The U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) took an unprecedented step on May 15, 2007, blocking troop access to MySpace, YouTube, and other popular Web sites. The official reason was to conserve bandwidth and safeguard security. But the DOD’s ban also highlighted a gap in understanding between senior military leaders and what demographers call Generation Y (alternatively known as the millennial generation or the baby-boom echo). Few members of this generation, born after 1978, can recall a time when the Internet was not at their disposal.

Not long ago, one of the authors of this article was asked to lead a U.S. Air Force study on the implications for the military of this new online generation. The request came from senior officers who had been appalled to discover a number of junior officers using the still-permissible Facebook Web site for the purpose of organizing their squadrons. These senior officers were having difficulty with the concept of using a civilian social-networking site for military purposes. What would that mean for military security? How would it affect the control and vulnerability of squadrons in the field? And from the perspective of DOD “middle management,” what was a major supposed to do? Forbid the behavior and risk losing the real benefits of an online community? Or protect it and risk the wrath of more senior officers who just didn’t understand?

This kind of conundrum is relevant not just for the U.S. military. A wide range of organizations, including most global corporations, will soon face a large, new cohort of young employees. Generation Y’s affinity for the interconnected world is just one of its intriguing characteristics….

Continue Reading… »

(click to view full)

The V-22 program has been beset by controversy throughout its 20-year development period, from crashes that have killed more than 20 Marines, to engine stalls, to issues with their AE1107C Liberty engines in Iraq that may lead to the end of Power By the Hour maintenance arrangements, or even replacement of the Liberty engines altogether. DID’s “V-22 Osprey: A Flying Shame?” offers a focused look at a number of specific allegations associated with the program, with material from Pentagon test reports, critical reviews, and the US military’s responses.

Despite these issues, the program continues to move forward. In March 2008, the Bell Boeing Joint Project Office in Amarillo, TX received a $10.4 billion modification that converted the previous advance acquisition contract (N00019-07-C-0001) to a fixed-price-incentive-fee, multi-year contract. The new contract will be used to buy 141 MV-22 (for USMC) and 26 CV-22 (Air Force Special Operations) Osprey aircraft, including associated manufacturing tooling in support of production rates.

This DID article will cover V-22 multi-year purchase contracts, developments that arise after this contract conversion, and associated contracts for key V-22 systems. The latest contract involves 6 “Liberty” engines…

Continue Reading… »

Canada’s military personnel have a reputation for being well-trained, but the state of their equipment and capabilities had become much bleaker after decades of neglect. Significant emergency purchases were required to secure the equipment needed for operations in Afghanistan, and despite being the second largest country in the world, the state of its military airlift capability was poor and deteriorating at all levels. Recent years have seen something of a turnaround, especially the funding injection and the beginning of major airlift (C-17, C-130J) and helicopter (CH-47D, CH-47F) projects in 2005-2006, and the shift away from wheeled armored vehicles to tracked tanks and M113s. Budget 2006 provided $5.3 billion over 5 years to sustain operations, acquire new equipment, and expand both the Regular and Reserve Forces, and ratcheted planned spending by $1.8 billion annually starting in 2011-2012.

Decades of neglect cannot be fixed overnight, however. Over 50% of the country’s military infrastructure is over 50 years old. On the equipment side, Canada’s Tribal Class destroyers, City Class frigates, CP-140/P-3 maritime patrol aircraft, Buffalo fixed-wing search and rescue aircraft, CF-18 fighter aircraft, and land combat vehicles and systems (other than tanks) will all reach the end of their service lives and need to be replaced at varying times over the next 20 years.

To this end, the Conservative Party of Canada led by Prime Minister Stephen Harper is proposing a long-term funding framework that would increase defense spending by about $600 million per year over the next 20 years. Nevertheless, the nature of its timelines, and of Canada’s political system, must both be considered as one evaluates this plan…

Continue Reading… »

Phalanx, firing
(click to view full)

The radar-guided, rapid-firing Mk. 15 Phalanx Close-In Weapons System (CIWS, pron. “see-whiz”) can fire between 3,000-4,500 20mm cannon rounds per minute, either autonomously or under manual command, as a last-ditch defense against incoming missiles and other targets. Phalanx uses closed-loop spotting with advanced radar and computer technology to locate, identify and direct a stream of armor piercing projectiles toward the target (see video: MPEG | AVI, with hat tips to the good folks at Digg.com).

As of Feb 28/07, More than 895 Phalanx systems had been built and deployed in the navies of 22 nations. The latest development is C-RAM/Centurion, a land-based system designed to defend against incoming artillery and mortars.

This is DID’s FOCUS Article with respect to the Phalanx CIWS. Recent developments include a US Army buy, for use on land…

• The Phalanx Platform: Competition, Upgrades & Developments [updated]
• Land-Based Phalanx: C-RAM
• Phalanx Contracts and Key Events [updated]
• Additional Readings
  
  Continue Reading… »

F100 visits Sydney
(click to view full)

The Royal Australian Navy took a pair of giant steps toward its future force in June of 2007, when it selected winning designs for 2 new Canberra Class LHD amphibious operations vessels, and 3 new Hobart Class air warfare destroyers.

Australia’s ANZAC Class (Meko 200 derivative) and Adelaide Class (FFG-7 Adelaide Class) frigates have limited air defense capabilities. They would be hard-pressed to survive against modern anti-ship missiles, and even planned ANZAC upgrades would not make them suitable for protecting a task force. Under the SEA 4000 program, Australia plans to replace its retired air defense destroyers with a modern system that can provide significantly increased protection from air attack for troops being transported and deployed, integrate with the US Navy and other Coalition partners, offer long-range air warfare defense for Royal Australian Navy task groups, and help provide a coordinated air picture for fighter and surveillance aircraft. Despite their name and focus, the ships are multi-role designs with a “sea control” mission that includes advanced anti-submarine and surface warfare capabilities.

After a long campaign that supported the creation and detailed evaluation of 2 fleshed out designs, the A$ 8 billion program has a winner. To the surprise of some observers, Australia’s 3 new “air warfare destroyers” will be… ‘Australianized’ F100 AEGIS frigates. Spain’s Navantia made an A$ 11 billion clean sweep, winning both the Canberra Class LHD and the Hobart Class Air Warfare “Destroyer” contracts. The new AWD ships were scheduled to begin entering service with the Royal Australian Navy in 2013, but that date has now slipped to 2014-2015.

This DID FOCUS Article explains the details of the SEA 4000 program, offers some details re: the winning design plus the losing “Evolved DDG-51” option, and covers the contracts and key events to date. Recent events include a request for AEGIS and cooperative Engagement equipment…

• SEA 4000: The Design Competition
• SEA 4000: The Program
• SEA 4000: Contracts & Key Events
• Appendix A: SEA 4000 Program Phase Organization
• Appendix B: Additional Readings & Sources
  
  Continue Reading… »

Leo C2s, Afghanistan
(click to view full)

It would seem that the Canadian Forces are taking some of the lessons re-learned during Operation Medusa in Afghanistan to heart. Canada’s DND:

“The heavily protected direct fire capability of a main battle tank is an invaluable tool in the arsenal of any military. The intensity of recent conflicts in Central Asia and the Middle East has shown western militaries that tanks provide protection that cannot be matched by more lightly armoured wheeled vehicles…. [Canada’s existing Leopard C2/1A5] tanks have also provided the Canadian Forces (CF) with the capability to travel to locations that would otherwise be inaccessible to wheeled light armoured vehicles, including Taliban defensive positions.”

In October 2003, Canada was set to buy the Styker/LAV-III 105mm Mobile Gun System to replace its Leopard C2 tanks. In the end, however, the lessons of war have taken Canada down a very different path – one that now has them renewing the very tank fleet they were once intent on scrapping with one of the world’s best tanks, and backing away from the wheeled vehicles that were once the cornerstone of the Canadian Army’s transformation plan. This updated article includes a full chronology for Canada’s new Leopard 2 tanks, and adds information concerning DND’s exact plans and breakdowns for their new tank fleet…

• Why New Tanks Now?
• Choices, Choices: Leopard 2s For Canada [updated]
• Next Steps and Updates [new]
• Additional Readings
  
  Continue Reading… »

(click to view full)

In the 1970s, fighter aircraft began to appear with Head-Up Displays (HUD) that projected key information, targeting crosshairs et. al. onto a seemingly clear piece of glass, so the pilot could keep his eyes on the sky instead of looking down at his instruments. We’ve been wondering when we’d see them in our automobiles ever since. In the 1990s, another innovation appeared: helmet-mounted displays put the HUD inside the pilot’s helmet, providing this information even when the pilot wasn’t looking straight ahead. The Israelis were already using a system called DASH when a set of former East German MiG-29s equipped with HMDs slaughtered USAF F-16s in exercises, and helmet-mounted displays suddenly became must-haves for modern fighters.

The Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System (JHMCS) projects visual targeting and aircraft performance information on the back of the helmet’s visor, including aircraft altitude, airspeed, gravitational pull, angle of attack, and weapons sighting, enabling the pilot to monitor this information without interrupting the field of view through the cockpit canopy. The system uses a magnetic transmitter unit fixed to the pilot’s seat and a magnetic field probe mounted on the helmet to define helmet pointing positioning. A Helmet Vehicle Interface (HVI) interacts with the aircraft system bus to provide signal generation for the helmet display. This provides significant improvement for close combat targeting and engagement.

A September 2005 exchange with Boeing enabled DID to gain insights into the rocky past, overall state, and future of a program that has experienced its share of snags and controversy – but gone on to become the #1 helmet-mounted sight in the world today. That information fits nicely with DID’s expansion of our coverage to detail the JHMCS’ game-changing effects on air combat, its production sets and known customers, and all contracts since full-rate production began. The latest item is a minor contract to equip USAF F-15Es…

• JHMCS: A Combat Multiplier [updated] (i.e. Continue reading…)
• JHMCS: The Program to Date
• JHMCS: Contracts & Key Events [updated]
• Appendix A: JHMCS History & Challenges
• Appendix B: Additional Readings & Sources
  
  Continue Reading… »

C-17 vs. AN-124
(click to view full)

The long-range C-17 Globemaster III heavy transport aircraft remains the backbone of US Air Mobility Command inter-theater transport around the world, and its ability to operate from shorter and rougher runways has made it especially useful during the Global War on Terror. Recent buys by Australia, Britain, and Canada have broadened the plane’s its global use. Now NATO, who has relied on the SALIS arrangement and its leased super-giant AN-124s from Russia, is looking to buy and own 3-4 C-17s as NATO pooled assets with multinational crews. Participating countries will receive allocated flight hours relative to their participation (a Dutch MinDef release says they expect 500 flight hours per year for EUR 10-15 million per year over 30 years), and thus far they include: Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, and the United States.

This order will not materially change the coming shut-down of C-17 production, but it does look like the inauguration of a pool that will fill a gaping hole in Europe’s defense capabilities – its complete lack of heavy airlift. This article will cover NATO C-17 acquisition program, including its structure and ongoing announcements. Program is actually a misnomer so far. There has been talk, and spending bills are being introduced in some countries, but nothing resembling firm contracts yet, despite an originally-planned in-service date of late 2007. While Denmark has dropped out, Finland dropped in, and Latvia is now on board. Now a second official export request has been issued – but the number of planes has dropped…

• The NATO C-17 Pool
• Contracts, Notifications & Key Events [updated]
• Additional Readings
  
  Continue Reading… »

AN-32, Arrival
(click to view full)

In the above Jan 10/08 photo, an Afghan soldier with the Afghan National Army Air Corps directs a newly delivered AN-32 light tactical transport plane to its spot on the ramp of Kabul Air Base in Kabul, Afghanistan, just 65 days from receipt of original tasking from the Navy International Program Office. This plane was the first of 4 refurbished AN-32s that were purchased from the Ukraine by the ANAA, which now has 7 An-32s in inventory. The ANAA also flies 2 related AN-26 transports.

US Naval Air Systems Command’s (NAVAIR) Support and Commercial Derivative Aircraft Program Office bought the AN-32s from Ukranian commercial firms, after inspecting the aircraft. Recent stories shine light on some of the credit for their early delivery, including soldiers like PMA-207’s C-26 and UC-35 Assistant Program Manager for Systems Engineering Mr. Roman Hnatyshyn, a first-generation U.S.-born citizen fluent in the Ukrainian and related Slavic languages. Air Force Lt. Col. Stephen Petters worked the other end, and was deployed from the Pentagon to Afghanistan to help rebuild the ANAAC’s ability to support itself and the planes it would be getting. NAVAIR release | Photo and initial delivery information from the Pentagon’s DefenseLINK.

AN-32, Airborne
(click to view full)

The AN-32’s high placement of the engine nacelles above the wing allow bigger propellers, driven by 5,100 hp AI-20 turboprops that almost double the output of the related AN-26’s engines. As a result, the AN-32’s 14,750 pound/ 6900 kg load capacity is almost 50% better than its AN-26 cousin’s. Most important to the ANAAC, it can take off with much better load fractions in hot and/or high-altitude conditions, whose thin air could be a problem for other aircraft. India also operates AN-32 “Cline” aircraft for that very reason, and some of those IAF AN-32s are currently flying supplies into Myanmar.

Welcome home…
(click for article)

In the wake of the scandal described last week in “YouTube Video Leads to Fixes at Ft. Bragg,” the US Army committed itself to walk through inspections of all its bases. On May 7/08, Army Secretary Pete Geren said that the US Army will spend $248 million in emergency funds to fix problems found during inspections of 148,000 rooms at bases worldwide.

Ned Christensen, chief of public affairs for the Army Installation Management Command, says that the US Army aims to have new or renovated barracks housing for 147,700 enlisted Soldiers within 5 years, at an estimated total construction cost for new barracks complexes of about $10.7 billion between 2004-2013. AP report.