24/01/2013 par Jacques N. Godbout - 45enord.ca

La secrétaire d’État américaine, Hillary Clinton, qui cédera prochainement son poste au sénateur démocrate John Kerry, a comparu mercredi 23 devant la commission sénatoriale des Affaires étrangères du Sénat et celle de la Chambre des représentants, pour y témoigner de sa gestion de l’attaque du 11 septembre contre la mission diplomatique américaine à Benghazi, où avaient été tués quatre Américains, dont l’ambassadeur Chris Stevens.

Hillary Clinton a nié avec véhémence que, contrairement à ce dont les républicains l’ont accusé, l’administration américaine dont elle fait partie ait tenté d’étouffer l’affaire de l’attentat de Benghazi en Libye.

Dans un premier temps, l’admninistration américaine avait attribué l’attaque à des manifestants en colère, qui auraient agi spontanément, avant de changer sa version et de révéler qu’il s’agissait plutôt d’une attaque délibérée et planifiée menée par un groupe islamiste sans doute lié à Al-Qaïda..

Cette histoire aura plombé la nomination à la tête du Département d’État de l’ambassadrice des États-Unis à l’ONU, Susan Rice, qui devait succéder à Hillary Clinton mais a dû retirer sa candidature que menaçait de bloquer les élus républicains qui la soupçonnaient d’avoir donner une version fausse de l’attaque terroriste pour ne pas ternir le bilan du président Obama, alors en campagne pour sa réélection à la Maison Blanche.

«[...] des gens ont accusé l’ambassadrice Rice et le gouvernement d’avoir trompé les Américains. Je peux dire que [...] rien ne peut être plus éloigné de la vérité», a déclaré avec force la secrétaire d’État, en tapant du poing sur la table. «Pour moi, ce n’est pas qu’une question politique, c’est personnel», a-t-elle affirmé, en laissant même échapper un sanglot. «J’ai pris dans mes bras les mères et les pères, les frères et les soeurs, les fils, les filles et les épouses qui se sont retrouvées seules pour élever leurs enfants.»

«Les demandes en matière de sécurité liées à Benghazi étaient gérées par les professionnels de la question au sein du Département», a expliqué la secrétaire américaine. «Je n’ai pas vu ces demandes, elles ne sont pas arrivées jusqu’à moi, je ne les ai pas approuvées, je ne les ai pas rejetées», a-t-elle précisé, tout en disant «assumer la responsabilité des conséquences de cette attaque.»

Elle a rappelé qu’elle avait tout de suite publiquement accepté l’ensemble des recommandations formulées par les cinq membres de la commission d’enquête indépendante, l’Accountability Review Board, parmi lesquels on retrouvait l’ex-ambassadeur Thomas Pickering et l’ex-chef d’État-major interarmées américain, l’amiral à la retraite Mike Mullen. Le rapport avait conclu que le dispositif de sécurité du consulat était extrêmement inadapté et avait entraîné le départ de plusieurs responsables de la sécurité au Département d’État, dont celui d’Eric Boswell, le secrétaire d’État adjoint pour la sécurité diplomatique.

Dans son témoignage, Hillary Clinton a rappelé aussi que «les révolutions arabes ont bouleversé l’équilibre des forces dans toute la région et que l’instabilité au Mali a créé un refuge pour des terroristes qui cherchent à étendre leur influence et à perpétrer davantage d’attaques du genre de celle de la semaine dernière en Algérie». Elle a souligné que les Américains ont pris conscience de la montée en puissance d’Aqmi, renforcée par les prises d’otages et des stocks d’armes libyens détournés après la chute de Kadhafi en octobre 2011.

La secrétaire américaine a donc plaidé aussi à cette occasion pour le renforcement du soutien de Washington à la lutte contre les groupes islamistes armés au Mali, comparant la menace d’Al-Qaïda au Maghreb Islamique (Aqmi) à celle d’Oussama ben Laden et du 11 septembre.

January 22, 2013 by Austin Bay - Strategy Page

Four years ago, as his first term began, President Barack Obama ditched the name Global War on Terror (GWOT). Instead of fighting Al-Qaida-inspired terrorism around the world, the U.S. would conduct "overseas contingency operations" (OCO).

Obama's act of oratorical magic -- poof, the global war has ended -- became an awkward problem, however. Real world events subsequently demonstrated that the word "overseas" was at best misleading, if not outright wrong. Detroit, New York and Portland, Ore., certainly aren't overseas, yet militant Islamist-inspired terrorists tried (and fortunately failed) to bomb all three -- Detroit on Christmas 2009, New York's Times Square in May 2010 and Portland in November 2010.

Obama still cannot call Maj. Nidal Hasan's terrorist attack at Fort Hood, Texas, (November 2009) a terrorist act. Hasan, however, had been in contact with militant Islamic cleric and al-Qaida recruiter Anwar al-Awlaki, who at the time was holed up in Yemen with al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). Hasan praised Awlaki as a source of inspiration.

To his credit, Obama didn't make the mistake of equating Osama bin Laden's May 2011 demise with the end of al-Qaida. He came close in May 2012, on the first anniversary of bin Laden's death, however, when he declared, "The goal that I set -- to defeat al-Qaida and deny it a chance to rebuild -- is now within our reach."

The president can make a good case that al-Qaida circa 2001 has suffered severe losses in personnel as well as substantial material and moral damage. Eleven years of global military, political and financial warfare have drastically reduced al-Qaida's ability to serve as the central operational actor in a global war against everyone who does not share its crackpot vision of a global caliphate.

Military and police initiatives organized by the U.S. have led to the deaths or arrests of al-Qaida's most experienced commanders. CIA drones have killed second-tier operatives (to include Awlaki, April 2012) who might have filled the leadership void. Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri, the current supreme leader, lacks bin Laden's media savvy and charisma. He doesn't move the masses.

Events in Mali and Algeria, however, demonstrate that the fragment al-Qaidas (plural) of 2013 can still conduct spectacular massacres and attract global attention. Like AQAP in Yemen, al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) is an al-Qaida regional orchestrator.

AQIM sponsored the attack on Algeria's Amenas gas plant, which left 37 foreign workers dead. The Amenas slaughter, replete with real bullets, bombs, corpses and consequences, ought to call into doubt Obama's inaugural claim that "a decade of war is now ending." In fact, the president's claim, with which he begins his second administration, is as ludicrous as his first term's OCO prestidigitation.

The Obama administration has taken pride in its "African solutions to African problems" partnership approach to sub-Saharan African problems. Its goals are laudable: promote democracy while strengthening fragile states by emphasizing good governance and economic development. But if the administration wants to see its nascent African efforts blossom, it is going to have to continue to wage war on Africa's various al-Qaidas.

The International Institute for Counter-Terrorism recently surveyed several extremist factions associated with AQIM. They are a deadly jumble of religious anger and criminal talent, but quite capable of wreaking havoc from Algeria to Nigeria. Other al-Qaida-aligned factions plague east Africa.

Al-Qaida 2001's dark genius was to connect the Muslim world's angry, humiliated and isolated young men with a utopian fantasy preaching the virtue of violence. That utopian fantasy seeks to explain and then redress roughly 800 years of Muslim decline. That dark genius continues to empower the al-Qaidas of 2013.

Their war against the world continues. No matter what President Obama says, our war against them hasn't ended, either.

January 23, 2013. By David Pugliese - Defence Watch

One question Defence Watch receives every now and then is “What is happenig with the Canadian Army’s Close Combat Vehicle project?”

As Defence Watch readers likely know, the Canadian Forces wants to buy 108 of the Close Combat Vehicles (CCVs). There would be an option for the purchase of up to 30 additional vehicles. The army has argued that the Close Combat Vehicles, which would accompany its Leopard tanks into battle, are a priority for future missions.

Nexter Systems is offering the VBCI 25 – a platform currently in service with the French Army.

BAE is offering the CV90.

General Dynamics Land Systems Canada has offered the Piranha 5 fitted with the Rheinmetall Lance 30 mm Modular Turret System.”

The CCV program has run into a number of problems. It went off the rails earlier this year and companies vying for the $2 billion program were told that their bids had been rejected and they would have to submit new proposals. It was the second time that candidate vehicles, some of which are in service with allied nations in Afghanistan, had been rejected by the Defence Department.

The Close Combat Vehicle program, announced with great fanfare by the government in the summer of 2009, has already fallen two years behind schedule, according to industry officials.

So what is happening with the CCV project?

Army commander Lt.-Gen. Peter Devlin recently noted that the three vehicles entered in the CCV contest had been tested in the U.S.

“Then an evaluation will be conducted of the strengths of the three vehicles and there will be negotiations with the company, so we anticipate that there will be an announcement mid next year,” he said.

Maybe in time for CANSEC 2013?

CF-1 and CF-2 aircraft undergoing dual air refilling

testing – Photo Andy Wolfe

23 January 2013 naval-technology.com

The US Navy's two Lockheed Martin-built F-35C Lightning II carrier variant (CV) test aircraft have successfully completed in-flight dual refuelling testing at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Maryland, US.

During the tests, the two aircraft, CF-1 and CF-2, were refuelled at the same time with a Lockheed Martin-developed KC-130 Hercules aircraft, marking a milestone as part of an F-35 flight test programme.

“The F-35C can fly at a maximum speed of 1,960km/h and can be launched through steam catapult and recovered by using tailhook arrestor.”

The stealthy, supersonic multi-role F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) is currently under development by Lockheed and has been undergoing flight tests since late 2006.

The aircraft is also being developed in two other variants, conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) variant for the US Air Force, and a short takeoff and vertical landing (STOVL) aircraft for the US Marine Corps and the UK Royal Navy.

Powered by a single Pratt & Whitney F135 turbofan engine, the F-35C can fly at a maximum speed of 1,960km/h and can be launched through steam catapult and recovered by using tailhook arrestor.

Armed with a 25mm GAU-22A series cannon, the F-35C aircraft will be integrated with an AIM-120 AMRAAM medium-range air-to-air missile, air-to-surface guided missiles, two GBU-31 JDAM guided bombs, eight GBU-38 bombs and munitions dispensers.

In December 2012, the US Navy's CV-2 aircraft successfully completed initial pit drop testing, marking successful conclusion of ground weapons ejection test series for the variant.

The first CV aircraft is scheduled to be delivered later this year to join an F-35 pilot and maintainer training programmes and is likely to be operational in 2015.

The programme is expected to achieve more than 1,000 flights in 2013.

Jan 22, 2013 ASDNews Source : Raytheon Corporation

    Weapon hits two stationary land targets during integrated test phase

The U.S. Navy successfully demonstrated the dual targeting capability of Raytheon Company's (NYSE: RTN) Joint Standoff Weapon (JSOW) C-1. Two recent tests during the program's integrated test phase prove the weapon can engage challenging stationary targets. Previous testing in the integrated test phase demonstrated JSOW C-1's capability against moving maritime targets.

The first stationary land target test was designed to assess JSOW's capability against operationally realistic infrared and radio frequency countermeasures. An F/A-18F Super Hornet aircraft launched a JSOW C-1 from approximately 29,000 feet and 17.5 nautical miles from the target. The weapon flew a preplanned route at 0.83 mach airspeed, employed 3-D waypoints, and successfully impacted a cement wall on a simulated bunker.

The second stationary land target test was designed to demonstrate JSOW's performance at night against an operationally representative bunker target. An F/A-18F Super Hornet launched the JSOW C-1 from approximately 25,000 feet. The JSOW C-1 flew the preplanned route at 0.81 mach airspeed and successfully impacted the buried bunker. Both tests occurred at the U.S. Naval Air Weapons Station in China Lake, Calif.

"These tests demonstrate that JSOW C-1 provides the U.S. and allied warfighters with a new dual capability to engage both stationary land targets and moving ships at range," said Celeste Mohr, JSOW program director for Raytheon Missile Systems. "These tests help clear the way for the important operational test phase of the program scheduled to begin early next year."

The JSOW C-1 is designed to provide fleet forces with the capability and flexibility to engage moving maritime targets, while retaining its robust capability against stationary land targets. The weapon is a modification to the existing JSOW C, which adds a weapon datalink radio and modified seeker software to increase capability for the anti-surface warfare mission.

Jan 22, 2013 ASDNews Source : CACI International Inc.

    New Work Will Support Development and Fielding of Chemical and Biological Defense Equipment to Protect U.S. Armed Forces

CACI International Inc (NYSE:CACI) announced today that it has been awarded a prime position on the Engineering-Technical and Logistics Domains of the Omnibus Program Engineering and Technical Support (OPETS) contract. CACI will support development and fielding of chemical and biological defense materiel for the Department of Defense (DoD) Joint Program Executive Office for Chemical and Biological Defense (JPEO-CBD). With a ceiling value of approximately $40 million for each of the two domains, the five-year (three-year base period plus a two-year option period) indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract expands CACI's presence in its C4ISR (command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance) and logistics and material readiness markets.

The JPEO-CBD is responsible for advanced research, development, acquisition, fielding, and lifecycle support of chemical and biological detection and reconnaissance systems, protection and decontamination systems, information management systems, medical technology, and installation and force protection systems for DoD missions overseas and in the U.S. To help keep Armed Forces personnel safe from chemical and biological threats, CACI will compete for task orders to provide JPEO-CBD with subject matter experts on chemical and biological defense, the development of technical drawings, configuration management, and logistics analysis and risk management.

CACI has extensive C4ISR experience that includes a long history of support on programs such as the U.S. Army's Strategic Services Sourcing (S3) and Technical Engineering Support Services contracts as well as ongoing support of development work for the Army's Stryker Nuclear Biological Chemical Reconnaissance Vehicle.

John Mengucci, CACI Chief Operating Officer and President of U.S. Operations, said, "Our extensive involvement in wide-ranging projects in the C4ISR and logistics arenas will be directly relevant in ensuring the success of the Joint Program Executive Office for Chemical and Biological Defense's mission. We look forward to providing the critical expertise required to help keep our Armed Forces out of harm's way."

According to CACI President and Chief Executive Officer Dan Allen, "We are excited for this new contract award with the Joint Program Executive Office and their confidence in CACI to support their critical mission developing chemical and biological defense solutions for our military. Our global presence and proven ability to rapidly deploy the technology and solutions required to support the DoD's high priority missions are enabling CACI to partner effectively with agencies throughout the defense community and are key elements of our strategy to grow our business."

EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE, Fla., Jan. 22 (UPI)

Raytheon reports that its GBU-53/B Small Diameter Bomb II has proven suitable for use on U.S. F-35 Lightning Joint Strike Fighters.

The bomb's suitability was determined during a test by the U.S. Air Force in which four SDB II shapes were loaded into an F-35 weapon bay alongside an Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile.

Checks of the aircraft's inboard and outboard bay doors verified adequate clearance between the two weapons, Raytheon said.

SDB II has an integrated tri-mode seeker that combines millimeter-wave radar, uncooled imaging infrared and semi-active laser sensors onto a single gimbal for use in all weather conditions.

"Completion of the fit check is critical because it further validates SDB II's compatibility with the F-35 and keeps SDB II on track for a smooth transition to production," said Harry Schulte, Raytheon Missile Systems' vice president of Air Warfare Systems.

"Once fielded, SDB II will provide the warfighter with an unprecedented capability to precisely strike moving targets in adverse weather conditions and through battlefield obscurants."

Raytheon said that in addition to the F-35, can also be used by F/A-22s, F-16C/Ds and F/A-18E/F aircraft.

SDB II can hit targets from a range of greater than 40 nautical miles. It has a powerful warhead capable of destroying armored targets, yet keeps collateral damage to a minimum through a small explosive footprint. It is highly accurate and offers warfighters the flexibility to change targets, due to a datalink that passes mid-flight updates to the weapon.

January 22, 2013 By Dave Majumdar - the-dewline

In this week's issue of Flight International, I wrote a feature about the Pentagon's plan to launch a prototype attack helicopter program in order to help preserve the US rotary-wing industrial base. Unfortunately, this country has not produced a successful clean-sheet military helicopter design since the 1970s. The Bell-Boeing V-22 Osprey doesn't count; it's not really a helicopter.

Read the feature here

Below is Flight's editorial about why it's important to invest in potentially revolutionary technologies:

Pentagon procurement chief Frank Kendall is directing the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to explore the possibility of developing a new prototype attack helicopter. Such an effort could present an opportunity for the USA to reassert its dominance in the rotary-wing industry after decades of malaise. Indeed, the last successful clean-sheet US military helicopter design was the Boeing AH-64 Apache.

Here is an opportunity for the Pentagon to invest in revolutionary new technologies such as high-speed compound helicopters, potentially offering big leaps in range, payload, speed and efficiency. Such progress has been sadly lacking in the rotary-wing world since the 1960s. But a higher degree of risk must be accepted if engineers are to be free to pursue game-changing advances. With careful analysis and design, programme risk can be reduced; it is, however, inherent in programmes that push the technology's limits.

Even if they do not result in the originally intended platform, the advanced technological capabilities, enhanced skills and expanded knowledge base developed could provide a foundation for future programmes, reducing future risk. And there would almost certainly be fallout technologies with other applications.

The Pentagon could use this exploratory effort not only to revolutionise rotary-wing technology but also to invest in future national technological capability.

I'd say this DARPA project could potentially yield a production attack helicopter in the future. It kinda reminds me of how the old Joint Advanced Strike Technology (JAST) program evolved into what is today the Lockheed Martin F-35.

But on the other hand, the Pentagon appears to be embarking on this project at the same time as the US Army-led Joint Multi-Role (JMR)/Future Vertical Lift (FVL) program is exploring advanced technologies to greatly improve the range, speed and payload for rotary-wing aircraft. The JMR/FVL is also looking at an attack variant (assuming that's still the plan), which kinda begs the question as to why the Defense Department needs two programs like this. It seems somewhat redundant, so I asked the OSD folks if they had any additional details; they didn't.

And there is the Armed Aerial Scout program, which doesn't really fall into this category... Sikorsky could offer the S-97 Raider, which is a arguably a revolutionary clean-sheet design. That's assuming the Army goes ahead with the program in this budget environment.

In general, I'm supportive of trying out new ideas in aerospace, even if the project is a spectacular failure. If one doesn't try new ideas, we never get anywhere. For example, this space venture my colleague Zack just wrote about is borderline insane, but at least they're giving it a shot.

Read it here

Anyways, the legendary Burt Rutan can make the case for new innovative ideas far better than I can, so watch this video.

22.01.2013 photo EMA

January 23, 2013 By Robert Farley Flashpoints

Last week, Bryan McGrath of Information Dissemination made a surprising argument about the U.S. Navy’s boomer flotilla. McGrath argued that rather than spend a tremendous amount of money replacing the force (which will reach obsolescence by 2040), the U.S. should seek alternative deterrent options. 

This argument comes at an interesting time for world Ballistic Missile Submarines (SSBN) fleets. In the United Kingdom, the battle over the Trident replacement has been fully joined, with many in Labour suggesting that expensive new boomers are a waste of money. At the same time, other SSBN operators have decided to modernize their fleets. The Russians continue to push forward with the Borei-class submarines, while the PLAN has now built up to five of the Type 094 class boomer.  India’s first SSBN, INS Arihant, will likely enter service in the first half of 2013. Only France, with submarines roughly a decade newer than the UK, is not currently pursuing a substantial revision of its SSBN force.

McGrath’s case rests on five points.  First, boomers take up a disproportionate share of the shipbuilding budget for the utility they provide.  Second, in the modern nuclear environment “survivability” means considerably less than it did in the Cold War.  Third, eliminating the boomers might open the door to more effective conventional strike options, including Prompt Global Strike. Fourth, it allows the Navy to concentrate on warfighting and forward presence, rather than strategic deterrence.  Finally, if the global political environment changes, we can always build new boomers.

As much as I would like to agree with McGrath’s argument, I’m not convinced.  I do think that Trident replacement is a waste of resources for the United Kingdom, but then the UK does not play the same kind of global role as the United States. While concerns about boomers crowding out other platforms should be taken seriously, other parts of the triad suffer from similar problems.  The U.S. ballistic missile force is aging, although some studies suggest that the basic architecture could remain in place as late as 2075.  The bomber force has also grown old, even as the Air Force has increasingly diverted bombers to non-nuclear tasks. 

Any option, thus, involves unpleasant decisions. Maintaining all three legs of the triad probably won’t be possible.  Because long range bombers inherently have dual conventional and nuclear purpose, the United States cannot eliminate the bomber leg in any traditional sense, although it can reduce numbers and certain metrics of readiness. Thus, the choice comes down to the intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) force and the submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) force.  My own view is that the United States can accept a lower threshold for at sea nuclear deterrence, but this leg should still retain a rump deterrence capability.  Survivability concerns may not be what they were, but they are still relevant, and SSBNs have both survivability and flexibility advantages over ICBMs. It isn’t accidental that China, India, and Russia are all choosing to develop or upgrade their SSBN capabilities at the same time. Concerns about shipbuilding costs should be remedied by resource transfers between services; if the Air Force no longer operates an ICBM force, then funding can (at least theoretically) shift towards the Navy.

Replacement of the Ohio boats will still be expensive, but circumstances may allow life extension beyond current expectations. The long term answer may not be an entirely new SSBN design, but rather a modified Virginia class boat that could carry ballistic missiles. The Navy has argued that this design would become more expensive than an Ohio replacement, but issues of number and vulnerability may prove more manageable if the option is no boomers at all.  No other state in the world can match such a capability, and yet the U.S. presumably feels deterred from launching pre-emptive nuclear attacks on China or Russia.  A reduced SSBN force is still the best option for providing a foundational level of nuclear security.

Le Canada employait en Afghanistan des hélicoptères

Chinook de modèle D, que l’on voit ici durant l

’entraînement (Photo : caporal Craig Wiggins, FC)

21 janvier 2013 par Jacques N. Godbout - 45enord.ca

Cela fait 21 ans que les grands hélicoptères canadiens de transport lourd à rotors en tandem Chinook n’ont pas volé ici, mais ils seront de retour cette année en dans le ciel canadien.Le Canada commencera en effet à prendre livraison de ses nouveaux CH-147F Chinook cette année.

La nouvelle flotte d’hélicoptères tactiques CH-147F Chinook sera basée au 450e Escadron tactique d’hélicoptères, qui a récemment repris du service et qui est installé à la Base des Forces canadiennes Petawawa (Ont.), mais relève du commandement de la 1re Escadre Kingston (Ont.). C’est le 18 mai 2012 que le ministre de la Défense Peter MacKay a annoncé la remise sur pied de l’escadron d’hélicoptères.

Comme il est précisé sur le site de l’ARC, les exigences opérationnelles spécifiques que les Chinook canadiens auront à remplir pour appuyer la Stratégie de défense Le Canada d’abord englobent la capacité de :

• circuler dans de vastes régions du territoire canadien, notamment l’Arctique, sans dépendre des caches à carburant, qui étaient auparavant disponibles, mais qui sont maintenant moins acceptables d’un point de vue environnemental;
• fonctionner de manière fiable dans des régions éloignées et isolées avec de l’équipement de soutien technique de base;
• opérer dans des conditions menaçantes où on pourrait s’attendre à la présence d’ennemis potentiels et de risques environnementaux.

Les nouveaux CH-147F Chinook canadiens sont donc équipés de réservoirs de carburant à longue portée, d’un système électrique modernisé et de matériel de survivabilité des aéronefs sous forme de contre-mesures accrues d’autodéfense, d’aides visuelles à la navigation et de systèmes d’avionique de pointe.

January 21, 2013 defense-aerospace.com

(Source: US Army; issued January 18, 2013)

The Ground Combat Vehicle, or GCV, acquisition strategy was modified, Jan. 17, to further reduce risk and maintain an affordable program.

The decision by the Department of Defense extends the current technology development phase of the program by six months to allow industry greater time to refine vehicle designs.

These efforts will support a full and open competition at milestone B in 2014, the next major decision point in the program. The revised strategy calls for selection of a single vendor for the engineering and manufacturing development and production phases of the program.

The six month extension to the technology development phase will provide contractors an opportunity to mature vehicle designs, while the Army finalizes GCV requirements, prior to the upcoming milestone B decision. This milestone marks the point where the GCV program will initiate critical design and testing activities in anticipation of vehicle production.

The Army’s prior strategy called for competition among two vendors during these phases of the GCV program. Citing projected budgetary pressures over the fiscal 2014-2018 period, the department’s decision to revise the development strategy ensures an affordable program that meets the Army’s critical needs for a new infantry fighting vehicle.

Since milestone A was approved two years ago, the Army has vigorously refined GCV requirements to provide industry the maximum range of flexibility in developing vehicle designs while constraining cost and technical risk.

Contractor efforts have informed the Army’s understanding of planned technical capabilities and the Army has formally assessed existing and alternative developmental vehicles. These measures have confirmed the Army’s need to develop GCV based on affordable and executable requirements. The changes in the GCV strategy reflect a continued emphasis on long-term affordability within the program.

The Army remains firmly committed to the success of the GCV program to provide needed protection and mobility to Soldiers. The new direction allows the Army to take positive steps to ensure delivery of this much needed capability to the force.

Jan. 21, 2013 defense-aerospace.com

(Source: Chicago Tribune; published Jan. 19, 2013)

Pentagon Grounds Marine Corps Model of F-35 Fighter Jet (excerpt)

WASHINGTON --- The Pentagon and U.S. Navy on Friday grounded the Marine Corps version of Lockheed Martin Corp's F-35 fighter jet after an incident that occurred during a training flight at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida on Wednesday.

The Pentagon's F-35 program office said the grounding affected all 25 F-35B model jets, while flights of the Air Force's A-model and the Navy's C-model were unaffected. Ground operations of the B-model planes continued, it said.

The program office it ordered the temporary suspension of flight operations after a propulsion line associated with the B-model's exhaust system failed prior to takeoff. The pilot aborted the takeoff without incident and cleared the runway, the program office said in a statement. There were no injuries to the pilot or ground crew.

The incident came just days after the Pentagon's director of testing and evaluation released an 18-page report detailing an array of problems which he said underscored the "lack of maturity" of the $396 billion fighter program.

The report and Friday's grounding of the B-model highlighted the continued growing pains of the ambitious Lockheed fighter program, which began in 2001 and has been restructured three times in recent years.

The grounding affected F-35B models, which can take off from short runways and land vertically like a helicopter, at a Maryland naval air station, the Florida air base, Marine Corps Air Station Yuma in Arizona, and Lockheed's F-35 production facility in Fort Worth, Texas.

"Implementing a precautionary suspension of flight operations is a prudent response until F-35B engineering, technical and system safety teams fully understand the cause of the failure," said Joe DellaVedova, spokesman for the Pentagon's F-35 program office. "Safety of pilots and ground crew is the top priority of the program."

The fuel line in question enables actuator movement for the exhaust system associated with the B-model's engine. Instead of traditional hydraulic fluid, it instead uses fuel as the operating fluid to reduce weight. (end of excerpt)


Click here for the full story, on the Chicago Tribune website.