About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Archive for September, 2005

Wanted: AUSA

Friday, September 30th, 2005

Anyone going to next week’s Association of the U.S. Army con­ven­tion in DC? I can’t make it. But I’d be psy­ched to have a set of eyes check out the event on Defense Tech’s behalf. E-​​mail me at defense-​​AT-​​defensetech-​​DOT-​​org if you’re interested.

Prosthetic Prof Climbs New Heights

Friday, September 30th, 2005

I went to Popular Mechanics’ Breakthrough Awards last night with pretty low motives: a chance to schmooze with some of the edi­tors who pay my rent. Maybe I’d grab a beer or four in the process. Instead, I walked out uplifted by one of the most inspir­ingly cool sto­ries I had heard in months. It came from the night’s final hon­oree, MIT media lab pro­fes­sor Hugh Herr.
hughherr.jpgAs a kid, Herr was a lousy stu­dent and good rock climber — a very good rock climber. Then, in 1982, he “became stranded on Mount Washington, New Hampshire for nearly four days in –20 F tem­per­a­tures and bliz­zard con­di­tions,” one biog­ra­phy notes. “Severe frost­bite dam­age took its toll on his lower legs, and both of his feet had to be ampu­tated six inches below the knee.“
Improbably, Herr swore he’d climb again. So he became a book­worm, even­tu­ally wind­ing up in field of pros­thet­ics. He devel­oped a knee that “adapts to the users walk­ing style, adjust­ing resis­tance to allow for a secure, agile gait,” Pop Mech observes. “Next, he plans to dis­trib­ute sen­sors beyond the knee to allow the device to move in response to sub­tle elec­tri­cal changes in mus­cles nearby.“
Herr is already help­ing out sol­diers wounded in Afghanistan and Iraq. And he is mak­ing good on his promise, to get back to climb­ing. In fact, he says, his new arti­fi­cial legs are bet­ter than his old bio­log­i­cal ones. Special wedge-​​like “feet” allow Herr to slide into cracks in the rock face that he could never use before. For ice climb­ing, Herr can slip attach spiky cram­pons to the end of his pros­thet­ics. Or he can use Inspector Gadget–esque extend­ing legs for extra reach.
In school, Herr told the crowd of a hun­dred or so at the American Museum of Natural History, he kept rais­ing his height an inch a day, to see how long it would take for peo­ple to notice. “It took until I was about eight feet tall,” he laughed.
Standing on that stage, hop­ping around on his man-​​made legs, eight feet seemed like an under­state­ment to me.

Rapid Fire 9/​30/​05

Friday, September 30th, 2005

* Iraq’s one batal­lion army
* Doom maker’s space ship
* Spy sats tar­geted
* SARS source found
* Grumpy old men invade nuke lab
* Best. Fundraiser. Ever.
* Who needs steriods?

Pentagon Weasels on Armor Payback

Friday, September 30th, 2005

Everyone in uni­form knows that life ain’t fair — that, sooner or later, the gov­ern­ment they’re try­ing to defend is going to mess with them, some­how. Set up road­blocks. Make their mis­sion harder. Treat them less than fairly. It’d be crazy to expect any­thing less from a bureau­cracy as giant and dis­jointed as the Defense Department. So putting up with B.S. just another part of han­dling the job.
soldier-Back.JPGBut this — this is too much:

Soldiers and their par­ents are still spend­ing hun­dreds and some­times thou­sands of dol­lars for armor they say the mil­i­tary wont pro­vide. One U.S. sen­a­tor said Wednesday he will try again to force the Pentagon to obey the reim­burse­ment law it opposed from the out­set and has so far not imple­mented…
Your expec­ta­tion is that when you are sent to war, that our gov­ern­ment does every­thing they can do to pro­tect the lives of our peo­ple, and any­thing less than that is not good enough, said a for­mer Marine who spent nearly $1,000 two weeks ago to buy lower-​​body armor for his son, a Marine serv­ing in Fallujah.
The father asked that he be iden­ti­fied only by his first name Gordon because he is afraid of ret­ri­bu­tion against his son.
I wouldnt have cared if it cost us $10,000 to pro­tect our son, I would do it, said Gordon. But I think the U.S. has an oblig­a­tion to make sure they have this equip­ment and to reim­burse for it. I just dont sup­port Donald Rumsfelds idea of going to war with what you have, not what you want. You go to war pre­pared, and you dont go to war until you are pre­pared.
Under the law passed by Congress last October, the Defense Department had until Feb. 25 to develop reg­u­la­tions for the reim­burse­ment, which is lim­ited to $1,100 per item. Pentagon offi­cials opposed the reim­burse­ment idea, call­ing it an unman­age­able prece­dent that will sad­dle the DOD with an open-​​ended finan­cial burden.

So wait, let me get this straight: reim­burs­ing 11 Bravos for their body armor is some­how “unman­age­able.” But sink­ing hun­dreds of bil­lions into a flail­ing, bloated mod­ern­iza­tion project that changes require­ments and dead­lines every cou­ple of months, that’s per­fectly OK? No, wrong. Helping sol­diers and marines fight today’s war isn’t a “bur­den.” It should be a pri­or­ity. The pri­or­ity.
(Photo: Johan Spanner)

Rapid Fire 9/​29/​05

Thursday, September 29th, 2005

* Court: release Abu Ghraib pics
* D.I.Y. air force
* Robot’s “trea­sure island” loot
* Nuke lab’s hir­ing freeze
* Iraqi insur­gency: how big?
* Galloway, beyond pissed
* MVP, so slick

(Big ups: Intel Dump)

Sat-​​Guided Cannon Ready to Blast

Thursday, September 29th, 2005

Artillery hasn’t been all that help­ful in the Iraq coun­terin­sur­gency. Even in trained hands, heavy, indi­rect fire is pretty indis­crim­i­nate. Bystanders often get killed, while intended tar­gets slip away.
paladin.jpgWhich is why the Army has been bankrolling “Excalibur,” a Raytheon effort to build a 155mm artillery shell that’s guided by GPS. Think of it as the howitzer’s answer to smart bombs.
Each Excalibur round comes with a multi-​​function fuze with three set­tings — height of burst (HOB), point det­o­nat­ing (PD) and delay, Raytheon notes. “An HOB set­ting will enable sol­diers and marines in con­tact to engage enemy forces on rooftops and in win­dows while the delay set­ting will be ideal for pen­e­trat­ing struc­tures and other enemy strong­points. The PD fuze will be effec­tive against enemy troops, light armor and trucks.“
The com­pany just fin­ished a set of Excalibur tests out at the Yuma Proving Ground in Arizona. The plans are for the muni­tion to be fielded in the next six months.

Osprey OK’d

Wednesday, September 28th, 2005

It took twenty years and $19 bil­lion. But at 4pm today, I’m told, the Pentagon’s Defense Acquisition Board will announce its rec­om­men­da­tion to go ahead with “full rate pro­duc­tion” of the once star-​​crossed, accident-​​prone Osprey V-​​22 tiltro­tor craft.
osprey_white.jpgThe fate of the hybrid air­craft has been very much in ques­tion, ever since a pair of Ospreys crashed in 2000, killing 23. This deci­sion “gets the pro­gram off pro­ba­tion. It can’t be sum­mar­ily can­celled now,” a source close to the pro­gram says.
It’s not exactly clear how many of the hybrid air­craft will even­tu­ally be man­u­fac­tured. The President pro­posed bud­get calls for 458 Ospreys to be built into the next decade, start­ing with 13 next fis­cal year. The Marines are ulti­mately sched­uled to get 360 air­craft, Special Operations Command are sup­posed to have 50, and the Navy is slated to have 48. “Pentagon bud­get doc­u­ments show the cost of V-​​22s at about $100 mil­lion each,” the Star-​​Telegram notes. Osprey mak­ers Bell Helicopter say the fig­ure is more like “$72 mil­lion and headed down.“
Those prices and those plans could change in the years to come, of course. But this much is set: A squadron of pilots starts train­ing on the V-​​22 next week. And an oper­a­tional squadron of nine Ospreys will be ready to fly out of North Carolina’s Marine Corps Air Station New River by 2007.
THERE’S MORE: Inside Defense has the report from the Pentagon’s test­ing office, which gave the thumbs-​​up to the V-​​22.
AND MORE: The watch­dogs at the Project on Government Oversight still aren’t con­vinced. “It cant autoro­tate to a safe land­ing, has no defen­sive gun, lacks the abil­ity to per­form quick eva­sive com­bat maneu­vers under fire, and cant descend too quickly or it will go into a dan­ger­ous roll,” they say.
AND MORE: The Osprey’s final two crashes were due to a mys­te­ri­ous aero­nau­ti­cal phe­nom­e­non known as “vor­tex ring state.” after re-​​reading Wired’s Osprey story, I can’t say I feel too good about how that’s been dealt with.

Lead test pilot Tom MacDonald of Boeing was assigned the VRS prob­lem. “It was this mys­tery area,” he says. “So lit­tle research had been done on it. People won­dered: Would it swal­low planes alive?“
MacDonald and the engi­neers worked out a sys­tem. He’d take the plane to 10,000 feet, putting enough air between him and the ground so he’d be able to recover if he got into trou­ble. Then he’d pull the nacelles back until they were almost ver­ti­cal, in heli­copter con­for­ma­tion, slow his for­ward air­speed, and try to induce VRS.
“We’d fly all day long,” says Gross, copi­lot on a few of the test runs. “We’d fall 2,000 or 3,000 feet and recover. We’d fly back up to 10,000 feet, repeat the exer­cise at 1,000 feet per minute, then 1,500, then 2,000, all the way up to 5,000 feet per minute. Then we’d do it again, this time chang­ing our air­speed.” (A typ­i­cal rate of descent for a 747 pas­sen­ger jet on run­way approach is 700 to 800 feet per minute.) In the process MacDonald, a for­mer Marine pilot, quadru­pled the pub­lished knowl­edge base on VRS.
What he found was that vor­tex ring state is sur­pris­ingly hard to induce. He had to fly slower than 40 knots while keep­ing the plane in a steady posi­tion for at least five sec­onds, and then descend at a hot 2,200 feet per minute. He also found that in an Osprey, he could recover from the con­di­tion rel­a­tively eas­ily, pro­vided he had 2,000 feet of alti­tude to play with. In the end, the team didn’t alter the air­craft. Solution: Install a sim­ple warn­ing sys­tem. When a pilot pushes an Osprey toward VRS, a light flashes in the cock­pit and a voice cau­tions, “Sink rate.” And Osprey pilots now know to pay atten­tion to those warnings.

Rapid Fire 9/​28/​05

Wednesday, September 28th, 2005

* Rocket-​​powered blimp drawn up
* LAW rein­stated
* G-​​Men, Chinese tag team
* U.S. to Israel: No copters for you
* Marines’ green fuel
* GPS fat cat finder
* Maxwell Smart, Semper Fi
* Number two? Not!
* Back to even

(Big ups: Xeni, RC)

“Cheap, Ugly” = Good

Wednesday, September 28th, 2005

The Army’s Future Combat Systems over­haul is FUBAR, we all know. But it’s just the lat­est in a long line of big-​​ticket Pentagon pro­grams to burn cash and squan­der expec­ta­tions.
fcs_t_300.jpgSo it there any way for the Defense Department to buy next-​​gen gear with­out pick­ing tax­pay­ers’ pock­ets and leav­ing sol­diers ass-​​out? Pentagon insider Dave has a few new rules on his blog, Garfield Ridge.

– It has to be cheap…
– Only one, maybe two, leap-​​ahead tech­nolo­gies allowed per pro­gram. The rest of the pro­gram has to rely on stuff we’ve already done before…
– Congress must not care about it. If it hates it, it will cut it and ruin pro­gram sta­bil­ity, par­tic­u­larly in the early years where it’s needed most. If it loves it, it’ll add unneeded money and unre­al­is­tic demands on the pro­gram. The best pro­grams are always the ones that Congress keeps their noses out of.
– The pro­gram must be small enough to fail.

That last one is prob­a­bly the most impor­tant one of all.
Most of the Pentagon’s acqui­si­tion trou­ble in recent years has occurred on pro­grams that are quite sim­ply too big to fail. Either the require­ment is one that can’t be ignored, thus forc­ing the devel­op­ment pro­gram into a fixed sched­ule — never a good idea to do this stuff on a dead­line — or the pro­gram reaches a point where so much money has been spent on it that in the event of fail­ure no one wants to cut their losses and try some­thing new. The moment the con­trac­tor smells fear on the part of the Pentagon, once it knows no one in the Building has the guts to can­cel the pro­gram as it goes south, that’s when the Pentagon takes it in the wazoo from indus­try, often will­ingly.
FCS, for all its nec­es­sary wis­dom — after all, it makes no sense to mod­ern­ize the Army one lit­tle piece at a time — FCS is pre­cisely one of the com­plex sys­tems that the Pentagon can’t seem to run right any­more, if it ever could.
Welcome to the ugly. 

And read the whole thing.

Defense Tech vs. “The World”

Tuesday, September 27th, 2005

You can hear me stam­mer­ing through another inter­view on BBC/​Public Radio International’s “The World” this after­noon. I’ll be talk­ing about my favorite $450 bil­lion sci­ence project.
THERE’S MORE: It’s online now, here.