussie ships are sailing home and read how the Taliban might start talking from our Aviation Week friends exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

Army Aviation Accidents Top $16 Billion

This article first appeared at Aviation Week.com.

U.S. Army aviation accidents and incidents have cost the service about $16.2 billion over the past dozen years, according to an exclusive Aerospace DAILY analysis of data provided by the Army Combat Readiness/Safety Center (USACRC).

The average cost per an accident or incident for the more than 30,000 events was $539,281, the analysis shows, with a maximum single-event cost of about $62.4 million. The mishaps have lead to 2,856 deaths.

So far this fiscal year -- Oct. 1 through Nov. 10 -- the service seems to be off on solid footing as far as mishaps go, according to online statistics released through the USACRC.

The Army shows seven reported Class A-C aviation accidents in FY '09. There are three flight accidents resulting in an overall rate of 2.385 accidents per 100,000 hours flown within the Army flying hour program.

The current number of Class A-C accidents is 65 percent below last fiscal year, and 73 percent below a three-year average of the same periods. The Army has lost no soldiers this fiscal year in aviation mishaps.

Reducing fatalities and injuries has been a priority for Army safety leaders. "While I'm not a fan of statistics, it is evident soldiers and leaders ‘get it' by the 46 percent decrease in on-duty fatalities across our Army in fiscal 2008 (compared to fiscal 2007)," wrote Brig. Gen. William Wolf, new director of Army safety and commanding general of the USACRC, in a Nov. 3 letter posted on the center's Web site.

Since 1986, the Army aircraft with the most reported fatalities due to mishaps are UH-60 Black Hawks, with more than 880 events, the analysis shows.

Placing second are the old UH-1H Hueys, with more than 460.

Next come Chinook variants, with the CH-47D accounting for more than 250 fatalities, according to the analysis.

Read the rest of this story, see what the president should make a priority at the Pentagon, check out where Ivan's looking at port calls and take a look at all-seeing MAVs from our Aviation Week friends exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

So Now What?

Here's Av Week's impression of where Obama will go with defense:

Obama promises to put "people first" in the military and bring major combat operations in Iraq to a close over the next few years. He wants to boost the National Guard and reserves, from personnel to equipment, and emphasize diplomatic efforts to promulgate U.S. interests abroad. But most importantly to the U.S. aerospace and defense industry - as well the foreign-based firms - Obama openly declares his desire to subdue the so-called military industrial complex that has long irked liberal advocates.

An Obama administration will "place our troops before CEOs, reining in military outsourcing and restoring honesty, openness, and economic good sense to our defense contracting and budgeting processes," according to a recently updated campaign Web site position.

"Negative trends in recruitment and retention threaten the strength of the all-volunteer force," the Obama campaign says. "In allowing this to occur, President Bush is repeating mistakes made at the end of the Vietnam War that 'hollowed out' our force. An Obama administration will rebuild a military that has been pushed to the breaking point."

Combined, the platform of Obama and running mate Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del.) paints a person-over-program picture, although the Democrats assert their willingness to develop, buy and equip the U.S. military with the best weapons and technology. But even there, Obama will favor admittedly blander programs that make for the backbone of global operations rather than high-profile fighters and attack aircraft.

"We must preserve our unparalleled airpower capabilities to deter and defeat any conventional competitors, swiftly respond to crises across the globe, and support our ground forces," the Democratic candidate says.

"We must adapt and make tradeoffs among systems originally designed for the Cold War and those required for current and future challenges. We need greater investment in advanced technology ranging from the revolutionary, like unmanned aerial vehicles and electronic warfare capabilities, to systems like the C-17 cargo and KC-X air refueling aircraft--which may not be glamorous to politicians, but are the backbone of our future ability to extend global power," the Obama camp says.

Nevertheless, rather than wholesale upheaval, changes to the Pentagon's budget, force structure and military capabilities are likely to come in measured amounts as the U.S. faces wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as continuing counter-terrorism efforts around the world and at home. As Aviation Week reported in late June, the next president will face mounting economic and budgetary pressures that will weigh on their defense policies as much or more than just the post-9-11 concerns of the Bush administration.

-- Christian

Next Tanker Round Option: Price Shootout

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

The next U.S. president could move forward with a new competition to buy the Air Force's much-needed aerial tanker replacements with an idea quietly crafted this fall at the Pentagon as a potential compromise.

But, for now, the idea has been dashed amid the political firestorm over the $35 billion program.

Pentagon acquisition chief John Young says his team discussed the notion of a new strategy to judge the existing KC-X proposals put forth by rivals Northrop Grumman/EADS North America and Boeing.

The new concept was proffered inside the Pentagon, but Defense Secretary Robert Gates eventually decided to shelve the tanker competition and declare a "cooling off" period before proceeding.

The new strategy would include two phases. In the first, both proposals – which met all of the key requirements of the KC-X competition – would be declared "technically compliant," Young says. Both offers satisfied threshold requirements on fuel carriage, range and cargo and troop transport among others.

Second phase

But one complexity in the last competition was how to value nearly 800 smaller requirements that were not weighted prior to the outset of the source selection.

In the second phase, the Pentagon would then focus on value. The Defense Department would request a best and final offer from both bidders for the development and procurement of the first 68 (of 179) aircraft. The winner would be selected on the best total combined cost, he says.

Based on the previous competition, Northrop's combined cost for development and first units was $12.5 billion compared to Boeing's $15.4 billion. Boeing's proposal was based on modifications to its 767-200 while Northrop's was a version of the Airbus A330-200.

"If we went back for a best price proposal from both of those teams, we would get better prices," Young says.

He notes that lifecycle cost would be too thorny because of fluctuations in areas outside the Pentagon's control. For example, the price of oil recently dropped, dramatically reducing the lifecycle cost of both aircraft. However, fuel efficiency of the two bids were different, and given the challenge of projecting such costs in the future, Young says the simplest way of conducting a price competition is to focus solely on the up-front price associated with developing and buying the first aircraft.

Young asserts this strategy could be useful as the Pentagon embarks on other programs that build off of commercially available products. Still, some lawmakers are pushing the concept of buying both designs and splitting procurement between the two production lines.

'Very bad decision'

Top Air Force officials have previously and repeatedly said the service's budget cannot bear the cost of both developments. Furthermore, buying two designs at once would require the Pentagon to operate five tanker models simultaneously until one is retired. These would be the massive KC-135 fleet (which is the first to be replaced), the KC-130, KC-10 and the two new variants.

Read the rest of this story, see a hot shot of a post-IED medic, check out DARPA's river rover and get a look at the USAF's cyber gun from our Aviation Week friends exclusively at Military.com.

-- Christian

US Navy Global Hawk May Head To Middle East

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

The U.S. Navy is considering deploying its first Global Hawk unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) to an air base near Iraq to experiment with its ability to conduct maritime surveillance, according to defense officials.

Navy officials declined to discuss the exact location for a deployment. "Longer-term options for the system may include additional deployment situations -- allowing the system to demonstrate its unique persistent maritime ISR capabilities in various overseas environments," says Chuck Wagner, a spokesman for Naval Air Systems Command.

According to other defense officials, the Navy Global Hawk is expected to arrive at a base in the Middle East early next year, and the aircraft will be co-located with Air Force Global Hawks already at that base. Defense officials declined to identify the base, citing security issues. But it is widely known that the Air Force's high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft supporting activities in Iraq and Afghanistan operate from Al Dhafra Air Base in the United Arab Emirates.

The high-flying Global Hawk is capable of collecting intelligence from above 55,000 feet altitude for a day or more at a time. The Global Hawk Maritime Demonstration (GHMD) vehicle, one of two Block 10 Global Hawks owned by the Navy, is carrying an integrated sensor suite. These aircraft were bought to allow the Navy to experiment with using a UAV for maritime surveillance. Using various modes -- for inverse synthetic aperture radar, maritime search and target acquisition -- this sensor can conduct surveillance of surface ships. The aircraft also carries the LR100, a basic signals intelligence collector.

Exercises

The GHMD aircraft have been used for a variety of exercises, including Trident Warrior 08 and Rim of the Pacific 08. Most recently, the aircraft collected images of wildfires in California this summer and of the Gulf Coast after Hurricane Ike.

The UAVs will give the Pentagon a new tool to use for monitoring shipping activity in the Persian Gulf, where several scrapes with Iranian ships have occurred in recent months. And the deployment will give the Navy some hands-on operational experience deploying the UAV prior to inducting its future Global Hawks into the fleet.

These Navy vehicles are not to be confused with the Navy's Broad Area Maritime Surveillance (BAMS) development program. Under that effort, Northrop Grumman is designing and building Global Hawk Block 20-based aircraft designed for maritime surveillance.

Read the rest of this story, see why computer weapons lag, watch one spook go down and check out where the Air Force plans to cut from our Aviation Week friends exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

USAF Cyber Command Winnows Base List

This article first appeared at AviationWeek.com.

The list of possible headquarter bases for the U.S. Air Force Cyber Command will be winnowed down and evaluated more closely over the next three to four months, according to Maj. Gen. William Lord, chief of the provisional command.

There is fierce competition to provide a home for the planned Cyber Command. A list of 56 bases is being reviewed by the Pentagon, Lord told Aerospace DAILY. In March, then-USAF Secretary Michael Wynne responded to 18 states' governors interested in hosting the new command to join in the basing process. Requests for information were sent out in May and responses were due back by July 1.

Cyber Command has been in suspended animation ever since the turnover of top Air Force leadership this past summer. "My tasking is to come back with a roadmap that defines [Cyber]," Lord said. Although priority is still being given to issues dealing with better management of the service's so-called nuclear enterprise, Lord said a decision was made to stand up the command.

Lord is confident that Cyber Command's designation as a so-called Numbered Air Force (NAF), the 24th under the USAF Space Command, is the best decision. "That's the way we fight today," he said. "It's not important which major command it falls under because the [capability is available] to all of the Combatant Commanders (COCOMS)." For example, he said, Air Combat Command organizes, trains and equips air-breathing assets, which are used by U.S. units in Europe and the Pacific for the commanders in those regions. "In the case of Cyber, you don't have hard assets," Lord said. "Network warfare is more distributed."

Lord also referred to what he called "cross-domain synergies," or the ability to use both kinetic and non-kinetic weapons "in concert, more efficiently. The bottom line is about changing enemy behavior," which doesn't necessarily have to result in total destruction. "Now you can have a more gradual and perhaps different kind of warfare where both a potential belligerent and another nation are not killing and maiming people" to effect change, Lord said.

Read the rest of this story, check out the JSF's noise signature, see the new Israeli sniper mount and take a look at some WWII crash pics from our Aviation Week friends exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

DARPA Cancels Hypersonic Blackswift

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

The Blackswift reusable hypersonic testbed has been canceled by the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) after Congress slashed the program's fiscal 2009 budget to $10 million, from $120 million.

Blackswift was to demonstrate an unmanned hypersonic vehicle able to take off, accelerate to a Mach 6 cruise and return to a runway landing.

"Congress made significant reductions in the amount of funds available to DARPA and the Air Force for the Blackswift testbed," the agency said in a statement. "Based on this, DARPA determined that it would not be possible to proceed with the solicitation for the effort."

DARPA had hoped to award a contract for the demonstrator later this year, and was believed to be negotiating with a Lockheed Martin Skunk Works-led team that included Boeing. The Blackswift was expected to fly in 2012. Meanwhile, DARPA says it will continue with the Falcon program to fly unpowered hypersonic test vehicles in 2009.

Congress was skeptical of Blackswift's technical achievability and operational utility, cutting DARPA FY '09 funding from the requested $70 million to $10 million and eliminating the Air Force's requested $50 million for the joint program.

"Obviously we are disappointed that we will not have the appropriated funds to move forward with the Blackswift flight test," DARPA program manager Steven Walker said. He said a significant effort had been made to develop the propulsion technology and build a national government and industry team capable of developing and flying a reusable hypersonic testbed.

"The Blackswift testbed would have been able to take off under its own power, cruise at Mach 6, maneuver at hypersonic speeds and land, and then do it again," Walker said. "Blackswift, or something very much like it, will be a required step prior to the U.S. developing an operational, reusable air-breathing hypersonic airplane."

Read the rest of this story, check out a shipboard drone landing, see where Italy's JSF stands and win some hearts and minds with our Aviation Week friends exclusively at Military.com.

-- Christian

Gripen Delivers Fighters To South Africa

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

The South Africa Air Force (SAAF) has taken delivery of the first four of 26 Gripen NG advanced fighter aircraft ordered at the biennial Africa Aerospace and Defense show in Cape Town, South Africa.

[Av Week Online Editor Sean Meade corrects: South Africa has accepted the first four fighters under an order for 26 Gripen C/Ds. An Aerospace Daily & Defense Report article Sept. 30 incorrectly identified the type of those four Gripens. (thanks DT reader Logan Hartke for the catch!)]

Nine of the fighters are two-seaters and 17 single-seaters. Deliveries are scheduled through 2012.

Armaments

Currently the fighters are said to be armed with only a 27mm Mauser cannon. The short-range IRIS-T air-to-air missile is on order from Diehl BGT and additional weapons are under development. The first class of six instructors are now in training at Makhado.

Denel SAAB Aerostructures (DSA) has delivered 220 pylons for Gripen aircraft, with 80 more contracted. The South African company is set to receive another follow-on contract to make 80 more pylons through a modified design, bringing the total to 380.

Modification kits for the earlier pylons will also be produced under a separate contract. SAAB predicts there will be further requirements for pylons until 2013, implying further work for DSA, according to a trade magazine.

In addition to the pylon contracts, DSA has longstanding contracts for the manufacture of the Gripen main landing gear and the rear fuselage sections, for both the Swedish air force and all export customers. These contracts form part of SAAB’s Defense Industrial Participation Program for South Africa.

Read the rest of this story, see how Canada's going green, read how the financial crisis could help the defense biz and check out what Mrs. Palin says about ak-ak from our friends at Aviation Week exclusively on Military.com.

-- Editor

Production Presidential Helicopter Flies

This article first appeared at AviationWeek.com.

AgustaWestland has begun flying the pilot production version of its VH-71A variant of the AW101 for the U.S. presidential helicopter program. The helicopter, PP-1, was flown from the company's Yeovil site in England on September 22. It is the first of five production aircraft that will be built under Increment 1 of the program, with 23 improved helicopters to be produced under the follow-on Increment 2.

Lockheed Martin, prime contractor for the VH-71 program, is installing the first mission systems in two Increment 1 test vehicles, TV-3 and TV-4, at its presidential helicopter integration facility in Owego, New York. Another two helicopters, TV-1 and TV-5, are continuing air-vehicle flight testing at the U.S Navy's Patuxent River test center in Maryland.

Read the rest of this story, see how FCS is moving forward, chart the submersible drug catcher and explore the myths of Airlift from our Aviation Week friends at Military.com.

-- Christian

747-Based Chemical Laser Tests Begin

This article first appeared at AviationWeek.com.

[Editor's note: You all know I've been a grudging supporter of the ABL, even if there's no money for it. All I'll say is it'll be exciting to see this thing actually work. Thanks from our friends at Aviation Week.]

Longer duration firings of the high-energy laser on board the U.S. Missile Defense Agency's Boeing 747 airborne laser (ABL) are getting underway following the completion of the "first light" initial firing milestone onboard the aircraft in a ground test on Sept. 7.

The test, conducted at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif., lasted only a "fraction of a second" says a spokesman for Northrop Grumman, the makers of the Chemical Oxygen Iodine Laser (COIL). But this was long enough to prove "the laser is ready to demonstrate power output sufficient to destroy a ballistic missile in flight," he adds.

The COIL test marked "Knowledge Point 6" for the ABL program and came after a series of activation tests that began late last year. The work paves the way for "Knowledge Point 7," which will involve firing the laser through the system's Lockheed Martin-developed beam control/fire control system and out of the nose-mounted turret. This is targeted for the end of the year and is a crucial milestone towards an airborne intercept test against a ballistic missile, which ABL prime contractor Boeing says remains "on track" for around August 2009.

The COIL laser test was conducted under simulated flight conditions with fuel being supplied by onboard chemical tanks, and the laser itself subject to "atmospheric conditions consistent with those at the altitude at which the aircraft will fly," Northrop Grumman says. The "first light" test involved firing the laser into an onboard metallic calorimeter, or "beam dump," which measures the power of the beam by measuring heat rise in the metal.

Read the rest of this story, learn why the IAF grounded its snakes, see the new Swiss Army Knife and check out NorGrum's long range bomber from our Aviation Week friends exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

Sikorsky Debuts Fly-by-Wire UH-60M

[Editor's note: Just a quick note folks...I'll be attending the Republican Convention this week and will be posting entries on Military.com's Election Center blog. Ward, John, Kevin and the rest of the gang will be backing me up here while I'm wading through all the politics and hot air in Minniapolis-St. Paul.]

Sikorsky has begun flight testing the UH-60M Upgrade, the latest version of the Black Hawk and the first fly-by-wire helicopter for the U.S. Army.

The first flight at the company’s West Palm Beach, Fla, test center lasted around 60 minutes and included hover, forward flight and a hover turn, Sikorsky says.

The M Upgrade introduces a digital fly-by-wire (FBW) system with triple-redundant Hamilton Sundstrand dual-channel flight control computers and actuators, and BAE Systems active control sticks.

Sikorsky says FBW, coupled with Rockwell Collins’ Common Aviation Architecture System (CAAS) glass cockpit, reduces pilot workload, improves aircraft handling qualities and increases pilot situational awareness.

Eliminating mechanical control linkages also saves weight and reduces maintenance, the company says. At the same time, the engines are upgraded to General Electric T700-701Es with fully authority digital engine control.

Read the rest of this story and others from our Aviation Week friends at Military.com.

-- Christian

First Flight of Sikorsky X2 Demonstrator

This article first appeared at AviationWeek.com.

Sikorsky's futuristic X2 high-speed helicopter technology demonstrator made its first flight today in Horseheads, N.Y., in the hands of chief test pilot Kevin L. Bredenbeck.

The single-engined fly-by-wire aircraft features coaxial rotors and a pusher propeller that Sikorsky believes will revolutionize the helicopter world with cruise speeds of up to 250 kts, some 100 kts faster than current production helicopters.

"This isn't an airplane we are training to hover. It's a helicopter that will go very, very fast," said Sikorsky CEO Jeff Pino. "I think it will get to 260 kts." (The helicopter world speed record is held by a Westland Lynx at 216.45 kts).

Today's flight lasted 30 minutes, during which Bredenbeck demonstrated hover, forward flight, and a hover turn.

Current helicopter speeds are limited by rotor aerodynamics. In contrast the X2's coaxial rotor system is optimized for all regimes of flight by a fly-by-wire control system that will slow the rotors at high forward speeds to prevent their tips going supersonic, while maximizing lift and minimizing drag by adjusting the pitch of the rigid, carbon-fiber blades. The counter-rotating rotors provide equal lift on each side of the aircraft and, unlike a traditional helicopter, are relieved of having to provide all the forward propulsion by a large pusher propeller at the rear of the fuselage.

The rigidity of the blades allows the rotors to be closely spaced only two feet apart, further reducing drag. Sikorsky believes the gap can be reduced even more in the future.

The X2 technology demonstrator is powered by a 1,452 shp, FADEC-equipped T800 turboshaft engine that was previously installed in one of the Comanche helicopter prototypes. It drives both the rotor and the pusher propeller through two gearboxes.

So far the aerospace industry's solution to high speed, vertical flight has been the hugely complex tiltrotor, a hybrid airplane with rotors. The X2 differs markedly in that it is still a helicopter that can go fast, autorotate, hover, and fly nap of the earth.

The X2 can match the speed of the Bell/Agusta BA609 tiltrotor with far less complexity, according to Steve Estill, Sikorsky's vice president for worldwide sales. X2 technology is especially well suited to missions such as flying fast to oil rigs, which would call for development of a light to intermediate X2 twin of the same size as the 12-passenger S-76 or 19-passenger S-92.

Read more about this story, see some gouge on the new laser JDAM, read about a new UAV called "saucer" and debate how much time is right for the new KC tanker from our Aviation Week friends at Military.com.

-- Christian

USAF not Ready to Retire the U-2

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

The U.S. Air Force is considering -- once again -- delaying the retirement date for its workhorse intelligence collector, the U-2 Dragon Lady, as developers work out issues with integrating a signals intelligence payload onto the Global Hawk unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), according to service officials.

The current plan calls for the completion of U-2 retirement in the third quarter of fiscal 2012. But the Pentagon is considering delaying the retirement to fiscal 2014 or possibly later, depending on the maturity of the Global Hawk. And retiring a mainstay intelligence collector like the U-2 during wars that require massive amounts of sensor data is also unlikely, according to one USAF official.

The USAF has wrangled for years with various dates for U-2 retirement. Earlier plans called for the retirement to start as soon as FY '07. But the date has continually slipped. Regional commanders such as in the Pacific realm rely heavily on the U-2. Key advantages of the aircraft over the Global Hawk include higher altitude (above 70,000 feet) and more available onboard power to run a larger selection of intelligence-gathering sensors.

The U-2 can collect data from all seven of its available bands (versus the Global Hawk's five) simultaneously. They include green, red, near infrared (visible), two shortwave infrared bands and a midwave infrared (which can be tuned to day or night collection). The seventh band is a redundant, midwave thermal infrared channel. The shortwave bands collect images in the invisible reflected solar wavelengths and are most useful in detecting objects in adverse conditions such as haze, fog or smoke.

The latest variants of the decade-old U-2S (part of the U.S. fleet of 33 remaining Dragon Ladies) also carry the Advanced Synthetic Aperture Radar System (ASARS) 2A designed by Raytheon (originally for mapping) that's so sensitive it can detect disturbed earth in areas where explosive devices and mines have been planted.

Its signals intelligence package gathers information about electronic emissions and communications and associates them with moving targets. The Air Force also procured a dual-data link that allows the aircraft to simultaneously feed information to the Distributed Common Ground Station network and also to a ground station within line-of-sight.

The Pentagon has said it will not retire the U-2 at least until the Global Hawk Block 30, which will carry the Advanced Signals Intelligence Payload, is flying. A USAF official said that flight could take place imminently. Another major milestone will be integration of the Multi-Platform Radar Technology Insertion Program sensor onto the Global Hawk Block 40 next summer.

Read the rest of this story, take a look at Poland's fighter buy, see the Zephyr UAV and the Russians' rocket-delivered UAV.

-- Christian

USAF Confident About CSAR-X Progress

This article first appeared in Aviation Week.com.

The U.S. Air Force is still confident a design will be selected as planned this fall for the armed service's controversial rescue helicopter replacement program, even though forthcoming draft findings of a Defense Department inspector general (IG) investigation could slow the process of announcing a winner.

Maj. Gen. Scott Gray, USAF director of acquisition for global reach programs, said he doesn't expect the IG's findings to impact the schedule of the contract award announcement. "We've heard nothing from the DOD IG that causes us concern," he told Pentagon reporters.

Service officials are folding lessons from Government Accountability Office's findings in the beleaguered aerial refueling tanker contest into future acquisition programs. In the case of CSAR-X, "we feel pretty confident that there was nothing...that needed to be fixed," Gray said.

The new aircraft are needed to replace aging HH-60G Pave Hawks now in service. Gray says that as of 2006, 7 percent of the Pave Hawk fleet of 101 helicopters was past its service life of 7,000 hr. He projects that in 2015, 58 percent will exceed their service life.

Read more of this story, see if there will be more work on DDG-1000, take a treaty watch and a bit of '80s retro from our Aviation Week friends on Military.com.

-- Christian

India Reviews Offsets for Fighter Program

This article first appeared at Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

New Delhi -- Prospective vendors submitted their offsets package Aug. 4 for India's Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) program.

The proposal was submitted in response to the MMRCA request for proposals (RFPs), which asked all competitors to provide an "industrial participation" (IP) plan as part of their offering.

The RFP for the 126-aircraft MMRCA program went out to Boeing, Eurofighter, Gripen, Lockheed Martin, MiG and Rafale, and the companies submitted their bids in April.

Lockheed said its offer included a wide range of projects including investment, manufacturing, export creation and joint development.

"Lockheed Martin is committed to working with our industrial partners and Indian defense industry to develop long-term, high-value projects that bring technology and sustainable business to India," said Orville Prins, a Lockheed vice president for business development.

The giant contractor, based outside Washington, D.C., is touting its history of having established four F-16 production lines outside of the United States as one of its selling points. It says it has achieved over $37 billion in offset program credits in 40 countries - "all without default or penalty. A proven cornerstone of these programs is the ability to provide transfer of technology to program partners."

Boeing claims it has a formidable industrial lineup that includes a supplier team of 16 leading aerospace and defense companies with combined revenues of over $454 billion, as well as 37 public- and private-sector Indian companies.

Earlier this year, Boeing reached agreement to form a joint venture with Tata Industries Ltd. Last year, it reached another deal with Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd, which is adopting Boeing's "Lean" and best-management practices. Boeing has also signed an agreement with international engineering firm Larsen & Toubro for joint exploration of business opportunities in the Indian defense market.

-- Neelam Mathews

NATO AWACS to Afghanistan?

This article first appeared on Aviation Week's Ares weblog.

The German government is apparently starting discussions on whether to politically back a one-year deployment of NATO E-3 Airborne Warning and Control System aircraft to support the NATO mission in Afghanistan.

But there's concern the issue could cause political waves. According to the German weekly news magazine, Der Spiegel, the government is trying to defer such a fight past the summer recess by not taking up the issue until September.

German government officials confirm that senior NATO military leaders have expressed interest in the AWACS deployment. But, they add, the request hasn't formally been blessed by the alliance's military committee.

The AWACS would be used largely to manage the large amount of NATO air traffic in Afghanistan, ranging from combat aircraft providing fire support to ground troops, to logistics flights, to helicopter operations.

Read the rest of this story, check out some killer Reaper pics, a sneaky read about a VTOL UAV and take a look at White Knight 2 from our Aviation Week friends at Military.com.

-- Christian

QinetiQ, Boeing Partner on Long-Endurance UAV

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

FARNBOROUGH -- Boeing has selected QinetiQ, the U.K.-based defense technology company, as its key technology partner on Vulture -- the ultra-long-endurance unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) concept proposed by the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).

The $3.8-million first phase of the program will see QinetiQ participating in system definition and analysis as well as a review of system requirements. The challenge? To create a large, load-carrying UAV able to remain aloft for weeks on end.

As part of the Boeing team, QinetiQ is expected to apply expertise gained in the development of Zephyr, a high-altitude long-endurance UAV. Launched by hand, Zephyr, is built mainly from lightweight carbon fiber. It flies on solar power by day and draws power from rechargeable lithium sulfur batteries by night.

In October of last year, Zephyr exceeded the official world record duration for unmanned flight, with a 54-hour mission flown over the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico.

DARPA's goal for Vulture is the ability to carry a 1,000-pound, 5-kw payload for an extended period, while remaining on station despite strong high-altitude winds and other factors. Considered a "pseudo satellite," Vulture may one day serve as a persistent intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) platform, or as an aerial node in a global communications network.

In addition to its UAV work, QinetiQ comes to Farnborough this year riding a wave of significant contract wins. The company is a key player on the F-35 Lightning II program. As a member of TeamUK F-35, QinetiQ is helping with development in key areas, including flight simulation, training, weapons systems and through-life platform management.

Be sure to read the rest of this story, take a look at Japan's altered acquisition rules, how the US Army is recruiting in the virtual world and more gouge from the Farnborough Air Show by our friends at Aviation Week on Military.com.

-- Christian

US Army Extends JHL Concept Studies

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

Work to refine concepts for a large cargo rotorcraft is moving ahead under the U.S. Army-led Joint Heavy Lift (JHL) technology effort.

JHL is the vertical take-off and landing candidate for the U.S. Air Force/Army Joint Future Theater Lift (JFTL) requirement.The first of three contracts to extend previous concept definition and analysis (CDA) work for another two years has been awarded, with the others to follow over the next week or two, says the Army's Aviation Applied Technology Directorate (AATD).

Contracts are being awarded to Bell-Boeing for the Quad Tilt Rotor, Karem Aircraft/Lockheed Martin for the Optimum Speed Tilt Rotor and Sikorsky for the coaxial-rotor X2 High Speed Lifter. The teams will update their designs to meet the new JHL model performance specification (MPS), which includes several new mission profiles that drive different aspects of the design.

The contractors ''have a requirement to provide an immediate assessment of the impact of the new MPS within 30 days of contract award," says Bruce Tenney, AATD associate director for technology. ''The government is going to do a gut check on the MPS changes and decide if a near-term update is needed for completion of the CDA."

Previous CDA studies assumed a payload of 20 tons and a C-130-size cargo box, but growth in the weight of Army Future Combat Systems vehicles has pushed the requirement closer to 30 tons and an A400M-size cargo box. The merger of JHL with the Air Force's Advanced Joint Air Combat System requirement under JFTL has also placed a greater emphasis on speed.

Work under the CDA extensions will help decide whether JHL needs two or four engines and whether folding will be required for seabasing operations. AATD also plans to demonstrate flight control laws that could reduce airframe loads and lower empty weight. These will be tested in the Army/NASA Rascal flying laboratory, a modified UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter.

Read the rest of this story, an interesting piece on cloud seeding, an after action report on FCS so far and a take a look at the new USS America from our friends at Aviation Week on Military.com.

-- Christian

Development For B-52 Jammer Continues

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

Boeing and several system suppliers have been awarded U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory contracts to mature technology for an airborne electronic attack (AEA) pod that could be flight tested on the B-52 in fiscal 2012, giving the venerable bomber another shot at one day providing stand-off jamming for early-warning radars.
The five-year AEA Tech Mat effort is a prelude to the planned Core Component Jammer (CCJ) program, a lower-cost replacement for the B-52 Stand-Off Jammer System (SOJS) that was cancelled in 2006 when estimated costs soared above $7 billion.

Boeing has been awarded a three-year, $15 million contract to study the integration of the jammer system on the B-52 and provide support to subsystem suppliers such as EDO and ITT, which have contracts to mature technology for the receiver, exciter and phased-array jammers.

Under a planned two-year extension to the program, not yet funded but expected to cost $300-350 million, two jammer pods would be built and flight-tested on a B-52H in 2012, says Boeing program manager Jeff Weis. This would set the stage for system development and demonstration of the CCJ for service entry around 2018.

To reduce cost, Weis says, the pods are planned to have the same size, weight and center of gravity as underwing fuel tanks carried by the earlier B-52D. The pods would house high-power phased arrays providing jamming in two low bands and one mid band, principally to counter early-warning radars.

To power the pods, Boeing plans to add generators to the B-52, which presently has them on only four of its eight engines. There would be an electronic-attack processor and a dedicated display at the existing electronic-warfare officer's station.

Boeing is teamed with Northrop Grumman, its partner on the U.S. Navy's electronic-attack EA-18G Growler. "We will leverage off the EA-18's controls and displays and Northrop Grumman's electronic attack expertise to keep it affordable," Weis says.

Read the rest of this story, see how spec ops are using sand, check out a new periscope design and watch the fur fly around Frenchie fighters from our Aviation Week friends on Military.com.

-- Christian

F-35 Offers Multirole Surprises

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily and Defense Report.

The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) will "redefine the concept of multirole strike" aircraft, Lockheed Martin officials say, but they offer few details to flesh out that claim.

Still, while the future concept of operations, electronic attack (EA) capability and derivative options remain undefined, at least publicly, some capabilities can be picked out of their purposely vague descriptions.

Starting from the notion that new hardware is the least likely addition to the aircraft and that it has an open architecture for avionics, look for the big multirole capability additions to involve electronic attack.

Because of the ability to penetrate while using low-probability-of-intercept radar and passive sensors, the JSF will not operate in proximity to current, so-called fourth-generation aircraft. It will instead roam well-defended enemy airspace while feeding precision targeting data to nonstealthy aircraft with standoff-range weapons.

Tailored for EA

The F-35 aircraft is being designed to deliver electronic attack (jamming, spoofing and pulses of energy) with the same ease that it can deliver explosive weapons. Moreover, Lockheed officials say the F-35 -- first of all a combat aircraft -- will have full 360-degree awareness of what is going on around it.

That presents an interesting dilemma for EA versus kinetic weaponry. The new AIM-9X air-to-air missile can perform high off-boresight shots without turning the aircraft's nose toward the target. However, delivering electronic effects require specialized antennae pointed toward the target. As far as is known, JSF has only its advanced active, electronically-scanned array (AESA) radar antenna in the nose to pump out its electronic firepower. It would then have the weakness of any AESA array in that it is flat with a field of view of less than 180 degrees, perhaps an effective field of regard for effective attack of 60-90 degrees.

Some radar specialists and Air Force planners already say they anticipate flying the F-35s in line, with the first aircraft being passive and the second emitting and passing target information to the first so that it can remain undetected. Therefore, it appears that without an add-on antenna, the JSF's EA capability will be limited to the forward quarter.

However, within that field the electronic effects generator can be routed through the AESA radar, which allows the F-35 to invade, blind or fool enemy sensors and radars at ranges of up to hundreds of miles.

Sensors

Lockheed officials do admit that the F-35's sensor capabilities include advanced electronic surveillance allowing development of an instantaneous electronic order of battle -- what's emitting and from where.

Read the rest of this story, see some hot photos of artillerymen putting warheads on foreheads, take a look at the downside of ditching the UCAS-D and see how India now thinks missile defense is a good idea from our friends at Aviation Week exclusively on Military.com.

-- Christian

Raytheon Missile Deployed On Predator

This article first appeared at Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

A small air-to-surface missile developed as a private venture by Raytheon is being deployed on the Predator unmanned aircraft by an unidentified customer.

The Griffin is a 42-inch-long, tube-launched missile with a semi-active laser seeker, and is intended to give the Predator and smaller UAVs an organic, self-guided direct attack capability, Raytheon says.

The short-range missile including its launcher weigh around 45 pounds, and the Predator will be able to carry up to three rounds for each Hellfire missile now carried. Although longer than Hellfire, the Griffin has a narrower diameter at 5.5 inches and a smaller warhead, reducing collateral damage.

Raytheon says the low-cost weapon is modular, using technology from several of the company’s existing weapons including Javelin, AIM-9X and guided projectiles. Other seekers and warheads could be installed, the company says.

Read the rest of this story, a screed on the Reaper's rewards, an entry on FCS's Hill fandango and see some killer photos of the Royal Navy from our Aviation Week friends at Military.com.

-- Christian

Boeing Rethinking Plan To Back Out Of JCA

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

Boeing is rethinking its decision to back out of a deal with L-3 Communications and Alenia North America to build C-27Js for the U.S. Air Force and Army.

Last week, Boeing Integrated Defense Systems President Jim Albaugh is said to have decided to pull out of the partnership to build the Joint Cargo Aircraft (JCA) over disagreements concerning Boeing's work share. Boeing was in talks to establish a new production facility for the aircraft in Jacksonville, Fla.

After Albaugh decided to back out of JCA, Boeing CEO Jim McNerney stepped in and reopened the matter, an industry source says.

This source suggests the relationship between Boeing and Alenia North America, as well as prime contractor L-3 Communications, was souring and they were not making headway on work share after a year of discussions. "Boeing is not used to being a follower" on contracts, the source says.

This week, however, it appears Boeing is publicly acknowledging the question is open. Chris Chadwick, president of Boeing Precision Engagement and Mobility Systems, which falls under Albaugh's purview, says "we are trying to close the business case" on the deal.

It appears to be a moot point, however, as Ben Stone, an Alenia official, says the company has "terminated" negotiations with Boeing. "We have stopped all negotiations in an effort to find work for Boeing," he says. "I am perplexed ... as to why Boeing would make that statement."

Weighing risk

At issue is the risk associated with Boeing funding the Jacksonville facility and how many of the aircraft the team would guarantee to roll off that production line. While the market appears robust for the C-27J, the Pentagon has only contracted for 78 of the aircraft. With a 2010 deadline for establishing the Jacksonville manufacturing plant looming, the team was mired in a disagreement over how many aircraft would be built in the U.S.

Read the rest of this story, a note on some crazy underwater drones, insight into Wired's idea for a terror drone and more from the AUVSI show in San Diego from our Aviation Week friends at Military.com.

-- Christian

Rescue Chopper Requirements Sacrificed for Rivalries

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

Nearly a decade ago, U.S. Air Force officers formulated a list of requirements for a new combat, search and rescue helicopter replacement eventually called CSAR-X. Stung by failures through the end of the last century, CSAR experts knew they needed a smallish medium-lift helicopter that could be deployed quickly and survive some of the worst combat environments.

As U.S. forces continue to find themselves waging irregular warfare or facing nature’s wrath, combatant commanders could be forced to move the CSAR fleet around in a snap for quick deployment. The aircraft needs to be able to take and return fire just to penetrate, survive and return from combat or disaster zones with no clear fronts.

The current CSAR fleet of H-60 variants lacks the inherent capability to do the job, experts say. "We had all of that experience through the ’90s," one of the early requirement writers said. "The key was to get in an aircraft without a large logistics footprint."

Instead, the Air Force picked what many military aviation experts consider to be a heavy-lift helicopter – a Boeing HH-47 Chinook variant that took longest of all the competing platforms to prepare for its mission after being deployed, and which has a questionable survivability record, according to some of the very Air Force CSAR experts who set down those initial requirements.

Bigger not better

Bigger in this case is not better – and that comes straight from the Air Force’s own 2002 Analysis of Alternatives for the CSAR aircraft. CSAR experts say larger helicopters are clumsy, slow and bulky, and present a bigger target.

In its defense, Boeing says it has supplied a combat-proven, medium-lift helicopter that meets CSAR requirements, even though its own literature has listed the Chinook as a heavy-lift model and the 47 is the biggest of the three competing CSAR-X candidates, by a relatively large margin.

"Procuring the HH-47 for the CSAR mission makes as much sense as entering a Winnebago in a NASCAR race," said John Guilmartin, a retired Air Force pilot with two Southeast Asia combat tours flying "Jolly Green" HH-3E and CH-53 rescue helicopters.

Now a history professor at Ohio State University, Guilmartin logged some 130 combat missions over a span of nine years and participated in the Gulf War Air Power Survey, an Air Force-sponsored study of the impact of air power on the first Gulf War. Part of the task force’s charter was to examine CSAR in the conflict.

Boeing disagrees with Guilmartin’s assessment and his ability to make an informed one.

"He’s not a Chinook pilot," said Rick Lemaster, Boeing HH-47 program manager. "If he had flown combat missions in a 47 in the last 10 years, then he might be able to apply his insight in CSAR here."

But Guilmartin stands by his CSAR experience and his belief that the Chinook would be a disaster, a lumbering beast.

How it happened

To find out how this happened with a $15 billion program the Air Force says is one of its top priorities, Aerospace DAILY interviewed scores of experts in and out of the service, many of whom have been involved with the CSAR-X program from its inception, and several who wrote the requirements for the new helicopter fleet. As might be expected, several of the key officials are now working – or have worked – for contractors involved in the fight for the contract, which is now in the midst of its third proposal request review.

Read the rest of this story -- one of several in Mike Fabey's series -- some gouge on Dutch F-16s in Afghanistan, Lockheed's confidence in the JSF and Aussies blowing up roadside bombs from our Aviation Week friends at Military.com.

-- Christian

Japan Wants Electronic Attack in Next Fighter

This article first appeared at Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

TOKYO -- Lockheed Martin’s F-22 Raptor still appeals to Japan’s leadership, but there’s an implacable demand for Japan’s industrial participation in any aircraft it operates, which appears to be diminishing demand for the Raptor.

"We must have the capabilities within Japan for technical support, maintenance and upgrading to meet changing circumstances during the F-X’s lifetime," says Maj. Gen. Hidetoshi Hirata, director of the Defense Planning and Policy Department in Japan’s Defense Ministry air staff. As far as F-X capabilities, "Stealth would be a great advantage for air-defense and air-to-air engagements. Stealth would also be necessary if we had to [penetrate enemy air defenses to] attack a ballistic missile launch facility before it activated." However, Japan is thinking about more than bombs.

"I think the technology to create malfunctions or damage [in enemy systems through electronic attack] is very important," he said.

Meanwhile, Japan’s Air Defense Command (ADC) has begun building a new headquarters at Yokota Air Base that will include a joint, Japanese-U.S.-manned subterranean command-and-control center. It also will feature an underground tunnel that connects the ADC HQ with the U.S. Air Force’s air operations center.

Read the rest of this story, a look at how confident LMCo is on JSF orders, the Dutch putting warheads on foreheads in Afghanistan and Aussies blowing crap up in the Stan from our Aviation Week friends at Military.com.

-- Christian

Helo Needs Still Unmet For Space Command

This article first appeared in Aviation Week's Aerospace Daily and Defense Report.
U.S. Air Force Space Command (AFSPC) is again pushing for a program to replace its aging UH-1N helicopters, saying that its current aircraft are too slow to handle the modern nuclear weapons support mission.

AFSPC vice chief Maj. Gen. Thomas Deppe says that the command has included a funding request in its fiscal 2010 draft budget to begin a program to replace the aging Hueys. "Any helicopter in the inventory is faster than that UH-1," he said during a breakfast speech May 28 hosted by the National Defense University Foundation. A new helicopter would need to have greater range, improved speed and armor protection, Deppe added.

The helicopters are used to escort nuclear weapons teams servicing the Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile fleet. They also are used to quickly transport security teams in the event of an alert at the missile fields. Today’s Huey lacks the range to traverse the largest of the missile fields in one mission.

"An 80-85 percent solution may be good enough," Deppe said, acknowledging that attempts to buy a Huey replacement in the past have failed to produce a viable program. "We could buy something off the shelf that could easily" handle the mission, he said.

Most recently, the Air Force discussed the concept of a Common Vertical Lift Support Program, which would provide a common helicopter to replace those used by AFSPC as well as the aging executive transports operating out of Andrews Air Force Base, Md.

However, helicopter procurements for USAF appear to be paced by the Combat Search and Rescue-X (CSAR-X) quagmire. The Air Force is examining responses from CSAR-X bidders with an award possible this fall.
Read the rest of this story, how some Dutch want to scuttle the JSF and pics of a pooch with a nose for TNT from our Aviation Week friends on Military.com.

-- Christian

Hover and Stare: FCS Testing UAVs

This article first appeared in Aviation Week's Ares Weblog.
Given Defense Secretary Robert Gates' order to the service branches to hurry up and get more unmanned aerial vehicles out to the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan, there’s a scramble afoot to develop and deploy next-generation UAV’s as quickly as possible.

And the $160 billion Future Combat Systems program is right in the middle of that scramble. The Honeywell Defense and Space Electronic Systems' Class 1 block 0 UAV is currently being evaluated by the Army Evaluation Task Force at Ft. Bliss, Texas, and has been going through an accelerated testing program to try and get it out in the field as soon as possible. While not slated for FCS Spinout 1 in 2011, the UAV is being pushed though as quickly as possible. FCS spokesman Paul Mehney says that based on feedback that they've been getting from the field during testing there is a need for some of the capabilities that the Class 1 UAV block 0 will provide, such as the "hover and stare," which uses gimbaled adjustable sensors that allow soldiers to keep the vehicle in stationary hover, as well as incorporating early versions of the Joint Tactical Radio System.

But that's not the only system being tested. The Class IV UAV (Northrop Grumman's MQ-8B Fire Scout) is also on schedule, and is expected to be fielded in the 2014 time frame. The Joint Expeditionary Force Experiment (JEFX) that took place back in April proved out some sensor technology for Class IV UAV's according to FCS' Mehney.
According to specifications provided by Northrop Grumman, the Fire Scout, as currently stands, comes equipped with:
Northrop Grumman's Airborne Surveillance and Target Acquisition Minefield Detection System (ASTAMIDS) sensor. Additional sensors include a Tactical Synthetic Aperture Radar (TSAR/MTI), a communications relay package, a training sensor, Mine, Chemical and Radiological detection and a RF emissions locator. The highly reliable air vehicle is based on a COTS airframe and propulsion system.

Read the rest of this story, another good one on wearable batteries, how small can you go with nano-vehicles and a doozie on the Gripen from our Aviation Week friends at Military.com.

-- Christian

NorGrum's Secret X-Bomber

This article first appeared in Aviation Week's Ares Weblog.

DTI reports this month that Northrop Grumman has won a classified Air Force contract to develop a secret bomber prototype. Naturally, nobody's confirming this on the record, but we present strong evidence that such a project is under way.

Ares has reported on this development before. I summarized the evidence pointing to a black-project bomber in October, tracing both the evolution of requirements and the money trail from the demise of the Joint Unmanned Combat Aircraft System in 2006 to the USAF's bomber project.

Later in the month, I reported on Northrop Grumman CEO Ron Sugar's public enthusiasm for classified programs, including the fact that he directly tied the company's acquisition of Scaled Composites to advanced aircraft programs. In February I pointed out the lack of visible funding for the Next Generation Bomber in 2008-2010.

More specifically, too, Sugar identified restricted programs as the company's top new business opportunity for 2008. That comment alone indicated the size of the business that the company was looking at, because - in the white world - the company was competing for BAMS, itself a billion-dollar contract.

As a consequence, those of us who look at these things carefully had our ears pricked up for any indications of progress on this front, and were rewarded on April 26 when Northrop Grumman issued its first-quarter financial results. Discreetly hidden on Schedule 5: "The company was awarded approximately $2.6 billion for restricted programs during this period." The results also showed that the only Northrop Grumman sector showing an increase in backlog on that scale, from March 31 2007 to March 31 2008, was Integrated Systems, the aircraft segment. So it is there in black and white that Northrop Grumman got more than $2 billion for a secret aircraft program or programs in the first quarter.

Now, consider the late-January announcement from Boeing and Lockheed Martin that they were teaming on NGB. I pointed out on Ares at the time that (contrary to what some analysts said) this looked like a defensive move. I'd say that we now have a pretty good idea about what triggered it.

Covering black programs is a combination of reporting and intelligence, and the "mosaic" is a vital concept:  like an archaeologist rebuilding a mosaic, you put the pieces together in a pattern that makes sense. In this case, all the indicators (funds, programs, hints dropped by Pentagon officials) point to the NGB having evolved from J-UCAS, which fragmented in late 2005 because the USAF saw it as a bigger aircraft than the Navy.

If that's the case, there are many reasons (read the DTI story) to expect that the airplane's going to look something like a big X-47B.

-- Bill Sweetman with Aviation Week's Ares Weblog

Read the rest of this story, a rif on set it and forget it sensors, the Gripen flies! and French roadside bomb practice videos from our Aviation Week friends on Military.com.

Hummingbird Hovers Into Record Books

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

SEATTLE -- Boeing's A160T Hummingbird unmanned rotorcraft flew for 18.7 hours on an overnight flight May 14-15, setting what the company believes is a world endurance record for a UAV in its weight class.

The flight, which was accomplished at the U.S. Army's Yuma Proving Ground in Arizona, was one of two key performance tests set by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to mark the completion of the initial development phase. The other major test, a series of hover-out-of-ground-effect (HOGE) demonstrations at altitudes between 15,000-20,000 feet, was successfully completed on May 9, Boeing says.

The HOGE flight lasted 2.9 hours, including hovering for more than seven minutes, while the more recent endurance flight involved carrying an internally mounted 300-pound payload to altitudes up to 15,000 feet. Boeing originally planned to attempt both milestone flights late last year, but was thwarted when a test aircraft crashed on Dec. 10 near the company's Victorville, Calif., test site.

Boeing subsequently modified software and diagnostics in the flight control system after its accident investigation board (AIB) determined that sensor data in the flight computer stopped being updated in midflight. Since resuming flight-tests the A160T has reached a speed of 142 knots, marked an eight-hour flight carrying more than 1,000 pounds of payload and flown a 12-hour flight carrying more than 500 pounds. All flights were accomplished using “a fraction of its maximum fuel capacity,” the company adds.

Read the rest of this story, training French pilots on US ships, stealth in the states and BAMS caught on tape from our Aviation Week friends at Military.com.

-- Christian

Stalled Defense Bill Could Delay Predators

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

If Congress fails to pass a fiscal 2009 defense appropriations bill -- leaving military spending at 2008 levels for the near term -- it would cause numerous planning and contracting problems, the Pentagon's top civilian and uniformed officials said May 20.

For example, according to Defense Secretary Robert Gates, the department would not have 14 Predator unmanned aerial vehicles it was counting on for fiscal 2009. Also, nearly $9 billion targeted to increase the size of the U.S. Army and the Marine Corps would be lost, as well as $1 billion for search and rescue and $246 million to stand up Africa Command, Gates told the Senate defense appropriations subcommittee.

A continuing resolution (CR) to keep funding the Defense Department without an appropriations bill -- but at the previous fiscal year's levels -- could have a "devastating impact" on both ongoing operations and acquisition programs, said Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

"It brings the organization almost to a halt, and then when you get to execute, you execute very inefficient, very late contracts, which is a significant waste of money," Mullen added.

Gates said any incremental increase in funding from FY '08 to FY '09 would be lost under a CR.

The issue of a delay in FY '09 funding was raised by Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), senior Republican on the full Appropriations Committee. He noted that without an appropriations measure, the Army would run out of operations and maintenance money by early July and all of the services would be out of money to pay personnel by late July.

Neither the House nor Senate appropriations committees have cleared their defense spending bills yet while both bodies grapple with the war supplemental spending bill for the rest of FY '08 and part of FY '09.

Tanker

On another topic, Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) tried to get Gates to concede that there were questionable aspects to the KC-45 Air Force refueling tanker contract award that Boeing lost to a Northrop Grumman-EADS team.

"It seems to me that from the beginning the Air Force and DOD are part of the problem," said Murray, citing two Government Accountability Office (GAO) studies that found the Air Force did not conduct sufficient analysis in developing its tanker requirements. Boeing, which would have done much of the tanker assembly in Washington state if it had won the $35 billion contract, has protested the award selection process and the GAO is in the middle of determining the merits of the complaint.

Gates deflected Murray's criticisms of the Air Force's decision, noting that he was not an expert on the subject. Gates said he is awaiting completion of the GAO response to the protest.

Read more of this story, some sweet gouge on the increasing 'tanker rancor,' what would you pay for a JSF? and what our friends in Paris want for defense from our Aviation Week friends on Military.com.

-- Christian

Canada Lowers Number Of Planned Fighters

This article first appeared in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

Canada has reduced the number of new fighters it plans to purchase to 65 from 80, and stresses that it has not formally selected the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) despite having participated in its development.

The reduced requirement for new combat aircraft was revealed by Prime Minister Stephen Harper when he unveiled the Conservative government's new 'Canada First' defense strategy in Halifax last week.

The Department of National Defense (DND) says 65 aircraft is an initial planning figure, and that "the final figure will be based on the operational requirements of the Canadian Forces." The requirements are being drawn up by the DND's Next Generation Fighter Capability office.

Canada's participation in the F-35 program has been based on the planned procurement of 80 aircraft, the number of upgraded Boeing CF-18s the Canadian Forces will operate until they replaced by new fighters in 2017-20. Harper said fewer aircraft are required because the new fighter will have significantly greater capability than the CF-18s.

Despite the widespread and understandable assumption that Harper was referring to the F-35, Canada has not yet selected its next fighter, the DND emphasizes. Like several of the international participants in the JSF program, Ottawa plans to evaluate other candidate combat aircraft before making a decision, which is required by 2012.

Read more on this and other inside scoop from our friends at Aviation Week on Military.com.

-- Christian

Chinook Production to Resume

This article first appeared at Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

Boeing plans to cautiously restart the CH-47 Chinook helicopter production line May 15, after shutting it down May 13 following the discovery of what the company is calling irregularities in two aircraft.

Rep. Joe Sestak (D-Pa.), whose district includes the Chinook plant, said he learned of severed wires on one of the CH-47s and a suspicious washer in a subsystem of the second aircraft. "After having several briefings [on the matter], I think there's a low probability this wasn't deliberate," Sestak said. "But it's not out of the question that it's the result of an accident."

Operations were suspended on the primary and final assembly segments of the line, and the investigation is focusing on subassemblies and structure modifications, according to Boeing officials (Aerospace DAILY, May 14). Second- and third-shift workers discovered the problems May 13 and helped inspect the additional helicopters on the line to determine if the irregularities were more widespread. The other six helicopters did not appear to have any problems.

Company procedure requires any issues to be reported to the Defense Contract Management Agency, which has numerous representatives placed on-site. The agency then passes its findings on to the Defense Criminal Investigation Service, which, despite its name, does not imply criminal activity, a Boeing official said. "But that has yet to be determined," the official said.
"They found it like they should have found it," Sestak told Aerospace DAILY. "The system worked. Now we have to figure out how and why it happened."

-- Aviation Week

Progress for Future Combat Systems?

This article first appeared in Aviation Week's Ares weblog.

At the Joint Expeditionary Force Experiment (JEFX) in Nevada this past April, run by the Air Force Global Cyberspace Integration Center, some critical technologies for the Army's Future Combat Systems program were put to the test. According to Army FCS spokesman Paul Mehney, the initial tests -- which sought to put FCS's networking technologies through their paces, proved successful overall.

"Our role was to provide the ground maneuver network portion," Mehney says, noting that the Army was able to take its "Build 1" software -- which is part of the communications software that will allow FCS to communicate across the network -- and use it to move images and data from sensors, whether they were unmanned aerial vehicles or ground sensors, to Air Force assets, which then allowed the Air Force to conduct fire missions based on near real-time intelligence from Unattended Ground Sensors operated by the Army.

(The Build 1 software is scheduled to go live during FCS's Spinout 1 in the 2011 time frame.)

While the Army and Air Force can obviously already communicate with one another, historically there has been no real way to move images over networks between the two services, or if it is done in special circumstances it is not necessarily in real time. But the tests in April allowed the Army's network and combat developers to take a look at how the FCS network can be used in future applications where there's a call for a joint fire mission. According to Mehney, "it also allowed our combat developers and engineers to take a look at that Build 1 network and limited Build 2 which is ongoing right now, to take lessons learned at JEFX to say "OK, how can we better manipulate development of the network for joint missions?"

Crucially, not only was the Army a participant in the JEFX tests, but the Marine Corps and the British were there as well, acting as ground observers. Plus, Marines manned a networked Humvee so they could see the network in action.

Read more of this story, how other jets are going to kick the JSF's butt in 2015, frustrated bleeding hearts in the US mil and Estonia's play for cyber dominance from our friends at Aviation Week on Military.com.

-- Christian

Gates Addresses ISR, UAV Difficulties

This article first appeared in the Aerospace Daily & Defense Report.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates is establishing a Pentagon task force to find new and innovative ways to provide intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) to combat forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Gates announced the new team during a speech at the Air War College at Maxwell Air Force Base, Ala., on April 21. During the speech, Gates said getting the military branches to field more unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) quickly to support requirements for U.S. Central Command has been "like pulling teeth."

The task force will be led by Bradley Berkson, director of program analysis and evaluation.

Gates says that the Air Force may "require rethinking long-standing service assumptions and priorities about which missions require certified pilots and which do not." The Air Force trains certified pilots to operate the Predator while the Army does not require pilots to operate its similar Warrior UAV.

Commanders overseeing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan say they have a shortfall of ISR collection in theater, and they specify that they want more full-motion video -- a capability provided by Predator, Warrior and Shadow systems.

The Air Force, however, says it is fielding Predators at an unprecedented rate. One Pentagon official says the service is expected to field its 25th "combat air patrol," (CAP) consisting of four air vehicles and ground support equipment, by June 1. This is double the number of CAPs in the theater about a year ago.

The limiting factor for fielding more Predator units quickly is training Predator crews. The Air Force’s schoolhouse at Creech Air Force Base, Nev., is training about 160 crews per year, according to Air Force officials. However, that is not enough to operate the additional Predators being fielded. Additional funding will need to be included in the Air Force budget to increase training capacity to 240 crews per year in fiscal 2009.

Gates’ new task force will explore whether and how to push more UAVs and crews to support operations in Iraq, as well as other technological responses that could help support the massive intelligence requirements there.

Read the rest of this story, a doosie on Afghan/Dutch relations, some weird bird called a vulture and Av Week's opinion on Gates' Air Force missive at Military.com.

-- Christian

Congress Worried About Ground Force Health

Growing concerns with the U.S. having enough Army and Marine Corps land forces to react to potential unforeseen crises overseas are drawing attention on Capitol Hill.

The concerns come as lawmakers craft fiscal 2009 defense bills and eye post-Bush administration budget-making, keeping in mind the looming potential for a significant number of troops operating in Iraq for years to come and the strain that deployments so far have placed on the volunteer U.S. military.

"We have had 12 military contingencies in the last 31 years, some of them major and most of them unexpected," House Armed Services Committee (HASC) Chairman Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) said at a recent hearing.

"We must have a trained and properly equipped force ready to handle whatever comes. But my strong concern is that our readiness shortfalls and the limitations on our ability to deploy trained and ready ground forces have reached a point where these services would have a very steep uphill climb with increased casualties to respond effectively to an emerging contingency," Skelton said.

Skelton made the remarks at an April 9 hearing with the four-star vice chiefs of the Army and Marines, both of whom admitted that they were not satisfied with their respective service's so-called strategic depth to respond to crisis scenarios like the post-9/11 invasion of Afghanistan.

Army Gen. Richard Cody testified that the Army remains "out of balance," repeating what has become a common official Army phrase referring to the need to recruit, station, train and equip soldiers for more than just counterinsurgency operations.

"The current demand for our forces in Iraq and Afghanistan exceeds the sustainable supply and limits our ability to provide ready forces for other contingencies," Cody said.

"Overall, our readiness is being consumed as fast as we build it. If unaddressed, this lack of balance poses a significant risk to the all-volunteer force and degrades the Army's ability to make a timely response to other contingencies," the Army vice chief said.

Read what the Marines have to say about all this from our Aviaton Week friends at Military.com.

-- Christian

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

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

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

AF Promises 380 Raptor Buy

U.S. Air Force Gen. Bruce Carlson, chief of Air Force Materiel Command, told a group of reporters Wednesday that the Air Force will figure out a way to buy 380 F-22s, despite the fact that the Pentagon -- through the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) -- has capped the number of Raptors to be procured at 183.

"We think that [183] is the wrong number," Carlson said. Even 380, a number he joked is a "compromise" from the 381 the Air Force originally asked for, still leaves too much room for risk. That risk could even include a future conflict with China, he said. "Most people say in the future there will be a Chinese element to whatever we do," he added.

"We're committed to funding 380," Carlson said Feb. 13 after speaking at Aviation Week's Defense Technology and Requirements conference in Washington. "We're building a program right now to do that. It's going to be incredibly difficult on the Air Force, but we've done this before." He added there are only three places from which to draw funds to accomplish the Air Force's goal: operations and maintenance, research and development and procurement. "We don't have a [money] printing machine," he said. "We have to pay for it."

Read more from our Av Week friends on Military.com.

-- Christian

Senate Pressures WH on C-17 Buy

Nineteen senators are pressuring the White House and Pentagon to "rightly fund" C-17 production by including it in the forthcoming fiscal 2009 budget request due to Congress in February.

Two letters, dated Dec. 13, were dispatched; one each went to White House Office of Management and Budget Director Jim Nussle and Defense Secretary Robert Gates. Both letters encourage the Bush administration to stop looking to Congress to plus-up funding for Boeing's strategic airlifter production line in Long Beach, Calif.

"We encourage you to work with DOD leadership to have C-17 funding added to their budget," the senators say to Nussle. "While Congress has sustained C-17 production in recent years, it is unrealistic to presume that it will be able to continuously support needed production through congressional adds."

Congress has provided funding to keep the production line open in the last two years; orders now stand at 190. The senators, however, tell Gates that the strategy of relying on congressional plus ups "is no longer viable."

The production line would close in 2009 without additional money, and without a nod from the government, Boeing would be forced to close operations at its suppliers. The senators note that about 30,000 jobs around the country contribute to C-17 production. Suppliers are now being funded by Boeing in hopes that the U.S. government will buy more of the massive airlifters.

The Pentagon's requirement for strategic airlift is about 300 aircraft. It has about 111 C-5s, which are in disrepair and subject to a $17 billion re-engining project before they can provide sufficient reliability. However, past requirements studies have not taken into account use of the C-17 as an intratheater airlifter, the increasing end strength of the ground forces, addition of an Africa Command and the demands of the war on terrorism. The Pentagon is planning to undertake a new Mobility Capabilities and Requirements Study next year.

Citing skepticism about the future of the C-5 modernization program, U.S. Air Force Gen. Norton Schwartz, chief of U.S. Transportation Command, has told Congress he needs at least 250 C-17s to handle his missions.

Read more on the C-17 push from our Aviation Week friends at Military.com.

-- Christian

Israel Wants JSF As Soon As Possible

Israel plans to keep its aerial domination of the Middle East intact, and that includes buying Lockheed Martin's F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, accelerating its first deliveries, and deciding whose advanced equipment will be packed into the stealthy strike aircraft.

A senior Israeli air force (IAF) official says those major areas of concern appear to be on the right track because of an "understanding" with the U.S. officials. Washington's representatives are more ambiguous, saying that there has been no official change to Israel's F-35 program.

"The plan is that we will get the F-35 as soon as it's possible," the senior IAF official says. He says the service will end up with more than 100 F-35s, but he would not confirm the size of the purchase or that Israel is asking that the initial delivery date be accelerated by two years to 2012. The IAF wants the JSF "the minute it is available."

"Israel has a unique requirement, it doesn't operate in a coalition, [and it has a] different kind of strategic relationship" with the U.S. than the other F-35 partners," says Tom Burbage, Lockheed Martin's vice president and general manager for the F-35. However, he says the overseas release of the first export aircraft will be no sooner than 2014.

The purchase, which could include an initial batch of 25 aircraft, is still being negotiated. Brig. Gen. Johanan Locker, head of the IAF's air division, was in Fort Worth as recently as late November.

Israel's ambitions to integrate indigenous weaponry also pose some problems for the program. The weapons road map for the Blocks 1-3 F-35 standards has already been drawn up with no Israeli weaponry on the list. Partner nations are currently working on a list for Block 4, but there's pressure to cut weapons from the process rather than add them. Israel undoubtedly will want its F‑35s to carry the Rafael Python 5 air-to-air missile and possibly its successor, as well as the Rafael Spice family of precision-guided weapons.

Moreover, an influential retired IAF general says total sales will be limited by the JSF's disadvantages. He points to its overdependence on stealth, a single crewman and what could be proprietary U.S. avionics.

"Eventually somebody will come up with a way to detect it," he says. "A stealthy configuration also means you can't carry additional weaponry on the exterior. The weapons system is more important than stealth. Israel will have F-35s, but not as many as we once thought."

Smaller numbers won't detract from the aircraft's deterrence value, he concedes. Even a small fleet will ensure a first-day-of-war, surprise-strike capability. But once daily combat operations escalate, nonstealthy aircraft aided by standoff weapons, escort jammers and information operations will sustain air operations.

Nonetheless, he worries that the JSF will start showing its limitations within five years. Among the drawbacks will be its one-person crew. As a result, "we can't operate the F-35 by itself," the retired general says. "We really need two-seaters, with one person concentrating on flying and someone else focused on the strike mission. One man can't take advantage of all the options," particularly since JSF capabilities will include jamming, information warfare and network attack.

Inevitably, the avionics will present an area of contention. For example, Israeli aerospace officials say they can offer a tailored, active, electronically scanned array radar for less money than an AESA bought from the U.S. However, many of the electronic warfare and attack techniques are routed through the radar to produce jamming, false-target and other effects at ranges of 125 mi. or more. As a result, integration could be difficult and expensive.

Elta, the electronics division of Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), has a version of the AESA, according to the retired general. "We need our own radar that we don't share with others. We also need our own advanced radar warning and active jamming." The Israeli AESA was flown last year; but for now it remains a generic system, not tailored to any specific aircraft—although it's sized for an F-16, an Elta official says. Flight trials are continuing.

For more on Israel's request for the JSF from our friends at Aviation Week, please visit the full story on Military.com.

-- Christian

Drone AEW Not Too Far Off

After a swift and (for competitors) apparently trouble-free development, IAI-Elta expects the Coformal Airborne Early Warning (CAEW) to reach formal initial operational capability (IOC) with the Israeli Air Force in the first quarter of 2008. In fact, the Gulfstream G550-based system is already flying missions with IAF crews, as the service conducts training and familiarization flights; crews have been training on the simulator in parallel with flight tests, which started in Israel last fall.

But the crews may not be flying for much longer. CAEW is already designed so that it does not need radar operators on board the aircraft. With a wideband datalink, it's intended to feed information to a ground station, and ultimately will be part of a tight network that also includes signals intelligence, maritime patrol and ground-surveillance G550s.

The final step is to take the flight crew off the aircraft, according to Avishai Itzhakian, general manager for IAI-Elta's AEW division. Speaking at IQPC Defence's AEW conference in London last week, Itzhakian outlined the project's goal -- to provide continuous air, land, sea and electronic surveillance with a constellation of UAVs.

It got interesting when someone asked when that might happen. "It's not so far away," he said, and pointed out that a Northrop Grumman speaker, talking about the Broad Area Maritime Surveillance (BAMS) program, had just referred to Boeing's proposal based on an optionally piloted G550. "You can figure this out for yourself," he said.

Read more about drone radar zappers from our Aviation Week friends at Military.com.

-- Christian

JSF Hoping for a Brighter New Year

After seven months of flighttestus interruptus caused first by an electrical problem and then by the failure and subsequent requalification of the F135 engine, the first Joint Strike Fighter -- aircraft AA-1 -- is back in the air.

Next week will see another milestone as BF-1, the first short take-off, vertical landing (STOVL) F-35B, rolls out in preparation for hover-pit tests -- where the powered-lift system is run up as the aircraft stands on a grating over a deep trench.

BF-1 will be much more important than AA-1 next year. AA-1 itself was built to the pre-2004, overweight JSF design and is not fully representative of the production JSF; and the STOVL version is the long pole in the tent, because it needs more flight testing than either the F-35A or the Navy F-35C, and is supposed to enter service first, achieving IOC in early 2012.

BF-1 is due to fly in May 2008 and is expected to be flying in STOVL mode by the end of the year. Program vice-president Tom Burbage, talking at a conference in Oslo last week, says that the customer wants a test program in which the jet "backs in" to STOVL -- slowing down from conventional flight to progressively lower speeds in each sortie, finally reaching the hover -- rather than performing "push-up" tests from the hover pit as the X-35B test aircraft did in 2000.

Everyone in the JSF program will be watching the hover-pit tests, though. A key issue: as reported here and here, the jet (to say the least) has no thrust to spare in vertical-flight mode. So far, says Burbage, recent rig tests of the F135 and its lift fan are showing that thrust is higher than expected. (That was the experience in the X-plane program, where the jet popped up to 30 feet on the first push-up, to the consternation of the engineers.)

The team is not taking credit for the lift bump, but it will be a big relief if it's still there on the hover pit. At the same time, work is underway on a redesigned second stage for the lift fan, which optimizes the work split between the two counter-rotating stages and provides another vertical thrust boost.

What Burbage calls "constipation" in the production system is also a concern, because the front-loaded test program needs to get assets on time. The problem centers on the big main frames or bulkheads that hold the wings and body together: early frames were late and the effect is rippling through the line.

On the sales side, Burbage is in constant motion, still trying to set up a deal between multiple non-US customers and the US government to reduce early-aircraft prices. The issue is that export customers -- particularly Australia and the European F-16 founder nations -- need early deliveries from the low-rate initial production (LRIP) batches, but that these come with a scary price tag.

That's a cost of doing business for the US government, which plans to buy many, many more aircraft once production stabilizes, and buys year-by-year by law; but export customers who are ready to sign multi-year contracts see it as a raw deal.

Read more Av Week predictions about the JSF's 2008 fortunes at Military.com.

-- Christian