November 28, 2011 defpro.com

ORLANDO | Underscoring the growing need to bring training solutions to where soldiers are located, the U.S. Army has selected Rockwell Collins to provide additional Transportable Black Hawk Operations Simulators (T-BOS). The contract, valued at $35 million, calls for deliveries to be complete by September 2015.

“Rockwell Collins has developed a strong track record of delivering the T-BOS on-time and on-budget with the kind of capability that has made it the U.S. Army’s standard deployable training device for the Black Hawk helicopter,” said LeAnn Ridgeway, vice president and general manager of Simulation & Training Solutions for Rockwell Collins. “Its mobile nature saves time and resources by taking the training to pilots in the field and it is the only U.S. Army accredited flight training device for the UH-60M aircraft.”

T-BOS is a high-fidelity flight simulator capable of being deployed to forward operating bases. It is air, land and sea transportable and can be ready for training within eight hours of arrival due to its own integral power and environmental control unit. The T-BOS is equipped with UH-60M avionics including Rockwell Collins' cockpit displays.

28.11.2011 DEFENSETECH

Let’s start this post-Thanksgiving week off with a picture that reminds us the era of unmanned strike jets flying off aircraft carriers is fast approaching. Yup, those stealthy looking planes are Northrop Grumman’s X-47 Unmanned Combat Air System demonstrator jets. The first one took to the skies in February and the second X-47, dubbed Air Vehicle-2, had its first flight out of Edwards Air Force Base in California on Nov. 22. The plane flew to 5,000 feet and flew in several giant circles near the base before landing.

Now, AV-2 will stay at Edwards while the first jet is going to be shipped to NAS Patuxent River, Md., in the next month or so where the Navy will practice simulated carrier take-offs and landings with the jet. If that testing goes well, the plane will start landing on a real aircraft carrier in 2013, using this technology.

All of this is meant to pave the way for the Navy’s Unmanned Carrier-Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike drone; a stealthy, fighter-sized, air-to-air refuelable jet that can carry bombs and ISR gear over fairly heavily defended targets. The Navy wants UCLASS to be operational by 2018, so it’s very likely going to be based on jets that are already flying, like the X-47B.

Here’s a picture of the second X-47B on its maiden flight.

28 November 2011 army-technology.com

Harris has awarded a contract to GE Intelligent Platforms to supply PPC7EP single-board computers for the US Army multiple launch rocket system (MLRS) M-270 high-mobility artillery rocket systems (HIMARS) programme.

The subsystem incorporates a PMCGA4C graphics accelerator card with maximum configurational flexibility and can be deployed in each vehicle.

HIMARS enables the troops to engage and defeat artillery, air defence concentrations, trucks, light armour and personnel carriers, as well as support troop and supply concentrations.

The new contract is valued in excess of $3.5m and is likely to have a ceiling value of approximately $7m.

Harris was subcontracted by Lockheed Martin to develop electronics for the US Army's MLRS/HIMARS platform earlier this year.

November 28th, 2011 By Air Force News Agency – DEFENCE TALK

Air Force senior leaders are looking at ways to balance the ratio of regular and Reserve Component Airmen to create the most effective and efficient combat capability in austere budget times.

Secretary of the Air Force Michael Donley is leading collaborative efforts between active, Reserve and Guard leaders to find the right force composition that will ensure the total force remains healthy and viable.

"Finding the right balance of regular, Reserve and Guard forces is the key to maintaining future Air Force capabilities during dramatic period of budget austerity," said Air Force Chief of Staff Norton Schwartz.

Of the forces serving on active duty today in the combat air forces, 58 percent are active-duty Airmen and 42 percent are from the reserve component - made up of Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard - according to Donley in a speech to the Air Force Association in September.

The total force leaders are working together closely to determine the right mix for the active and reserve components which is economical, sustainable and meets the nation's and combatant commanders' requirements.

"One of our biggest lessons learned is that we do have access to reserve component Airmen on short notice," Schwartz said. "They have stepped up to the plate every time we've called to perform both daily operations, as well as strategic surges."

Another key link to maintaining the right mix of regular and reserve component Airmen is to make it easier to move in and out of active-duty status so our Airmen can serve our country, retain successful careers and still save taxpayers' money, Schwartz said.

"Our Reserve and Guard programs are exceptionally efficient and cost-effective," he said. "Twenty years of combat have taught us that we rely on Reserve Airmen to answer the call of service when our nation needs them."

At a recent meeting at Bolling Air Force Base, Md., Donley conferred with Schwartz as well as Undersecretary of the Air Force Erin Conaton, Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Manpower and Reserve Affairs Daniel Ginsberg, Air Force Vice Chief of Staff Gen. Phillip M. Breedlove, Gen. Craig R. McKinley Jr., the chief of the National Guard Bureau; Lt. Gen. Charles E. Stenner Jr., the chief of the Air Force Reserve; and Lt. Gen. Harry M. Wyatt III, the director of the Air National Guard.

"We need to capitalize on the incredible synergy we gain from reserve and regular Air Force Airmen working as one team," Schwartz said. "With the proper balance, I know we can create the strategic depth and an immediate-response force that is efficient, effective and has a combat capability second to none."

November 27, 2011: STRATEGY PAGE

A popular (but unofficial) accessory for the current combat helmet is an attachment that provides full face protection. This comprises a ballistic (fragment proof) transparent visor and a continuous mouth-cheek protector below that. This BATLSKIN device provides better protection to the face (where 30 percent of wounds occur these days) and more stable attachment of night-vision devices to the helmet. The BATLSKIN equipment includes a pad system for the standard ECH/ACH helmet.

The new ECH (Enhanced Combat Helmet) is just coming into service. The lighter (than previous helmets) ECH is even more resistant to bullets and fragments than the current ACH. When ECH was tested to see how well it could resist high-powered rifle bullets, it was found that in most cases it would stop anything fired from a sniper rifle. Overall, it was calculated that the ECH was 40 percent more resistant to projectiles and 70 percent stronger than the current ACH helmet. ECH is about eight percent lighter than the 1.4 kg (3.1 pound) ACH it replaces.

The ECH is made of a new thermoplastic material (UHMWP, or Ultra-High Molecular Weight Polyethylene). It is lighter and stronger than the Kevlar used in the ACH and earlier PASGT and, it turned out, provided much better protection as well. The ECH costs $600 each, twice as much as the ACH. If unofficial items like BATLSKIN prove popular, they may show up as official accessories, and using some of the high tech protection that went into the ECH.

November 26, 2011: STRATEGY PAGE

The U.S. Air Force is upgrading its F-22 fighters, at a cost of $39 million each. This is just the latest of several upgrades for the F-22, which entered service six years ago. Upgrading combat aircraft is common, and necessary. But the F-22 upgrades have been more expensive than previous aircraft. The F-22 is also more expensive to maintain. That costs $44,000 per flight hour, compared to $30,000 per hour for the older F-15 that the F-22 is replacing. The F-22 per-hour cost is nearly twice what it is for the F-16. While it requires 19 man hours of maintenance for each F-16 flight hour, the F-22 requires 34 hours. The manufacturer originally said it would be less than ten hours. Most of this additional F-22 expense (and man hours) is for special materials and labor needed to keep the aircraft invisible to radar.

The main problem is the radar absorbent material used on the aircraft. The B-2 had a similar problem, which was eventually brought under control. But even then, the B-2 cost more than twice as much to operate than the half century old B-52. The B-2 and F-22 use different types of radar absorbent materials, so many of the B-2 solutions will not work for the F-22. Some of the F-22 electronics were not as reliable as the air force expected.

The F-35 uses a different approach to defeating radar signals, and the manufacturer insists that F-35 maintenance costs will be closer to that for the F-15. But Lockheed Martin has been saying, for years, that its F-22 would be cheaper to maintain than existing aircraft. The air force never challenged this, at least not in public. Instead, the air force tried to keep the high operating costs a secret.

In addition, the F-22 costs more than three times as much as the aircraft it was replacing. The air force wants to build more than 187, and has allies in Congress who want the jobs (and votes) continued production would generate. But the Department of Defense was reluctant to spend that kind of money, especially when there so many other programs seeking funds (like electronic warfare aircraft, UAVs and upgrades for F-15s and F-16s). Thus, two years ago, the Department of Defense decided to terminate F-22 production at 187 aircraft. This resulted in each aircraft costing (including development and production spending), $332 million. Just the production costs of the last F-22s built was $153.2 million. Added to the cost of the last few aircraft was a $147 million fee the Department of Defense agreed to pay if the production line was shut down. This goes to pay for shutting down facilities and terminating contracts with hundreds of suppliers.

The F-22 is a superb aircraft, probably the most capable fighter in the world. But the development and manufacturing costs kept rising until it became too expensive for the media, voters and politicians. The air force was able to build it, but they couldn't sell it to the people who paid the bills.

Back in the 1900s, the F-22 was a $62 billion program, of which development accounted for $18.9 billion (this was a spending cap imposed by Congress). A decade before that, the air force was planning to buy 750 F-22s. Costs kept going up for two decades, and Congress refused to provide more money. So, for $62 billion, the air force ended up getting fewer aircraft.

The air force ran into a similar problem with the B-2 bomber, which became so expensive they were only allowed to build 21, and these cost $2.1 billion each. About half of that was development expense. Actual construction costs for each of those aircraft was about $933 million. Still pretty high, mainly because a lot of special machinery and factories had to be built to manufacture the many custom components.

The air force likes to point out that if the original (1986) plan had been followed, each of 132 B-2s would have cost $438 million each. But then the entire program would have cost $58.2 billion, versus $44.3 billion for the 21 plane program (which included $10 billion more R&D expense).

New technology gives a weapon, especially an aircraft, an edge in combat. But since World War II, most military technology has been developed in peacetime conditions. This means it is more than twice as expensive, as there is no wartime urgency to overcome bureaucratic inertia (and emphasis on covering your ass, which is very time consuming and expensive) and hesitation (because you don't have a war going on to settle disputes over what will work best). Developing this new technology takes longer in peacetime, which also raises the cost, and fewer units of a new weapon are produced (driving up the amount of development cost each weapon will have to carry.) If several hundred B-2s were produced under wartime conditions, each aircraft would have probably cost $200 million, or less. In other words, a tenth of what it actually cost. Same deal with the mythical $35 million F-22, or any other high tech weapon.

Other nations have adapted more effectively to peacetime development conditions. But the United States has the largest amount of peacetime military research and development, and this has created a unique military/industry/media/political atmosphere that drives costs up to the point where voters, politicians and the media will no longer support them.

photo USAF

November 26, 2011: STRATEGY PAGE

For over five years, the American infantry's favorite UAV has been the tiny (2.2 kg/4.4 pound) Raven micro-UAV. But over the last few years, the slightly larger (3.2 kg/7 pound) Desert Hawk 3 (DH3) has been gaining in popularity. DH3 uses an Xbox like controller, which most troops are already familiar with. The UAV, once the parts are snapped together, has a 1.4 meter (54 inch) wingspan and is 92 cm (36 inches) long. New operators can be trained, on the job, in about a week.

Battery powered, the DH3 can stay in the air for up to 90 minutes, flying a route specified by the operator and using onboard GPS and flight software for guidance. The DH3 can be equipped with daylight or night (heat imaging) cameras. Because of the larger carrying capacity, DH3 can carry a more powerful and stable camera than Raven. Everything seen on each flight is recorded, and simultaneously transmitted back to the operator, who views the video on a handheld controller or laptop computer.

DH3 cruises at about 80 kilometers an hour and at an altitude of 100-160 meters (300-500 feet). The UAV can operate up to 15 kilometers from its base station. The UAV is launched using a large elastic rope (a bungee cord, basically) and lands by just coming in low and turning off its motor. The Desert Hawk can also be hand launched like the Raven, but a strong arm is required.

The DH3 is made of plastic. The operators do not fly the Desert Hawk, but they can change its flight pattern while it's flying a mission, or command it to just circle a location. An onboard computer handles all the details of flying correctly and not spinning out of control. After one mission, the operator can put in a fresh set of batteries and launch it again.

While DH3s can be issued in ones and twos to infantry units, the British form Desert Hawk detachments. These units consist of two sergeants and 236 kg (520 pounds) of waterproof carrying cases containing six UAVs, a laptop computer, hand held controllers, communications equipment and a spare parts and repair kit.

The Desert Hawk has several advantages over the Raven. Desert Hawk is quieter, more stable (because it is heavier and larger) and mounts a camera that can move independently of the aircraft. Because of this, most infantry have found these advantages sufficient to select DH 3 over the Raven.

The DH3 was long used mainly for route security (protecting convoys from roadside bombs and ambush), base security and in support of raids and patrols. Captured Taliban are united in their hatred of the DH3, because it makes it difficult to remain hidden, and get away safely from foreign troops and smart bombs.

Des marines testent un navire fonctionnant avec un biocarburant composé à 50% d'algues.

Crédits photo : Former Navy Gallery - New One is USNavy URL/U.S. Navy

25/11/2011 Par Laure Mandeville – LeFigaro.fr

Soucieuse d'assurer sa sécurité énergétique, la Défense américaine s'est fixée comme objectif de porter à 25 % la part d'énergies renouvelables dans sa consommation d'ici à 2025.

Un acteur inattendu pourrait voler au secours de la révolution verte américaine en panne : le Pentagone. Confrontée à des dilemmes budgétaires de plus en plus déchirants et inquiète d'assurer sa sécurité énergétique en réduisant sa dépendance à l'or noir étranger, l'institution militaire américaine, qui consomme plus de 300.000 barils de pétrole par jour, a décidé d'opérer une conversion stratégique, en fixant à 25 % du total sa consommation d'énergies renouvelables d'ici à 2025. À cet effet, le département de la Défense va investir dans trois directions : l'amélioration de l'efficacité énergétique des véhicules, les biocarburants et les énergies renouvelables. Entre 2006 et 2009, l'investissement dans ces nouveaux secteurs est passé de 400 millions à 1,6 milliard de dollars, augmentant de 300 %.

La Marine et le corps des marines sont particulièrement engagés dans le processus, puisqu'ils entendent porter à 50 % la part des énergies alternatives, comme le solaire ou les biocarburants, d'ici à 2020, et réduire de moitié la consommation d'essence pour les véhicules non combattants d'ici à 2015. Une flotte verte, fonctionnant avec des carburants alternatifs, est en cours de construction. Nombre d'avions volent déjà avec des biocarburants.

Le secrétaire à la Marine, Ray Mabus, explique que ces décisions sont plus destinées à protéger la vie des soldats qu'à préserver la qualité de l'air. Les nombreux convois qui transportent les stocks d'essence aux troupes à travers l'Afghanistan suscitent en effet des pertes inacceptables, explique-t-il. Son espoir est de réduire cette dépendance en produisant de l'énergie sur place.

Ces choix verts pourraient avoir un effet considérable sur l'ensemble de l'industrie des énergies renouvelables, vu le gigantesque poids économique de ­l'armée américaine. Un projet d'équipement en panneaux solaires de quelque 160.000 sites, à travers une centaine de bases militaires, est en négociation avec la société Solar City. Des projets similaires existent pour la construction d'éoliennes. «Le département de la Défense consomme plus d'énergie que les trois quarts des pays sur terre, explique Phyllis Cuttino, directrice du programme d'énergies propres au Pew Center. Les militaires sont dans une position unique pour stimuler la transformation énergétique», dont le secteur privé a tant besoin.

Le caractère structuré et hiérarchisé de l'institution pourrait aider à avancer rapidement. Il existe pourtant des tiraillements. Certains experts se demandent pourquoi les militaires devraient être obligés de se soumettre à des objectifs chiffrés. «Mener une révolution verte n'est pas une mission légitime pour des forces armées», a par exemple confié Jack Spencer, de la Heritage Foundation. Le secrétaire à la Marine, Ray Mabus, prévient toutefois qu'il ne s'agit pas d'un effet de mode, mais d'une nécessité absolue.

Hawker Beechcraft a fait équipe avec CMC, CAE, P&WC, L-3 WESCAM

et Lockheed Martin pour présenter l'AT-6 (notre photo), un appareil qui

devait être construit à Wichita, au Kansas.

Photo fournie par Hawker Beechcraft

24 novembre 2011 Marie Tison - La Presse.ca

(Montréal) L'US Air Force (USAF) a rejeté du revers de la main un avion militaire présenté par Hawker Beechcraft et quelques partenaires, dont les sociétés québécoises Pratt & Whitney Canada (P&WC), CAE et CMC Esterline.

Hawker Beechcraft a dénoncé cette décision et a demandé au Government Accountability Office, l'équivalent américain du Vérificateur général, de la réviser.

Les partenaires québécois se sont cependant montrés philosophes. «Évidemment, cette nouvelle nous déçoit, mais il y a d'autres occasions d'affaires pour cet appareil sur la scène mondiale», a déclaré la directrice des relations publiques de CMC, Janka Dvornik, dans une entrevue téléphonique avec La Presse Affaires.

L'USAF a lancé un appel d'offres pour 35 avions légers de soutien (des appareils turbopropulsés), un contrat évalué à près de 1 milliard US. Les 20 premiers appareils doivent servir aux forces afghanes alors que les 15 autres doivent être utilisés comme appareils d'entraînement pour les pilotes de l'USAF. Des commandes subséquentes pourraient faire grimper le nombre total d'appareils à 55.

Hawker Beechcraft a fait équipe avec CMC, CAE, P&WC, L-3 WESCAM et Lockheed Martin pour présenter l'AT-6, un appareil qui devait être construit à Wichita, au Kansas. Hawker faisait face à un seul autre concurrent: le Super Tucano d'Embraer, présenté par l'avionneur brésilien et la société américaine Sierra Nevada. Embraer a fait savoir qu'elle assemblerait les appareils à Jacksonville, en Floride.

La semaine dernière, l'USAF a communiqué à Hawker Beechcraft pour faire savoir qu'elle excluait l'AT-6 du processus d'appel d'offres. L'USAF n'a toutefois pas fourni de motifs et a refusé de rencontrer Hawker Beechcraft pour discuter de la question.

«Cette décision nous déconcerte, a fait savoir Hawker Beechcraft dans un communiqué. Cela fait deux ans que nous travaillons de près avec l'USAF. Nos partenaires et nous avons investi plus de 100 millions de dollars pour pouvoir répondre aux critères de l'USAF.»

Mme Dvornik a reconnu que CMC avait investi du temps et des ressources, mais elle n'a pas voulu préciser la valeur de cet investissement. CMC doit fournir de l'équipement avionique pour l'appareil.

CAE a également refusé de révéler la valeur de son investissement, mais la porte-parole du fabricant de simulateurs de vol, Pascale Alpha, a affirmé qu'il ne s'agissait pas d'une somme significative. Comme Mme Dvornik, elle a fait valoir que cet investissement ne visait pas spécifiquement le contrat de l'USAF, mais l'ensemble des occasions qui se présenteront pour l'AT-6.

«Nous continuons à travailler sur ces autres possibilités, a-t-elle déclaré. Nous avons un très bon produit.»

CAE est responsable du volet de formation pour l'AT-6.

Le motoriste de l'avion d'Hawker Beechcraft, P&WC, a également investi dans le projet d'AT-6.

«Nous avons comme politique de ne pas révéler ce genre d'investissement, mais pour P&WC, il s'agit d'un montant non matériel», a déclaré la vice-présidente aux communications de l'entreprise, Nancy Germa.

L'entreprise de Longueuil occupe cependant une position particulièrement confortable dans le cadre de l'appel d'offres de l'USAF. En effet, P&WC propulse le concurrent de l'AT-6, le Super Tucano, avec le même moteur, le légendaire PT6A. P&WC a fabriqué plus de 36 000 de ces moteurs depuis le lancement d'une première version, dans les années 60.

Nov 24, 2011 (SPX) SpaceWar.com

San Diego CA - Kratos Defense and Security Solutions, reports that its Weapon Systems Solutions Division - Digital Fusion Solutions, Inc. (DFSI) subsidiary was a critical team member of Aerodyne, Inc., which was awarded a contract with potential value over $105 million to provide technical and engineering support for the U.S. Army Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Project Office.

Kratos and the Aerodyne Team have been performing mission critical UAS-related work for this extremely important National Security customer for the past five years.

Under the Project Manager, Army UAS Technical Services contract, Kratos-DFSI will provide significant technical expertise to support the UAS Operations Center, as well as all UAS Platforms and functional divisions, in the areas of operational readiness, flight hour/sortie historical data, maintenance action records, and all Standard Army Management Information Systems (STAMIS) data elements.

In addition to UAS Operations Center support, DFSI supports PM UAS-wide automation initiatives and system sustainment activities such as the UAS Dashboard, the UAS portal/intranet (SharePoint), custom database applications, automated processes and workflows, and Lean Six Sigma business process improvement efforts.

The team's five-year contract has a base value of more than $9 million, with five additional options. If all options are exercised, the contract value will exceed $105 million. The work will be performed primarily at the Army's Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville, AL.

"The UAS PO is committed to continuous improvement of their processes and systems," said Jeff Williams, DFSI Senior Director. "DFSI has had the unique opportunity to lead or support many of these process improvement initiatives over the past 6 years, and we are pleased that we can continue supporting the UAS PO as part of the Aerodyne team."

Richard Selvaggio, President of Kratos' Weapons Systems Solutions Division, said, "We are extremely proud to continue our support of this valuable customer.

Kratos business today is heavily involved in United States unmanned aerial systems assets, including the manufacturing of ground control stations, transport and protection systems, avionics and command and control systems, electronics and the weaponization of UASs. We believe that unmanned systems will play an increasingly important role in this country's national security and that Kratos is very well positioned to support this mission."

23 November 2011 by defenceWeb

The US Army has concluded its second Network Integration Evaluation exercise, moving closer to deploying an integrated battlefield network after collecting soldier feedback on the latest tactical communications technologies.

The three-week event, known as Network Integration Evaluation, or NIE, 12.1, represented the first time that all of the components of the Army network to be fielded in fiscal year 2013 were united and evaluated in a realistic operational environment. Soldiers at the lowest echelons were brought into the network, communicating through text messages, digital photos and chat rooms.

Company commanders made quick decisions using information received in real time while moving around the battlefield. New hardware and software was integrated for the first time outside of a lab, and put to the test in mountainous desert terrain that mirrors the communications challenges in rugged places such as Afghanistan.

"We are getting a great look at connecting the Soldier to the network, and a fantastic look at mission command on the move -- for the first time in an operational setting," said Col. John Morrison, director of the Army G-3/5/7 LandWarNet-Battle Command Directorate. "For the first time we've got everything talking together, so now we can establish an integrated network baseline. It's just been phenomenal."

The second in a series of semi-annual field exercises designed to rapidly integrate and mature the Army's tactical network, NIE 12.1 involved 3,800 Soldiers of the 2nd Brigade, 1st Armored Division evaluating dozens of systems in operational scenarios. Soldier feedback and test results from the NIEs are directly shaping the makeup of the Army's network Capability Set 13, which will begin fielding to up to eight brigade combat teams in fiscal year 2013.

Additional brigades will receive the latest network assets as part of Capability Set 14.

Those capability sets will include greater bandwidth to transmit voice, video and data across the battlefield, as well as the ability to bring situational awareness and mission command information down to the dismounted Soldier.

NIE 12.1 was also host to the Joint Tactical Radio System, or JTRS, Rifleman Radio program of record test. This radio, which is carried by platoon, squad and team-level Soldiers for voice communications, can connect with handheld devices to transmit text messages, GPS locations and other data. Soldiers with 2/1 AD also informally evaluated more than 45 other systems, including solutions proposed by industry to meet the Army's identified network capability gaps.

"Getting information technology to the field in a rapid fashion is what we're trying to do here," said Col. Dan Hughes, the Army's system of systems integration director. "Some of the systems that are here are systems that industry paid their money for, that they built, that they brought out, and are in the hands of soldiers probably five to six years before they would be in the hands of soldiers if we had gone through the regular (process). And they're getting feedback immediately."

That feedback, ranging from rave reviews to harsh criticism, will inform the Army's decisions about what equipment to purchase and make part of the next capability set, as well as how some gear could be improved with certain changes.

That was the case with Nett Warrior, a Soldier-worn mission command system that 2/1 AD soldiers deemed valuable but too bulky during the first NIE event. Those results informed Army leadership to revise the requirement, which resulted in a slimmed down version and a reduction of procurement costs for the device. This new version that leverages commercial technology debuted at this NIE and provided dismounted combat leaders with essential information, such as digital maps, text messaging and the GPS locations of friendly forces.

"With a radio you can tell them where you're at, but with this they don't even have to ask," said Pfc. Philip Kerr, one of the soldiers using Nett Warrior in mission threads here. "If there's ever a situation where I'm down here and I can't see the other side of a town, I can pop it up on a (digital) map. I can then see where everyone else is at, and that can be very valuable in case something goes wrong."

The Nett Warrior devices connect to the network via the Rifleman Radio and its Soldier Radio Waveform. They run Joint Battle Command-Platform, or JBC-P, software, the future version of the widely fielded Force XXI Battle Command Brigade and Below/Blue Force Tracking, known as FBCB2/BFT, system, which allows units to track friendly forces and exchange messages in order to synchronize operations and avoid fratricide. The software will host applications developed by the Army and third parties -- similar to the "apps" marketplace used on the Apple iPhone or Google Android operating systems.

"We want to take the same capabilities that we have in our vehicles, in our command posts, in our aircraft, and provide them to the dismounted Soldier, specifically at the team leader through platoon leader level," said Maj. Anthony Douglas, assistant product manager for Blue Force Tracking -- Software. "Right now, Soldiers in Afghanistan are using (legacy) radios and hand and arm signals to communicate with each other."

The current version of FBCB2, known as the Joint Capabilities Release, or JCR, for its interoperability with the Marine Corps, earned positive Soldier feedback for its new chat function. JCR Chat works like an online chat room within FBCB2, allowing users to instant-message in real time over the BFT 2 satellite network.

"It's super easy to use -- anybody that's been on a chat room before knows how to use it," Staff Sgt. Cody Moose said. "You can have multiple chat rooms, too. We use it for every mission."

The Soldier input and system data collected during NIE 12.1 will be reviewed by a triad consisting of the Brigade Modernization Command, the Army Test and Evaluation Command and the System of Systems Integration Directorate under the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology, or ASA(ALT).

The next event, known as NIE 12.2, will take place in the spring and further solidify the Capability Set 13 network. The six-week event will include the formal operational test for the Warfighter Information Network-Tactical, known as WIN-T, Increment 2, the Army's on-the-move, satellite-based communications network, which was informally evaluated at NIE 12.1.

WIN-T Increment 2 is a major upgrade to the tactical network backbone that will extend satellite communications to the company level, allowing Soldiers to communicate seamlessly through voice, data, images and video -- even in complex terrain that can break line-of-sight radio connections.

Lockheed did well to exceed its 2011 testing goals for the F-35, but it remains late on technical fixes, wildly over budget, and well behind IOC goals. (PEO photo)

November 23, 2011 defense-aerospace.com

(Source: Lexington Institute; issued November 21, 2011)S

Aviation Week & Space Technology tells that the nation's biggest weapons development program has surpassed its testing goals for calendar year 2011, and is on track to do the same in 2012 (Click here for report). The goal for 2011 was 872 flight tests, and as of last Thursday, 875 had been completed.

This is very good news, since three U.S. military services and a dozen allies need various versions of the plane to replace aging Cold War fighters. Without it, they can't preserve U.S. air superiority through mid-century.

So where are all the news stories highlighting the importance of this achievement and praising American ingenuity? Over the last several years, news services and the general media have reported every setback the F-35 program has faced, real or imagined. You know, like the trillion-dollar number to operate the plane through 2065 that it now turns out none of the military users believes (they're getting ready to challenge the methods and assumptions supporting the calculation).

I checked news.google for F-35 stories this morning, and it came up mostly with headlines like "Lockheed's F-35 Not in Budget 'Cross Hairs', Dempsey Says," and "McCain Raises Concerns About F-35 Cost Overruns." Something tells me if I wait a few days for the Fourth Estate to digest the good news from the F-35 program, I'm still going to find mostly negative reports about how it's faring. I predict all the major news outlets will decide it isn't worth reporting that the Pentagon's most expensive and complicated weapons program is making steady progress. Aviation Week and the rest of the trade press will notice, but the New York Times? Not a chance.

This tells you some important things about the way news is reported in the general media. First, it underscores the preference of reporters and editors for stories involving conflict of some sort. If it's good news, it usually isn't considered news at all. Second, it reflects the ideological biases of some outlets, which will report any kind of lurid nonsense about big weapons programs with minimal checking, but just can't be bothered to tell you the other side of the story. And third, it suggests why people who are exposed to a great deal of daily news tend to be pessimistic about America's future -- because all the technological breakthroughs and economic achievements get short shrift, while bad news hogs the front page.

Oh, and it also tells you one more thing about the prevailing approach to gathering the news. It tells you why consumers are walking away in droves, preferring social media and internet aggregators to the daily downer they get each day from traditional outlets. People just don't believe (or don't care about) the version of reality they are getting from newspapers and television news, so they are voting with their feet to get information from other sources.

If you look at the way the F-35 story has been reported over the last several years, that reaction is easy to understand. It's an essential program that is making steady progress, but you'd never know that from reading stories about it in the general media.


(EDITOR’S NOTE: Readers may find it of interest to know that the Lexington Institute, as its CEO has publicly acknowledged but neglects to mention here, is a paid consultant to Lockheed Martin, maker of the F-35.

November 23rd, 2011 By US Department of Defense – DEFENCE TALK

Partnerships and modernization hold the key to meeting the challenges facing the United States and its allies as they near a turning point after a decade of war and adapt to new challenges and priorities, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta said here today.

In a speech at the Halifax International Security Forum, the secretary said the alliance system remains the bedrock of the U.S. approach to world security and is "an enduring advantage and force multiplier that no rival possesses."

"As we in the United States confront the fiscal realities of limited resources, we believe that we have the opportunity to establish a force for the future that, while smaller, is agile, flexible, deployable and technologically equipped to confront the threats of the future," he said. "It must be complemented by a full range of America's national security capabilities: strong intelligence, strong diplomacy, a strong economy, strong technology, developments in cyber capabilities -- using that great experience we gained from 10 years of war to be innovative, to be creative about the kind of force that we need for the future."

"But it must also be complemented by strong alliances, partnerships [and] regional efforts at cooperation -- all have to be part of the answer," he added.

The U.S. military alone, Panetta said, cannot be all things to all nations.

"We will maintain our excellence. We will maintain our leadership," he said. "But in the effort to maintain our excellence and our leadership, we also have to meet our security commitments around the world. And in doing that, we must -- and we will -- sharpen the application of our resources, better deploy our forces in the world, and share our burdens more and more effectively with our partners. And frankly, all of our allies need to do the same."

Terrorism, nuclear proliferation, cyber attacks and other threats facing the world do not recognize national boundaries and can't be addressed effectively by any one nation alone, Panetta said.

"Such transnational threats demand a shared response," he said. "That's why I have made it a priority to build and maintain partnerships across the globe. It's a theme I reiterated extensively during the international travel that I made last month in Europe, in Asia and in the Middle East. It has thus loomed large in our strategic review of the Department of Defense. This review is an effort not only to grapple with new budgetary realities, but also to adapt the force to better confront current and future security challenges."

No global alliance has been more successful than NATO, the secretary said, crediting that success to decades of investment in capabilities and joint training and the determination of leaders in the trans-Atlantic community. Revitalizing NATO, he added, is a centerpiece of President Barack Obama's administration's efforts to build stronger alliances and partnerships.

He noted that NATO has expanded from being an alliance geared toward collective territorial defense to take on expeditionary operations outside its area.

"We have seen the payoff in Afghanistan," he said, "where 49 countries have come together largely under a NATO umbrella, expending both blood and treasure to prevent al-Qaida from ever again being able to use Afghanistan as a safe haven. To all our [International Security Assistance Force] partners, we are profoundly grateful for your sacrifice and for your steadfast partnership."

Panetta praised Canada in particular for its decade of contributions in Afghanistan, noting that Canadian soldiers fought in the Taliban heartland of Kandahar province, and he also praised Canada for its leadership in NATO's recent success in Libya.

As it works to help in forging a stronger NATO, the United States will continue to play a decisive role in safeguarding its partners' shared interests, Panetta said. Part of doing so, he added, is enabling allies and partners to contribute their share to the common defense.

"To do that, however, the alliance needs to develop new capabilities to keep pace with emerging threats -- even in an era of fiscal austerity," the secretary said. "As I said [at a NATO defense ministers conference] in Brussels last month, these challenging economic times cannot be an excuse for walking away from our security responsibilities. I refuse to believe that we have to choose between fiscal responsibility and national defense. Instead, we must commit to ensuring NATO addresses key shortfalls in areas such as intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance; precision strike munitions; and aerial refueling and lift capabilities."

NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen's "Smart Defense" initiative provides a framework for allied nations to pool their declining defense funds more efficiently and effectively, Panetta said, adding that the alliance plans to make more progress in that regard at its upcoming summit in Chicago.

Modernizing NATO also means ensuring that investments focus on the most likely future threats, particularly those posed by countries like Iran that are developing intermediate-range missiles capable of targeting Europe. The United States has been leading the way in NATO's missile defense efforts, most recently by announcing it will deploy four Aegis ships to the Mediterranean Sea, the secretary said. Missile defense, he added, also presents an opportunity for NATO and Russia to cooperate in dealing with threats emanating from the Middle East.

But while missile defense is a tangible sign of NATO modernization efforts, the alliance also must constantly assess the forms of engagement that are most appropriate for the alliance's capabilities and the threats it faces. These, he said, are the kinds of discussions taking place in the Defense Department's strategy and global posture review, as officials try to be disciplined in setting priorities to maintain the U.S. global leadership role while meeting the department's fiscal responsibility to the nation's taxpayers.

Addressing concerns about the effect those discussions may have on the future of the U.S. military presence in Europe, Panetta offered assurances.

"Let me be clear at the outset that the United States will always ensure that we maintain the right mix of forces and capabilities, including those stationed in Europe, prepared to meet the full range of security challenges acting in concert with our allies -- including instability on its periphery and unforeseen developments," he said. "At the same time, we must build on our success with the trans-Atlantic alliance and further enhance our collective security by building enduring and capable 21st-century security architecture in other critical regions of the globe, beginning right here in this part of the world."

The United States has worked with Canada to encourage new partnerships in the Pacific and in the Western Hemisphere, Panetta said, "recognizing that regional challenges -- from transnational criminal organizations to natural disasters -- require stronger regional institutions that can deliver regional solutions."

Two regions of the world stand out as posing particularly vexing challenges, the secretary said.

"It is apparent to all that the Asia-Pacific region is going to be a principal force behind world economic growth, with lines of commerce and trade that are constantly expanding and security challenges that are growing in complexity," he said. "In the Middle East -- another region crucial to the global economy and U.S. interests -- we've seen dramatic changes as a result of the Arab Spring. We see continuing violence. We see continuing extremism. We see continuing instability. And the threat from Iran continues to pose challenges.

"So as the United States draws down its forces in Iraq and begins to draw down its surge forces in Afghanistan," he continued, "we will also have to maintain a strong presence in the Middle East and work closely with our allies and partners to bolster multilateral cooperation in countering threats emanating from al-Qaida, from Iran, and elsewhere."

The global nature of security challenges and the interests at stake require building multilateral structures that enable all allies and partners to improve cooperation in countering common threats, Panetta said. "That includes encouraging Canada and our European allies to join us in meeting common challenges -- whether it's in Asia-Pacific, the Middle East or throughout the Western Hemisphere, and enabling them to do so through NATO when appropriate," he added.

The United States can and will do more than one thing at a time, the secretary said.

"U.S. security commitments are not zero-sum," he added. "And even as we enhance our presence in the Pacific, we will not surrender our status as a global power and a global leader. As a country with global interests and responsibilities, and with a military with unique global strength and reach, America will remain committed to global security."

American and Canadian leadership have built a system of alliances and partnerships that have safeguarded and advanced liberty, prosperity and security for decades, Panetta said.

"And as we move forward -- as we make the tough decisions needed to ensure a better life for our children and our grandchildren -- we will not back away from these alliances and partnerships. Indeed, they are a key to our ability to provide that strong defense for the future. We will strengthen them, and in so doing, we will strengthen our two great nations so that we know even greater prosperity and even greater security in the century that lies ahead."