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… »

NSC 1 Bertholf
(click to view full)

The US Coast Guard’s massive $25 billion Deepwater meta-program (really Deepwater-II given post-9/11 changes) has endured more than its share of ups and downs. Nevertheless, Congressional support remains strong, and efforts are being made to restructure the program and get it back on track. “Voted Off the Island: The USCG’s Deepwater FRC Program” offered an in-depth look into the difficulties faced by the USCG’s Island Class cutter modification program, and by the Deepwater Fast Response Cutter that was supposed to replace it. “US Coast Guard’s Deepwater Effort Hits More Rough Sailing” covers recent program developments more generally.

The Legend Class National Security Cutters are the largest ships in the Deepwater program, and represent the program’s flagship in more ways than one. The 418 foot, 4,300 ton ships will be frigate-sized vessels with a 21 foot draughts¹, and are rather larger than the 379 foot, 3,250 ton Hamilton Class High Endurance Cutters (HECs) they will replace. Controversies regarding durability and potential hull fatigue, as well as significant cost overruns, have shadowed the new cutter’s construction. Nevertheless, the program appears to be moving forward.

This DID FOCUS Article covers recent developments concerning the Legend Class cutters. The latest developments include the tempest over TEMPEST, while a Navy review board gives the first of class ship Bertholf a thumbs-up review…

• Quick Background: The Deepwater Program
• The Legend Class National Security Cutters
• The Pitfalls of Being a Legend: NSC Issues & Action
• Legend Class Program: Contracts & Key Events [updated]
• Additional Readings
  
  Continue Reading… »

Few of us would argue that soldiers returning from the battlefield deserve treatment for stress as well as wounds, as a moral obligation. Not to mention preventative programs and techniques similar to those discussed in Grossman’s On Combat book and “Bulletproof Mind” presentations, Richard Strozzi-Heckler’s work in SOCOM’s Trojan Warrior Project (1980s) and the Marine Martial Arts Program, et. al.

DID has covered a number of programs and issues related to soldier medical care. When analyzing current or proposed situations, however, it helps to know some math. This is true for all military programs, and it is true here. Since DID often provides statistics, and the issue appears to be current, we offer these:

If Bloomberg news is correct, 1.6 million American troops have been to Iraq or Afghanistan during this war, and about 4,560 have died to this point. If those 1.6 million people have exactly the same rate of suicide as the general population for the rest of their lives, the national rate of suicide in 2005 for ages 15 and up was 13.14 per 100,000. Assume that the average age of the soldiers is 30, and a conservative estimate gives them 40 years of exposure to the risk of suicide. 1.6 million x (13.14/100,000) x 40 years = 8,409 suicides at rates exactly equivalent to the American population as a whole. Versus about 4,560 killed so far in almost 7 years of combat. Media coverage that is surprised by this casualty comparison, and portrays soldiers as generally unbalanced on that basis, opens itself to serious professional questions. Perhaps enlistments in Raytheon’s Math Moves U program could be arranged.

You would also wish to know military statistics for suicide, of course (17.3/100,000 overall, 19.9/100,000 for those serving in Iraq and Afghanistan), as well as general population statistics for men age 20-44 (21.82/100,000) and women age 20-44 (5.54/100,000) per 2004/05 figures. Adjusted for US military figures of 17% women, an equivalent general American population would have a near-term annual suicide rate of 19.06 per 100,000.

A Viking comes ashore
(click to view full)

The BvS-10 is the successor to the wildly popular Bv206, 11,000 of which have been sold to 40 countries around the world – including the USA (M978). It is in use in both Britain and the Netherlands as a key armored vehicle for their respective Marines, and is under evaluation elsewhere. Singapore has developed and manufactured an improved variant of its own called the Bronco ATTC, and Finland and Norway also have their own local Bv-206 variants.

What makes this unusual-looking vehicle family so popular? They aren’t like Hummers or similar wheeled mainstays. They aren’t full armored personnel carriers, either – they’re armored, but Bv family vehicles can’t take the kind of punishment that a Bradley or LAV can absorb. Instead, the secret to their success lies in a remarkable all-terrain capability, and their ability to fill a rare and critical role: air-portable and amphibious infantry enhancement.

These success factors are discussed below, along with contracts and key developments related to this vehicle family. The latest development involves a bulletin from the Dutch, who are finding that they need to fix some issues with the BvS-10 Vikings headed for duty in Chad…

• The Bv Family of Vehicles (i.e. Continue reading…)
• Bv Family: Why So Popular?
• Bv Family: Performance in Afghanistan [updated]
• Contracts and Key Events
• Additional Readings & Sources
  
  Continue Reading… »

Cpt. Jones & the Mayor
in Karmah, Iraq
(click for interview)

Twentynine Palms, CA has hosted one of the Marine Corps’ most unique assets: battlefield foreign language specialist role players. Iraqis who play D&D? No, Iraqis who can help the Corps simulate life and cultural norms in Iraq. In recent days, the Marines have handed out over $400 million in contracts to keep that capability running – and extend it to Camp Lejeune. Characteristically, Alaskan firms have won both awards, just as they have taken a significant share of Special Operations Command’s foreign language PsyOps support contracts.

These role player awards seems like large but inconsequential outlays, a sort of upside-down Disneyworld for Marines. In fact, they are more critical to current military effectiveness on the front lines than just about any piece of equipment DID covers. An example of how critical this work is can be found in journalist Michael Totten’s reports from the front lines. “Builders of Nations” noted the contrast between prior military training, and the civil administration work that characterizes current deployments to Fallujah. Totten writes:

Continue Reading… »

USMC RG-31,
IEDed in Iraq
(click to view story)

BAE OMC’s RG-31 was the first mine-resistant vehicle fielded by US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, where it was used by the 101st Airborne (and reportedly by SOCOM) as a patrol vehicle. Since hostilities began, a series of orders have been placed by US forces through an odd triumverate: General Dynamics Land Systems Canada was partnered with BAE OMC of South Africa and its GDLS parent in the USA. All contracts are signed through the Canadian Commercial Corporation, a Crown Agency of the Canadian Government (who also use RG-31s).

According to General Dynamics, as of August 2007, U.S. forces had ordered 492 RG-31 vehicles, including 309 of the improved RG-31 Mk5 variant for the U.S. Army and Special Operations Command (SOCOM). Almost none of these orders had come through the MRAP program, however – just 20 vehicles as of July 2007, even as competitors like Navistar and Force Protection had seen order book totals approaching 2,000.

General Dynamics does reap 50% of every Cougar MRAP order to Force Protection, via the Force Dynamics partnership, but the RG-31 had been MIA. An August 2007 order for 600 more vehicles put General Dynamics back in the game as a distant 4th place producer; hopefully, US forces will be able to avoid the initial maintenance issues that have given Canadian RG-31s problems in Afghanistan. The latest developments involve American contract involving what appear to be some design changes…

• GD’s Other MRAP Entries: The RG-31 Family
• RG-31 MRAP Contracts
  
  Continue Reading… »

JAS-39N CAP Concept
(click to view full)

After Dassault’s Rafale was disqualified, and EADS’ Eurofighter pulled out, the battle to supply Norway’s 48 F-16 replacements has come down to a straight shootout between the F-35A Lightning II, and Sweden’s upgraded JAS-39N. See “F-35 Lightning II Faces Continued Dogfights in Norway” for more.

Gripen International has now delivered its bid to the Norwegian government, on the same day that it submitted its bid for India’s much larger MMRCA fighter competition. Dagbladet reported, and Gripen’s release confirmed, that Norway added a new wrinkle to its competition requirements:

Continue Reading… »

In late September 2007, US Air Mobility Command at Scott Air Force Base, IL issued a slew of indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity, firm-fixed-price contracts for “International Airlift Services” to various commercial carriers. The total value of these contracts has a higher ceiling of just over $3 billion in 2007, compared to $2.32 billion in 2006 and $2.29 billion in 2005.

The 2007 contract also appeared to bring far more consortia into the fold, as opposed to the 2006 and 2005 awards. The way these awards work is that each contractor submits a bid, and the US military allocates awards according to each bid’s scope and competitiveness.

Recent developments include an additional award to Lynden…

Continue Reading… »

IOTV: key features
(click to view full)

When reading about modern body armor one often hears about small arms protective inserts (SAPI) or Enhanced SAPI (ESAPI) ceramic plate inserts. While these inserts are more fragile than past generations of inserts, they offer a significant improvement over its 1990s predecessors in terms of both weight and protection. After episodic issues with production ramp-up and quality control, this gear is widely fielded with the US Army and several allied militaries. The US Marines replaced it with the MTV, and the Army itself has introduced the Improved OTV, and even privately developed body armor like Blackwater Gear use them; all rely on a “vest and plates” approach that uses a similar set of inserts to give the vests most of their bullet-stopping power.

This DID spotlight article covers the USA’s acquisition efforts in this area – including a recent order from the US Army for non-ESAPI plates…

• ESAPI, Explained
• Contracts & Key Events, 2004 – Present [updated]
• Additional Readings & Sources
  
  Continue Reading… »

FC-1/ JF-17
(click to view full)

Back in January 2007, DID wrote:

“The military world has no shortage of irony. The defense industry has its moments too, as Pakistan just discovered. An aircraft whose development was driven by military sanctions from the US and Europe is now derailed by military sanctions. This leaves the Pakistani Air Force dependent on an alternative from… America. Meanwhile, the Chinese are left with no export launch customer for a plane they may now have to reluctantly buy themselves, instead of the favoured and more capable J-10. Somewhere in Delhi, champagne is pouring – but first, a bit of background.”

The arms market also features no shortage of change. The agreement India thought it had, was reversed by Russian autocrat Vladimir Putin. Now Pakistan has begun to take delivery of the new fighters, and is reportedly seeking additional agreements with Western firms for avionics and weapons upgrades. In addition, a joint marketing agency has been set up in conjunction with China…

• The JF-17 Thunder, aka. FC-1 Fierce Dragon
• Stuck in Sichuan: The Saga
• Updates and Key Events [updated]
  
  Continue Reading… »