First of all Happy New Year from Defense Tech. I hope you all had a wonderful holiday season and are ready to get back to work helping us decipher the strategic and technological dilemmas facing the world's militaries.
I heard today that a friend and colleague of mine Tom Ricks of the Washington Post has started a new gig blogging with Foreign Policy online -- relaunched by the Washingtonpost/Newsweek/Slate publishing group after it purchased the magazine from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in September.
Let's just say the so-called "Best Defense" blog is off to a ho-hum start, with two-to-three sentence entries that don't add very much to the news of the day. But that's OK, Tom will hit his stride and learn that he needs to shed some of that journalistic punch pulling he's been trained to do for his entire career. And there have been a bunch of updates since I first checked the blog this morning.
Anyway, he summed up for me a thought I'd had since this whole Gaza goat rope started. Seems to me Israel can't possibly "win" with Operation Cast Lead as it stands. I just don't understand the goals here and can't put together the logic that must have led them to this decision -- unless of course it's PURELY politics (don't forget, FM Livni and DM Barak are both running for PM in February against Likud hawk Netanyahu).
Here's what Ricks pulled from his sources:
Terry Daly, one of the smartest people I know on counterinsurgency issues, doesn't see much hope for Israel's crackdown in Gaza. "Don't ask me what the solution is to Israel's strategic problem," he comments in a note. "Thomas Henriksen's excellent 2007 Joint Special Operations University monograph, 'The Israeli Approach to Irregular Warfare and Implications for the United States,' clearly relates how the Israelis have tried most of the usual solutions. For 60 years, though, Israel through the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), basically has relied on 'the utility of force.' The IDF became and remains a shining example of conventional military excellence, but it also seems to be heading for defeat in 'war amongst the people,' where the objective is to win peoples' support not to kill them and break all their toys. . . . Meanwhile the Muslim nihilists must be salivating at the thought of getting the IDF on the ground in the Gaza Strip."
The most controversial naval issue of the post-Cold War era has been whether or not China is planning to procure aircraft carriers. In late December the senior national defense spokesman, Huang Xueping, declared that China is "seriously" considering adding an aircraft carrier to its navy.
While this may be the most definitive statement to date by a Chinese official, more significant was the Chinese Navy's decision this past fall when 50 naval officers began a pilot training program at the Dalian Naval Academy to provide a cadre of carrier-based aviators.
Thus, speculation about a future Chinese carrier force continues albeit still without any public indications of whether such ships would be constructed in China or possibly purchased from a foreign source, in particular Ukraine, which contains the Black Sea Shipyard in Nikolayev. That yard produced all Soviet-era aircraft carriers. Also, no definitive time table has been put forward by any Chinese officials.
And, much more significant from a viewpoint of the future of China's Navy, on 26 December a three-ship task force departed Sanya in Hainan Province for operations off the coast of Somalia and in the Gulf of Aden to help deter pirate attacks on international merchant shipping. Although Chinese warships have carried out long-range visits to other countries, those could not be considered operational missions.
(The last time that China sent a naval expedition to East Africa was during the Ming Dynasty when the emperor's envoy Zheng He led a large armada in the early 15th Century to the region for goodwill port calls.)
The modern Chinese task force consists of two missile destroyers and a replenishment oiler. The destroyers are the Haikou and Wuhan. These are two of China's newest warships. The Haikou, completed in 2005, is an advanced air-defense ship, the Chinese equivalent of a Western Aegis-type warship. With a full load displacement of about 6,500 tons, the Haikouhas a heavy anti-air and anti-ship missile armament as well as anti-submarine weapons. Two helicopters are embarked.
The Wuhan, completed in 2004, is the same size, also with a multi-mission capability, although without the advanced 30N6E multi-function radar (Western code name Tombstone). One helicopter is carried.
The replenishment oiler Weishanhu, a 22,000-ton ship, completes the anti-pirate force.
About 800 officers and sailors man the three ships, commanded by Rear Admiral Du Jingchen. Upon sailing, Admiral Du stated that, "China definitely has neither the intention of threatening interests of any sovereign parties nor the interest in breaking up power equilibrium in the region."
Africa: Security Challenges and Strategic Perspectives
If you work for the government, military, defense community, academic community, etc, you may want to give this a close look:
"Some of the world's lead experts on Africa are convening a symposium to discuss security issues on the continent at Maxwell Air Force Base on February 13th. Co-hosted by the Air Force research Institute, the AF's brand new strategic think tank which advises the AF Chief of Staff, and the Association for the Study of the Middle East and Africa (ASMEA), the day-long event promises to cover Somali piracy, militias in Congo, Hezbollah terrorists around the region and many other critical topics. It is open to the military and governmen, civilian academics, and interested others who request an invitation. For more, and to register, go to www.asmeascholars.org."
Africa is the largest vacuum in the world and thus the most fertile ground for the breeding of dangerous non-state actors (the Somali piracy issue being proof enough of that fact). If you're in the military and do anything with irregular warfare, this could be an easy, interesting TDY -- though I'd recommend that anyone with interest in the regional or functional study of irregular warfare attend.
-John Noonan
The H&K IAR Revealed
I just got some information on the Heckler and Koch bid for the Marine Corps Infantry Automatic Rifle.
You can see the picture here and below, check out the stats:
To me, it basically looks like a 416 with a longer barrel and more robust butt stock. I will say that troops love the H&K box magazines for their lack of hangups in when feeding on burst fire.
Thing is, I hope the deck isn't stacked against FN and H&K because of Colt's submission of two weapons. I have absolutely nothing against Colt or its IAR variants (though for some reason they declined to provide me with any details of their weapons for DT or Military.com), I just for once want to see a free and fair competition for the Corps' new version of the BAR (though in 5.56, much to many's chagrin)...Without any ole boy networking or bias.
We'll see though, huh?
-- Christian
The Little Bot that Could
Here's a pretty interesting piece of defense tech sent over by DT reader Travis the other day about an innovative mast system that can be used in unmanned ground vehicles that allows the diminutive bots to see over high walls.
The so called Situational Awareness Mast uses a patented interlock system that differentiates it from telescoping masts that take up a lot of room and weight when stowed, thereby limiting their extension height.
The Situational Awareness Mast (SAM, also known as a Zipper Mast) from Geosystems Inc. is a telescoping linear actuator that has a unique property -- it's stroke length is an order of magnitude greater than its nominal height! For example, the SAM8 is a 10 lb device with a stroke length (8ft) that is 24 times it's nominal height (4 inches)! This can be used to vertically translate a robot's sensor suite for better visibility while still allowing for a low profile. Read on for information on the different Zipper Mast variants, the patent describing the system, and an exclusive video of a Zipper Mast on an iRobot Packbot!
Be sure to check out Hizook for more details on how Geosystems accomplishes the low-profile boom. They've got pics from the patent and other schematics. As with UAVs, UGVs are beginning to come into their own and I know from personal experience they're a potential lifesaver on a battlefield strewn with IEDs, mines and other boobie traps.
And here's a video of the system that best explains how it works.
As the new administration takes office, the defense budget will come under extensive scrutiny. A recent editorial in The New York Times entitled "How to Pay for a 21st-Century Military" calls for a halt to the F-22 Raptor fighter, the DDG 1000 Zumwalt-class destroyer, SSN 688 Virginia-class submarines, and MV-22 Osprey programs, among others.
Some "big dollar" programs could be cut, in part to demonstrate the seriousness of the Obama administration to reform the U.S. military establishment. But there will be many programs at risk that have less visibility. One of the leading candidates for cancellation is the long-gestating Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV), the advanced "amtrac" that has been under development for almost two decades.
The Marine Corps now has ten of the EFVs -- that designation being assigned in 2003 to replace the more prosaic but useful AAAV -- Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicle, which in turn replaced the LVT -- Landing vehicle Tracked -- designation in 1982.
The EFV can carry 17 Marines on land or sea, at a speed up to 45 mph on land and about 25 knots at sea. The EFV’s range is 325 miles on land and 65 nautical miles at sea.
But those specifications are the "rub." How does the EFV fit into the Marines Corps concept of Operational Maneuver From The Sea (OMFTS)? That concept calls for launching an assault from 25 to 100 nautical miles from the objective -- which may be an inland location, such as an airfield, capital, or military base. Recent studies by the Defense Science Board (DSB) and Naval Research Advisory Committee (NRAC) call for amphibious ships to stand offshore at least 50 miles because of the threat of land-launched cruise missiles (as struck the Israeli frigate Hanit operating off the Lebanese coast in 2006).
Thus, launching an assault from 25 or more nautical miles offshore would see the assault troops flown in by MV-22 tilt-rotor STOVL aircraft and CH-46E and CH-53E helicopters, the former at more than 300 mph and the helicopters at more than 100 mph. And, of course, they could land troops on an inland objective.
Follow-up equipment that was not air landed would be brought ashore by Air Cushion Landing Craft (ACLC), with a new design being developed, and the few remaining LCU landing craft.
Where does the EFV fit in? It cannot be launched from more than about 30 miles offshore because of its limited waterborne range if it is to return to the launching ship; it could be launched farther out if it is to then climb ashore and operate as a personnel carrier. And, even at 30 miles the transit time would be more than an hour, or longer if the seas are rough. If too rough, of course, the EFVs could not be employed.
No one would dispute how convenient thumb drives are, or how they’ve made the transfer of files form one machine to another so easy. These drives offer numerous advantages over other portable storage devices. They are more compact, and operate much faster. The new thumb drives using USB 2.0 operate faster than an optical disc drive, while storing a larger amount of data in a much smaller space.
They also have no moving parts, making them more robust than mechanical hard drives. These types of drives use the USB mass storage standard, supported by modern operating systems such as Windows, Mac OS X, Linux, and other Unix-like systems. However, that convenience comes with risk.
FACT: The flash-memory market was until recently one of the fastest-growing segments of the global semiconductor industry. The total worldwide revenue of the market in 2008 is estimated to be about $12 billion.
The recent news of this significant cyber incident at the Pentagon has called into question the use of thumb drives. According to one report, senior military leaders said the malware infection incident affected the U.S. Central Command networks. This incident included systems both in the headquarters and in the combat zones. Thumb drives are reportedly banned within the U.S. Department of Defense. The ban comes after they were identified as the most likely point of compromise that transferred what has been termed a “global virus” according to Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman. Inside sources leaked a message distributed to employees saying that all flash drives, whether purchased or provided by the Department of Defense, would be confiscated.
This is a problem not just for DoD, but for all computer users, so tell us about your use of thumb drives.
This was forwarded to us by our friend Winslow Wheeler who writes:
With a Comptroller, William Lynn, who outdid all of his predecessors and successors with the most populous and preposterous budget gimmicks post-Cold War Pentagon spending has seen, with a level of spending that out-did the plan left on the table by that penny-pincher Defense Secretary Richard Cheney, and a level of shrunken, aging forces unready to fight, the Clinton era was the absolute low for post-World War II Pentagon management, up to then. That it was outdone by the mangling of the Bush years - even today - is no reason to think that a return to the precepts of Clinton-esque defense thinking is a good idea.
The New York Times would seem to disagree. While it does not say so explicitly, the Times' editorial of December 21, "How to Pay for a 21st Century Military," articulates all the shallow, even gimmick-laden, thinking about DOD management that characterized the Clinton era in the Pentagon in the 1990s. To some it will sound good, if you are unfamiliar with the more detailed facts buried under piles of press releases from think-tanks, members of Congress, and manufacturer brochures, but what the NY Times is really advocating is business as usual with a cosmetic veneer of reform.
This argument is clearly and strongly articulated by a Pentagon insider who has seen it all before and who has demonstrated frequently the character and insight to call it as it is. Franklin ("Chuck") Spinney wrote for "CounterPunch" an important and informative analysis of the NY Times' vision of the past guised as Pentagon reform for the 21st Century. Here it is:
Hackneyed Thinking and the Status Quo
The New York Times Flames Out in Defense Dogfight
By CHUCK SPINNEY
Counterpunch (http://www.counterpunch.org/spinney12232008.html)
The 21 Dec 2008 editorial in The New York Times, "How To Pay For A 21st-Century Military" purports to advocate tough-minded pragmatism to reform a Pentagon that is clearly out of control. Yet its logic is really another example of the kind of hackneyed thinking that serves to protect the status quo. It also suggests indirectly why the mainstream media are in such trouble.
The editors of the Times present a cut list that includes terminating the F-22, the DDG-1000, the Virginia class attack submarine, the V-22 Osprey, halting premature deployment (not R&D) on ballistic missile defense, cutting nuclear weapons, de-alerting nuclear weapons, cutting two air wings from the active Air Force, and cutting one carrier from the Navy. Some of these recommendations make a lot of sense, but even if one assumes unrealistically that there is no cost growth elsewhere and there are no contract termination costs or base closing costs, the cutbacks would "save" $20 to $25 billion. While $25 billion may sound impressive, bear in mind, the upcoming Defense Department's core budget could be as high as $580 billion in Fiscal Year 2010, according to news reports.
Put another way, even if we believe in the vanishingly small probability of a best case scenario with no cost growth or contract termination costs, these cuts would reduce the defense budget Mr. Obama is about to inherit by only a little over four per cent -- and that would be a reduction from a budget level that the editors say is bloated, because the defense budget was increased recklessly by 40 per cent in inflation-adjusted terms since 2001 (not including the costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan).
Furthermore, the editors at the Times do not even want to pass on this piddling amount to the taxpayers or Mr. Obama's infrastructure program, because they say that the "savings" should be plowed back into the Pentagon to increase the size of the Army and Marine ground forces, to buy the Navy's littoral combat ship, and to resupply the National Guard and Reserve forces. But then they conclude by observing that the era of unlimited budgets is over and that Secretary Gates must make procurement reform a priority.
This is very peculiar logic. And it is made even more bizarre by what the editors of the Times did not say. Consider please just a few things they forgot to mention:
From all of us here at Defense Tech, we'd like to wish you all a merry Christmas.
-- Christian
SOCOM Pack Program Winners
While there still is no official announcement, Granite Gear and their partner Montgomery Marketing Inc have announced that they have captured at least some of the SOCOM Pack program. Two packs were out for competition and they have won the Patrol Pack category with their 2400 cubic inch Raid pack and they will begin manufacturing within 60 days.
Mystery Ranch, long thought to be the leader in the large Recce Ruck category has won and will be offering a custom design based on their internal frame technology.
Congratulations to both Granite Tactical and Mystery Ranch!
The Granite Tactical Gear line is currently available from Extreme Outfitters. Mystery Ranch information can be accessed here.
If you work for the government, military, defense community, academic community, etc, you may want to give this a close look: 
