source US Navy

December 2, 2011 U.S. Department of Defense / Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs) – defpro.com

The U.S. Navy will christen its newest attack submarine Mississippi, Saturday, Dec. 3, during an 11 a.m. EST ceremony at General Dynamics Electric Boat in Groton, Conn. The Honorable Ray Mabus, secretary of the Navy, will deliver the ceremony’s principal address. Allison Stiller, deputy assistant secretary of the Navy for ship programs, is the ship’s sponsor.

The naming of Mississippi, designated SSN 782, recognizes the state’s long-standing tradition of shipbuilding in support of our nation’s defense. It also honors the spirit of the people of Mississippi who have made great strides in recovering from the devastation of Hurricane Katrina.

Mississippi is built to excel in anti-submarine warfare; anti-ship warfare; strike warfare; special operations; intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance; irregular warfare; and mine warfare missions. Adept at operating in both the world’s shallow littoral regions and deep waters, Mississippi will directly enable five of the six Navy maritime strategy core capabilities -- sea control, power projection, forward presence, maritime security and deterrence.

There have been four previous ships named Mississippi. Most notable, the first, a side wheeler, served as Commodore Matthew Perry’s flagship for his historic voyage to Japan and fought with Adm. David Farragut’s forces on the Mississippi River during the Civil War.

Capt. John McGrath, a native of Neptune, N.J., and a 1990 graduate from the U.S. Naval Academy, will be the ship’s commanding officer, leading a crew of approximately 142 officers and enlisted personnel.

The 7,800-ton Mississippi is built under a teaming arrangement between General Dynamics Electric Boat and Huntington Ingalls Industries-Newport News Shipbuilding. It is 377 feet long, has a 33-foot beam, and will be able to dive to depths of greater than 800 feet, and operate at speeds in excess of 25 knots submerged. Mississippi is designed with a nuclear reactor plant that will not require refueling during the planned life of the ship -- reducing lifecycle costs while increasing underway time.

The christening will be carried live at http://www.gdeb.com and the link will become active on the morning of Dec. 3.

Photo: Lockheed Martin

Dec 1, 2011 By Michael Fabey - aerospace daily and defense report

A guided missile prototype funded and developed by the Office of Naval Research (ONR) successfully hit two high-speed boats during recent testing in Point Mugu, Calif.

Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division engineers used a shore-based launcher to fire two Low-Cost Imaging Terminal Seeker (LCITS) rockets in the Nov. 3 test, one inert and the other with an explosive warhead, ONR reports.

Using inertial guidance, the missiles flew to a point where the infrared terminal guidance system took over. Onboard imaging infrared seekers identified their intended targets among five maneuvering small boats. The rockets adjusted trajectories to intercept and hit two of the boats.

The test was part of the Medusa Joint Capability Technology Demonstration (JCTD), an effort funded by the Department of the Navy, Office of the Secretary of Defense and Republic of Korea.

The Medusa JCTD is designed to combine the missiles with the MH-60 helicopter. “It’s a fire-and-forget weapon,” said Ken Heeke ONR LCITS program manager. “No longer do you have to continue to monitor the target after you’ve fired the weapon. You can move on to the next threat with the assurance that the rocket will hit the target.”

ONR researchers produced LCITS, a suite of low-cost technologies that modify existing helicopter-borne rockets into precision-guided weapons. By adding an infrared imaging guidance section to 2.75-in. Hydra-70 rockets, the researchers are providing naval aviators with a new lethal capability.

Unlike laser-guided weapons that require operators to select and monitor a target from launch to detonation, LCITS gives unguided rockets the ability to compute and home in on targets automatically after launch.

The ONR effort combines two sets of high-profile Pentagon programs – guided missiles and helicopters.

Rotary-wing programs rank third among all Pentagon programs in 2010 expenses with about $7 billion in contracts and contract modifications, according to an exclusive Aviation Week Intelligence Network (AWIN) analysis of contracting data aggregated by the National Institute for Computer-Assisted Reporting.

Collectively, guided missile programs rank 10th among all Pentagon expenses in 2010 with about $3.2 billion in transactions, the AWIN analysis shows.

Dec 1, 2011 By Andrea Shalal-Esa/Reuters - AviationWeek.com

WASHINGTON - The Marine Corps version of Lockheed Martin’s F-35 fighter jet could soon be taken off a “probation” imposed by former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, a U.S. Marine Corps official said on Wednesday.

General Joseph Dunford, assistant commandant of the Marine Corps, told an investment conference that he was “pretty bullish” on the F-35B, the short takeoff, vertical landing variant of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

He cited progress in fixing technical problems and said the fighter jet met 98 percent of its test points this year.

Gates put the F-35B on a two-year probation last January and threatened to cancel further work on it unless technical issues were resolved. But Dunford said he was optimistic about the plane’s future after a year of solid progress.

“It’s no longer … in the cross hairs,” Dunford told the conference hosted by Credit Suisse and Aviation Week, noting that an engineering solution had been identified for every challenge that had arisen.

Given the progress, the plane already was slowly coming off probation and could see that label removed wholly at the start of 2012, he said.

The F-35 program is the biggest U.S. weapons program, which has prompted speculation that the program may face big cuts as Pentagon budget officials struggle to cut over $450 billion from their plans for the next decade.

The F-35B, designed to take off from shorter runways and land vertically, like a helicopter, is seen as particularly vulnerable given a variety of technical issues.

But Dunford said the new fighter remained a top priority of the Marine Corps, and that its ability to land on shorter runways and twice as many U.S. warships was a critical capability that the military could not do without.

Dunford said the Marines would not accept a “hollow force”, and would rather reduce the overall size of their force than send Marines into battle without the right equipment.

December 1, 2011 By David Axe - wired.com/dangerroom

The cost for the Marines to fix and fly their full fleet of V-22 tiltrotors has grown by nearly two-thirds over just four years, according to a Pentagon estimate. In 2008, the Defense Department calculated the “lifetime” cost of operating 360 V-22 Osprey transports at $75 billion over roughly 30 years. Today the figure is more than $121 billion — a 61-percent increase.

The rapidly escalating bill could could not come at a worse time for the Marines and Osprey-makers Bell and Boeing. The Marines are struggling to pay for an ambitious, carefully coordinated aviation modernization plan, elements of which have begun to unravel all at the same time. And that’s not even taking into account the looming prospect of deep defense cuts.

Bell and Boeing, meanwhile, are hoping to convince the Pentagon and foreign governments to order more V-22s, providing years of work at the companies’ factory in Amarillo, Texas.

The V-22, which takes off like a helicopter but cruises like an airplane thanks to its rotating engine nacelles, has been controversial since development began nearly 30 years ago. Several early models of the Osprey crashed during testing, killing 30 people. A redesigned version, though safer, still crashes or burns at a rate far higher than the Marines like to admit.

Leaving aside its safety record, the V-22 ain’t cheap. A single Osprey costs $60 million to purchase,  plus millions more to support. For comparison, a Navy F/A-18E/F Super Hornet fighter is actually slightly cheaper to buy. And the Army’s workhorse UH-60 Blackhawk chopper can be had for around $15 million apiece.

The price increase should come as no surprise to close observers of the Osprey’s tortured development. In order to make up for its small wings and rotors, which are sized to fit on Navy assault ships, designers fitted the V-22 with unusually powerful Rolls-Royce engines. They run hotter than normal airplane motors and break down faster. Engine problems have caused many of the V-22′s worst accidents and also account for much of the ballooning operational cost.

The Marines have tried different approaches to driving down the V-22′s maintenance bill. At one time the Corps even considered replacing the current engines with entirely new models. So far, nothing has worked. Four years after being declared combat-ready, the V-22 has readiness rate of just 69 percent, compared to 85 percent for a Blackhawk.

The Osprey’s growing pricetag could threaten other Marine programs. Despite their reputation for doing more with less, the Marines actually have the most ambitious aviation modernization plan of any of the military branches, according to Richard Aboulafia, an analyst at the Teal Group in Virginia.

The Marines want to buy F-35B stealth jump jets, modernized AH-1Z and UH-1Y light helicopters and the new heavyweight CH-53K chopper in addition to the V-22 — and all at the same time. Budgets are so tight that a cost increase with any of these new aircraft forces the Marines to cut back on others. Already, the Marines are considering eliminating H-1s to pay for F-35s. What would they sacrifice to afford more Ospreys?

source everydaynodaysoff.com

December 1, 2011: STRATEGY PAGE

It had to happen. An American firm has come out with a battery pack that fits under an M-16 type weapon and supplies power to multiple devices attached to the rail on top of the rifle. If this RIPR (Rifle Integrated Power Rail) device is widely adopted, it would mean more reliable power for rail mounted items, and the ability to build them lighter and smaller (by leaving off the batteries).

In the last two decades, an increasing number of accessories have been developed for military rifles and machine-guns, and most of them would not have appeared were it not for the development of the "Picatinny Rail." This is a standard for a metal rail, with crosswise grooves, that make mounting accessories (scopes, lights, and so on) easy to do. Just snap them on, or tighten a few screws. The Picatinny Rail is a development of the Weaver Rail, which has been around since the 1930s. Items built to attach to a Weaver Rail can be attached to a Picatinny Rail, but not vice versa.

The war in Iraq and Afghanistan has created a demand for weapons accessories, and caused hundreds of new items to be invented for attachment to weapons via the Picatinny Rail. Such rails were originally found just on the top of the rifle (forward of the breach), but are now often found underneath the barrel as well, forward of the magazine. Many of these devices rely on battery power, thus the need for something like RIPR. Most people have never heard of the Picatinny Rail, but anyone who handles an assault rifle or light machine-gun, knows all about them, and can't imagine going into combat using a rifle without rails. If RIPR becomes widely used, there will be less problems dealing the battery needs of several rail mounted accessories.

December 1, 2011 Army Sgt. 1st Class Tyrone C. Marshall Jr. / American Forces Press Service  - defpro.com

ARLINGTON, Va. | The military’s logistics system has performed “extremely well” on the front end of supporting warfighters these past 10 years, a senior Defense Department official said Nov. 30.

“The department’s logistics system is actually performing extremely well for what it is designed to do, which is supporting forces engaged in combat,” said Alan F. Estevez, assistant secretary of defense for logistics and materiel readiness.

Estevez praised the defense logistics system during the 2011 Defense Logistics Conference which featured corporate sponsors such as IBM, Northrop Gruman, Honeywell and Rockwell Collins.

“If you look at what we have done in sustaining and redeploying our forces in Iraq, [and] in surging and sustaining our forces in Afghanistan -- all that going on simultaneously -- we’ve done a magnificent job,” he said.

Estevez noted people tend to look at logistics as the behind-the-scenes “tail” in the department.

“We really can’t look at logistics as ‘tail’ from the perspective of the Department of Defense,” he said. “That combat power that’s on the ground today in Afghanistan, putting the hurt on the Taliban, is there because of a logistics system that is capable of putting it into a landlocked country.

“And [it’s capable of] sustaining it there and doing likewise in another war,” Estevez continued. “Plus, [it is] capable of doing things like Haiti relief, tsunami relief, and earthquake relief across the globe.

“So I’d submit to you that logistics is not ‘tail,’” he added. “It’s not a back-end function inside the Department of Defense.”

Estevez cited the efficiency of the defense logistic system in Iraq. “In the next month we’ll be out of Iraq,” he said. “Your logistics system has just done a phenomenal job in posturing the force.”

A year or so ago, Estevez noted, the U.S. had about 500 bases in Iraq. Today, there are six bases operating in Iraq, aside from sites that will be used for the Office of Security Cooperation-Iraq, and the State Department.

Estevez compared the amount of U.S. equipment and forces in Iraq prior to the drawdown with the country’s current figures.

“Over the last year, since September of 2010, as we embarked on Operation New Dawn, there were about 2.15 million pieces of equipment in Iraq,” he said. “Today, there’s about 346,000 pieces in Iraq.”

“Not all of that will be coming out,” he added. “Some of that will remain in Iraq. It is no longer usable for U.S. forces, and on the other hand, it is usable for Iraqi forces.”

Today, there are about 13,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, with nearly 800 departing each day, compared to 46,000 troops as recently as midsummer of this year, Estevez said.

The assistant secretary noted as U.S. forces have drawn down, they’ve helped build up Iraqi capabilities, with about $400 million worth of gear, so they are capable of sustaining themselves.

“On the backside of that, we’ve saved $700 million by not having to haul that stuff out of Iraq and back home where we, the U.S. military, have no use for it,” he said.

However, unit duty gear comes back with the units, Estevez said.

Meanwhile, the Defense and State departments are working closely in a “whole-of-government” approach to sustain Iraqi capabilities, he said.

Nov 30, 2011 By Diane Bartz/Reuters AviationWeek.com

WASHINGTON- Lawmakers in the U.S. House of Representatives will introduce a bill this week to give some U.S. companies more access to cyberthreat intelligence, which they can use to defend themselves against hackers looking to steal everything from credit card numbers to intellectual property, according to a copy of a bill obtained by Reuters.

Internet service providers and other companies have long complained that they give information to the U.S. government about potential threats but do not generally get enough back, either because it is classified or because the investigation is linked to a potential prosecution.

Under a bill to be introduced by Representative Mike Rogers, chair of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and ranking member C.A. Ruppersberger, the Director of National Intelligence will set rules that will allow some classified cyberthreat data to be shared, the draft said.

The committee website indicates that the bill will be introduced this week.

The 11-page bill requires that companies not be subject to civil or criminal lawsuits because of the data sharing, or for failing to act on any cybersecurity data obtained as part of the information sharing, according to the bill.

A cyber-taskforce in the House, which is dominated by Republicans, issued a report in October urging legislation be done on a piecemeal basis. This is in contrast with the Senate, which is more interested in a comprehensive bill.

On the other hand, there is agreement on the substance of several major cybersecurity initiatives.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has indicated that it will take up overarching cybersecurity legislation next year. The upper chamber has been working on various bills for two years and on a comprehensive bill for six months without finishing a draft.

U.S. lawmakers have considered several cybersecurity bills in recent years, but failed to pass any despite a growing sense of urgency following high profile hacks of Google, Lockheed Martin, the Pentagon’s No. 1 supplier, Citigroup, the International Monetary Fund and others.

source Lockheed Martin

DALLAS, November 30th, 2011 -- Lockheed Martin

Lockheed Martin today tested a new Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System-Plus (GMLRS+) ‘scalable effects’ warhead, which enables users to select the range of the warhead’s detonation power depending on the target.

“The ‘scalable effects’ warhead was set to low-yield prior to the flight and scored a direct hit on the target,” said Scott Arnold, vice president of precision fires in Lockheed Martin’s Missiles and Fire Control business. “The performance of both the GMLRS+ rocket and the scalable effects warhead were outstanding, validating our continued investment in evolving the proven GMLRS weapon system to address current and future threats.”

This test at White Sands Missile Range, N.M., was the second of two GMLRS+ launches scheduled for 2011. In early August, a GMLRS+ round successfully completed a 120-kilometer mission, an improvement in range of approximately 50 kilometers over the current GMLRS round. Both tests were internally funded by Lockheed Martin and Aerojet and were supported by the U.S. Army’s Precision Fires Program Office.

Aerojet, a world-recognized producer of missile and space propulsion systems and defense armaments, was selected for this test phase as the GMLRS+ warhead supplier after an evaluation and selection process.

GMLRS+ is a Lockheed Martin internal research and development program to upgrade the combat-proven GMLRS Unitary system, and integrate new capabilities into the existing GMLRS guidance/navigation package and airframe. It will accommodate various warheads, and will operate seamlessly within the current High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) and MLRS M270A1 launcher force structure. Lockheed Martin is the prime contractor on the GMLRS program.

TUCSON, Ariz., Nov. 30, 2011 /PRNewswire/

Raytheon Company has completed captive carry tests of its Small Tactical Munition Phase II configuration, paving the way for flight tests.

"Raytheon developed STM Phase II to provide the warfighter a weapon for Shadow-class UAS (unmanned aircraft systems) and counterinsurgency aircraft," said Bob Francois, vice president of Advanced Missiles and Unmanned Systems for Raytheon Missile Systems. "STM is a mature, precise and affordable weapon and gives the warfighter flexibility to engage moving and static targets with minimal collateral damage."

The Sept. 16 test was conducted on a Raytheon Cobra unmanned aircraft system at Yuma Proving Grounds, Ariz.

About Small Tactical Munition

STM Phase II is a new 12-pound, 22-inch long, precision-guided, gravity-dropped bomb specifically designed for employment from manned and unmanned aircraft systems. STM Phase II is more than two inches shorter than the Phase I design and has foldable fins and wings, enabling employment from the U.S. military's common launch tube. STM Phase II's easier assembly will make the system simpler to manufacture on a large scale.

Key Points

    At 12 pounds and 22 inches, STM is the smallest air-launched weapon in the Raytheon portfolio.

    Has both GPS and semiactive laser guidance.

    Small enough to be employed from the U.S. military's common launch tube.

30 November 2011 - by Tony Osborne - shephardmedia.com

Joint logistic support groups (JLSGs) should be formed for future NATO operations so that there can be greater co-ordination of logistics in multinational operations, according to a US logistics chief.

RAdm William Brown, director of logistics for United States European Command (EUCOM), outlined the lessons commanders from EUCOM and Africa Command (AFRICOM) are heeding from the conflict in Libya.

Speaking at the Military Logistics 2011 conference in Bristol on 29 November, Brown told Shephard that to solve the issues that arose at the beginning of operations between AFRICOM and EUCOM, high-ranking officers from both commands were now in communication on a daily basis.

The first eight days of the UN-sanctioned no-fly zone over Libya were controlled by US commanders under the auspices of Operation Odyssey Dawn. Operations in Libya fall under the purview of the recently-created AFRICOM but air operations in support of Odyssey Dawn were launched from bases on the other side of the Mediterranean from bases in Europe, under the command of EUCOM.

‘AFRICOM ran the operation for the first eight days until NATO took over,’ explained Brown. ‘There were a lot of questions - who was doing this, who was doing that - but because the assets were at European bases…a lot of the heavy lifting was done from EUCOM.’

Brown said that the infrastructure available to US and NATO forces, such as airbases and forward-stored munitions, allowed the coalition to be ready for air operations within a few days. Work to prepare for a possible Libya operation had begun some 30 days prior to the beginning of Odyssey Dawn.

‘Having this capacity allowed us to do this preparation in the background,’ added Brown, ‘It allowed us to say we can be ready in 24 hours not 60 days.’

At bases like Naval Air Station Sigonella in Sicily, personnel involved in operations were accommodated in tent cities.

‘This was a base we thought we were getting out of,’ said Brown. The base quickly became home to ISR, ground attack and support aircraft from several coalition nations involved in the air effort.

It did not all go smoothly, however. One example raised by Brown was the Swedish Air Force who arrived at Sigonella with a flight of JAS-39 Gripen fighter aircraft.

The deployment had been arranged well in advanced but the air arm had to put a hold on air operations when it was discovered that the Gripens used JP-8 fuel, but JP-5 was the only fuel available at the base. It was several days before a final decision was made that the Gripens would be able to use JP-5 fuel.

Credit: Boeing

Nov 29, 2011 By David Fulghum - aviation week and space technology

St. Louis - Even with the F-22 on the ramp, if the F-35 program is delayed or killed, the U.S. and its allies will need more aircraft with a reduced radar signature or the ability to carry standoff weapons at a range to penetrate sophisticated air defenses.

The other requirements for these improved legacy aircraft are the ability to carry conventional and directed-energy weapons, advanced electronic warfare (EW) capabilities and a price tag that is a fraction of a specialized stealth design.

Proponents of the Joint Strike Fighter—including F-35 manufacturer Lockheed Martin—doubt whether legacy fighters, such as the F/A-18 and F-15 built by rival Boeing, or even Lockheed’s own F-16 could be modified to match the capabilities that the JSF delivers.

Indeed, U.S. Air Force leadership remains adamant about maintaining the ability to take apart sophisticated air defenses, and few officials believe there is any substitute for specialized stealth designs such as the F-22 and F-35.

“To not incorporate the technology that is available to the U.S.—and growing in other nations around the world—does not keep pace with the requirements of today’s fight,” Gen. Gary North, commander of U.S. Pacific Air Forces tells Aviation Week. “What most people don’t understand is the growing increase in land- and maritime-based, surface-to-air missiles [which drive the requirement] to have stealth or reduced-radar-cross-section platforms in today’s world.

“As air-to-air missiles develop longer ranges, the abilities to see an adversary [earlier in an engagement] and to work in an intensive electronic warfare attack environment are critical. Every nation has to decide what it needs for self-defense and how much they are willing to contribute to it,” North says.

But if the stealth fleet becomes too small, it has to be supplemented. That is the niche market being worked by Brad Jones, Boeing’s director of F-15 mission systems. The program spans specialized, low-signature variants such as the Silent Eagle for international customers and upgrades to existing F-15C and F-15E aircraft for the USAF. A shrinking U.S. force structure also is part of the formulation, as is the need for international customers to fly interoperable aircraft in short-notice military emergencies such as the NATO-led Libyan campaign.

A first-order question is whether the F-15 is going to be around long enough to purchase new aircraft or upgrade the existing fleets. The evidence suggests that U.S. F-15s, at least, will still be flying combat missions at mid-century.

With new aircraft production slowing down and being cut, a fighter-shortage “bathtub” is looming, meaning there will not be enough to fill operational and training needs. Right now, the Air Force has about 350 F-15Cs and 222 E-model, two-seat strike aircraft. And the service is trying to move quickly to extend the airframe life of both.

A full-scale, F-15C fatigue test is underway at Boeing with the goal of extending the 9,000-effective-flight-hour life expectancy to 18,000 hr.

The Air Force is now also launching a fatigue test program for the stronger-wing, bomb-truck F-15E from its current 8,000-hr. rating to an effective service life of 32,000 hr.

Boeing has contracts to modernize the aircraft with active, electronically scanned array (AESA) radars that have ranges 2-3 times that of the original 56 nm produced by mechanically scanned radar, say radar specialists. It also has raised the mean time between failures to 2,100 hr. from less than 100 hr.

The APG-82(v)1 radar provides an ability to create high-detail maps for precision targeting of long-range, air-launched weapons. Designed to compound the advantages of the radar is the advanced display core processor (ADCP II) now in development. Moreover, there is a digital EW program in the 2013 budget plan.

“So we can see the Air Force’s thought process,” Jones says. “The ADCP II is being loaded up with processors. That is the basis of what an aircraft needs for modernization. The Air Force is putting a foundation into these aircraft” for an extended operational future.

The F-15 can carry long-range, glide and powered weapons such as the cruise-missile-size Champ, which is critical for electronic attack. Moreover, the F-22s—operating at higher altitudes and deeper in the threat rings—can provide long-range targeting for the F-15s. The F-15s then supply a large off-board magazine of missiles for the F-22s, which can serve as command-and-control aircraft.

The ADCP II boxes, which are common to the U.S. Navy’s F/A-18E/F Super Hornets, are bolted into the aircraft as structure. The core software also is the same so the services both benefit from upgrades.

Another F-15 upgrade option is the digital electronic warfare system (DEWS). It also has gigabits of data available and ports linking the radar, processors and EW systems. That provides the route for running information from DEWS to the radar and other emitters to tailor jamming and electronic attack.

“From the hardware standpoint, we’re done,” Jones says. “We’re now talking about software upgrades. The EW system could include electronic attack and other options. All the hardware is in the array. We put in everything we can. We’ve added more channels in the array to do the more exotic tasks.”

The possibilities are there to create a data beam, load it with algorithms and identify an enemy electronic target of interest. “All that has been thought of,” Jones says. “We’ve put in the processing power, the channels and the data buses. So what you need is the algorithms and the data base to go in the processor.”

The lower-signature F-15 Silent Eagle—with canted vertical stabilizers, specialized treatments and materials and other aids—is being proposed to South Korea for its FX-3 program.

“We’ve already installed the AESA, incorporated the DEWS and put in fly-by-wire,” Jones says. “All we’re doing extra for [South] Korea is adding a large area display and a conformal weapons bay [for a decreased radar cross section]. But it gives your fighter Day 1, forward-sector stealth. In three hours, you can put the pylons, weapons and fuel tanks on, do your checks and be ready to go. After the special missions are done, you can return to carrying exterior payloads.

“We now have conformal weapons bays,” Jones notes. “The engine face has been considered in the changes. We did not change the engine intakes because that would require changing big structure. An option is grill work over the turbine face that is similar to what like was done with the F/A-18 Super Hornets. For a relatively low amount of dollars you can get a certain reduction in signature.”

photo USAF

ST. LOUIS, Nov. 29, 2011 – Boeing Company

The Boeing Company received a $20 million contract in September from the U.S. Air Force to upgrade the visual systems in the F-15C Mission Training Centers. Twelve MTCs, located at Langley Air Force Base, Va., Royal Air Force Lakenheath, United Kingdom, and Kadena Air Base, Japan, will be upgraded with Boeing’s Constant Resolution Visual System (CRVS).

CRVS is the centerpiece of a complete training suite that provides 360 degrees of immersive training, with a significantly lower cost than previous visual systems. By using standard, off-the-shelf projectors, the system is able to take advantage of the rapidly improving technology emerging in the commercial marketplace.

“A key feature of the CRVS is the ability to train with the Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System and night vision goggles, both of which will be used in the F-15C MTC,” said Mark McGraw, Boeing vice president for Training Systems & Services.

The Boeing CRVS reduces total system life cycle cost by minimizing the number of projectors by one-third to one-half the number of projectors used in competing systems. The system is compatible with a full array of fast jet and rotary wing cockpits.

"CRVS is unique because it is the only system to provide constant resolution throughout the field of view,” added McGraw. “It eliminates a key problem with other systems, where the visibility of targets varies depending on where the pilot looks. Our design provides increased performance, yet is simple in concept.”

Installation of the F-15C visual systems will begin in October 2012 and will be completed by January 2013, allowing training to start by the end of that month.

Photo: US Navy

Nov 29, 2011 By David A. Fulghum, Bill Sweetman - aerospace daily and defense report

Are there alternatives to keep U.S. strike aviation viable if the F-35 program is delayed, reduced or killed by the budget sequestration?

The initial options available to Pentagon leaders, should the Joint Strike Fighter prove unaffordable, range from outright termination of the program to the deletion or delay of either or both the Navy’s F-35C or the Marines’ F-35B. Terminating the Air Force’s F-35A would kill the program, but it could be delayed, or full-rate production for the USAF could be cut back from the current goal of 80 aircraft a year.

“There is no alternative” and “There is no Plan B,” JSF advocates have repeatedly said in reaction to any plans to trim the colossal project. However, the threat of sequestration, the reality of fiscal crisis and the certainty of cuts to planned budgets are emerging at a point where the program and Pentagon leadership have yet to produce firm guarantees about the JSF’s future in terms of initial operational capability dates, procurement and support costs.

But there also are U.S. and international groups working on plans to sustain other in-production fighters like the F-15, F-16, F/A-18 and European products through mid-century to minimize the predicted fighter shortage. Supplementing those less stealthy designs will be unmanned strike designs, standoff weapons, electronic attack devices and signature reduction packages.

Nonetheless, vastly complicating the F-35 issue is the role of international partners. Individually, none of the eight partner nations is expected to take even 5% of the planned production run. But they need aircraft early, with the result that – under the current program of record – the collective partner buy in the low rate initial production (LRIP) phase is comparable in size to that of the USAF.

If the partners respond to delays and cost increases by sliding their own purchases to the right, or by leaving the program altogether, that will reduce production rates and increase unit costs during the LRIP phase, which is designed around a steep ramp-up from a few dozen aircraft annually to more than 200 by the fiscal 2016 buy year.

High production rates (several times higher than any other fighter today) and large numbers have always been the foundation for the JSF’s economics, both in terms of procurement and support costs. Major investments have been made in assembly, test and completion facilities, and a complex supply chain involving many small and medium enterprises has been established, premised on large volumes of work. The result is a system that may not be well optimized for the production rates seen in other fighter programs.

Close to two years after then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates fired program office director Maj. Gen. David Heinz, the JSF effort was declared in critical breach of Nunn-McCurdy limits, and there is no final estimate of delays and overruns, since so far none of the customer services has been able to establish a firm date for initial operational capability.

The project does not even have Milestone B approval (a legal requirement for systems development and demonstration and low-rate initial production.) The original MS-B was issued in 2001 and rescinded last year as a consequence of the Nunn-McCurdy breach.

The Defense Acquisition Board is charged with re-establishing MS-B and was expected to do so in May, but it was kicked back to fall and still has not happened. Part of DAB’s job is also to resolve disparities between estimates of procurement and operating costs from the contractors, the program office, and independent reviewers such as Navair and the Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation office.