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 October, 2005

Captain America in the Forever War

Monday, October 31st, 2005

American troops in Iraq are near-​​suicidal. Or maybe they couldnt be hap­pier. It all depends on the fla­vor of blog you read, I guess. But what I found in my time in Iraq didnt cling to any neat polit­i­cal sto­ry­line.
sgt_looking.jpgOver three weeks in and around Baghdad this July, I spoke to dozens and dozens of sol­diers about their views on the con­flict. For the most part, morale among these infantry­men and engi­neers and bomb-​​disposers was high. Shockingly high, given the fact that they didnt buy the Bush admin­is­tra­tions ratio­nales for the war.
Democracy? Here? Are you fuck­ing kid­ding me? one sergeant laughed, as we drove near the Abu Ghraib prison. This was from a guy from helped safe­guard the January round of elec­tions. He fig­ures the place will col­lapse into civil war as soon as U.S. troops leave.
But hes glad hes in Iraq, regard­less. Mostly, because of the insur­gents.
The gueril­las in Iraq have been bru­tal, killing way more inno­cent bystanders than American occu­piers or Iraqi col­lab­o­ra­tors. While I was in Baghdad, a group of sol­diers in a nearby neigh­bor­hood were hand­ing out candy to bunch of kids. Until a sui­cide bomber stepped in, and killed 27.
It bog­gles my mind, how some­one can go into a crowd of kids, and kill them all. Ill never under­stand it. But thats why Im here, said Staff Sgt. Mark Palmer, with the 717th Ordnance Disposal Company, an Army bomb squad. Yeah, its still fun to blow stuff up. But its not the core thing. Figuring out how this shit [the bomb] works. Stopping it from hurt­ing peo­ple. Thats the main thing.
U.S. troops are highly trained. So theyll do what theyre ordered. But in order to feel good about their mis­sion, they need a cause. They need a bad guy, a vil­lain, so they can play Captain America. The insur­gents have been only too happy to step col­lec­tively into the role of Dr. Doom.
The result is a cycle of attack and reprisal that has noth­ing to do with WMD or draft­ing con­sti­tu­tions but can eas­ily drag on for years. Most of the sol­diers I spoke with didnt expect the deadly feed­back loop to stop any time this decade. Im stay­ing [in the Army] until I retire, which is another ten years, one non-​​commissioned offi­cer told me. So I fig­ure Ill be back here, what, another five or six times?
Most of these GIs were ready to whoop ass, when they first get to Iraq. Theyre part of Americas pro­fes­sional, increasingly-​​permanent mil­i­tary class. Which means theyve been train­ing for years to go to war with pre­cious few full-​​out bat­tles to fight. For a solider, this is like the Super Bowl, Captain Greg Hirschey, the 717ths com­mand­ing offi­cer, said.
But the Super Bowl is only one day long. To keep going for years and years, they need a mis­sion, a rea­son to stay and fight. Washington isnt pro­vid­ing. The insur­gents are.
And make no mis­take, sol­diers are stay­ing. Id say three in four of the GIs I spoke with were plan­ning to reen­list. The new, fat bonuses are one rea­son, of course. But another is the sense that there are real-​​life psy­chopaths out there that need to be stopped. It may sound corny. It may sound dumb. But thats what I saw.
THERES MORE: Now, Id be remiss if I didnt throw in a few caveats here. These sol­diers we all sta­tioned at Camp Victory, the posh­est mil­i­tary base Ive ever seen. Its also one of the safer places would could be in a war­zone. Which means bet­ter morale. Could sol­diers and marines feel dif­fer­ently out in the sticks, where its MREs three times a day and mor­tars all night? You bet. Also, I was in Iraq in July. Since then, 233 American troops have died over there. That could have been a major morale-​​changer, too.
AND MORE: Chris is embed­ded with the 2–2 Batallion of the II Marine Expeditionary Force in the Anbar province. Which means you go read his blog, now.
AND MORE: Joe Katzman’s response is really worth a read.

Kidding Around

Monday, October 31st, 2005

It’s as if the U.S. Navy added 30 destroy­ers in three years. That’s how much the Pentagon is beef­ing up Tawain’s fleet, with two pairs of retired Kidd-​​class anti-​​air destroy­ers. The first set was trans­ferred on Oct. 29. The sec­ond pair will be handed over in 2007.
Kidd.jpgThe Kidds were retired by the U.S. Navy in the mid-​​1990s and pur­chased by Taiwan in 2001. With the advent of the Arleigh Burke class armed with Aegis radar, Vertical Launch System for SM-​​2 mis­siles, the rail-​​launcher-​​armed Kidds became redun­dant, despite being less than 20 years old when retired.
At 9,000 tons dis­place­ment, the Kidds will increase by one-​​third the ton­nage of Taiwans major sur­face com­bat­ant force. (Lately the U.S. has been decreas­ing its sur­face fleet by as many as ten hulls and tens of thou­sands of tons per year.)
Besides sig­nif­i­cantly bulk­ing up Taiwans navy, the Kidds will give the force its first mod­ern air-​​defense capa­bil­ity and should prove a sig­nif­i­cant deter­rent against Chinas largely-​​outdated sur­face fleet, which depends heav­ily on land-​​based air cover. The Kidd deal has under­stand­ably angered China. While many in the U.S. are eager to tout China as the next super­power and a naval rival, cooler heads point out that China is heav­ily depen­dent on mar­itime trade and energy imports and that its naval mod­ern­iza­tion is largely intended to secure sea lines of com­mu­ni­ca­tion and to coun­ter­bal­ance Indian intru­sion into regional waters. Besides, on the seas China is still a gen­er­a­tion behind the U.S. and years behind Taiwan. The Kidds only extend that dis­par­ity.
David Axe

America’s Army Hits the X-​​Box

Monday, October 31st, 2005

This is my first post here at Defense Tech. Noah was kind enough to let me play in the Defense Tech sand­box for a cou­ple of days, because I’m down here in DC to cover the Serious Games Summit. My nor­mal gig is as Technology Correspondent for The World, an inter­na­tional news pro­gram co-​​produced by the BBC World Service in London, and WGBH pub­lic radio in Boston.
xbox_AA2.jpgAfter a long morn­ing filled with alot of talk about the inter­sec­tion of phys­i­cal, infor­ma­tional, and cog­ni­tive worlds of gam­ing (some­where in there I think I heard “inter-​​linked topolo­gies,” but I hadn’t had much cof­fee yet, so…), I think I finally hit on some use­ful info.
America’s Army, the pop­u­lar first per­son shooter, is com­ing out on X-​​Box on November 15th. But that’s not even half the story, or even the really good part of the story. The Army is work­ing with numer­ous com­pa­nies to expand AA, which started out as a recruit­ment and pro­mo­tional tool, into an across-​​the-​​board train­ing sim. We’re talk­ing some­thing that will be with a sol­dier from the recruit­ing sta­tion, to basic train­ing, and right on through to the streets of Baghdad and Kandahar.
This isn’t just on the desk­top. A stripped down Humvee, for exam­ple, can be put in what they’re call­ing a Seamless Synthetic Training Domain, sur­rounded by white walls. A gun­ner and dri­ver can then sit in the Humvee, while a train­ing scene — say it’s a con­voy sce­nario in Mosul — plays out on 360 degrees worth of white screens. The sim records their hits and misses, the things they did right, and the things they did wrong. The sol­diers wear vests that record the hits vir­tual bad­dies score on them, and the sim­u­la­tion adjusts accord­ingly. Other sol­diers, linked via PC, can even play the bad guys in the sce­nario. All the infor­ma­tion is recorded, and It can be fed back into the sys­tem for an After Action Review. Whoah.
More to come…
Clark Boyd

Laser Rifle Dazzles?

Monday, October 31st, 2005

Granted, the thing looks fake. And no, I can’t find this sup­posed press release any­where else on the web — which is usu­ally a bad sign.
dazzler_maybe.jpgBut… c’mon. How could I resist post­ing about this alleged Air Force super-​​duper laser daz­zler, espe­cially when it’s called PHaSR? (That’s short for “Personnel Halting and Stimulation Response,” by the way.)
The Air Force Research Lab opens up around 11am east­ern time. I hope to have an answer shortly after. But until then… Enjoy!

A laser tech­nol­ogy being devel­oped by Air Force Research Laboratory employ­ees at Kirtland Air Force Base, N.M. will be the first man-​​portable, non-​​lethal deter­rent weapon intended for pro­tect­ing troops and con­trol­ling hos­tile crowds.
The weapon, devel­oped by the laboratory’s Directed Energy Directorate, employs a two-​​wavelength laser sys­tem and is the first of its kind as a hand-​​held, single-​​operator sys­tem for troop and perime­ter defense. The laser light used in the weapon tem­porar­ily impairs aggres­sors by illu­mi­nat­ing or “daz­zling” indi­vid­u­als, remov­ing their abil­ity to see the laser source.
The first two pro­to­types of the Personnel Halting and Stimulation Response, or PHaSR, were built at Kirtland last month and deliv­ered to the laboratory’s Human Effectiveness Directorate at Brooks City Base, Texas, and the Joint Non-​​Lethal Weapons Directorate at Quantico, Va. for test­ing.
“The future is here with PHaSR,” said pro­gram man­ager Capt. Thomas Wegner. Wegner is also the ScorpWorks flight com­man­der within the Laser Division of the direc­torate. ScorpWorks is a unit of mil­i­tary sci­en­tists and engi­neers that devel­ops laser sys­tem pro­to­types for AFRL, from begin­ning con­cept to prod­uct field test­ing.
The National Institute of Justice recently awarded ScorpWorks $250,000 to make an advanced pro­to­type that will add an eye-​​safe laser range finder into PHaSR. Systems such as PHaSR have his­tor­i­cally been too pow­er­ful at close ranges and inef­fec­tive but eye-​​safe at long ranges. The next pro­to­type… is planned for com­ple­tion in March 2006.

THERE’S MORE: “A task force charged with study­ing poten­tial directed energy threats to U.S. mil­i­tary air­craft… has sent senior ser­vice lead­ers a plan to ensure next-​​generation planes pro­tect pilots and crews from laser attacks,” Inside Defense reports. There’s not much detail, how­ever, on what that paln entails, other than more laser-​​safe eye­wear.
AND MORE: Confirmed.

Rapid Fire 10/​31/​05

Monday, October 31st, 2005

* Infrared vs. snipers
* Laser tag for Marines
* Ice, ice, Osprey
* B-​​2 engi­neer = spy
* “Smart dust,” for real?
* UK’s nuke city
(back­ground here, kinda)
* “Boeing’s her­itage build­ing UFO space­craft
* “How to Survive a Robot Uprising

(Big ups: RC, JQP, KR)

Jamming with the B-​​52s

Friday, October 28th, 2005

For months, observers have been pre­dict­ing big cuts to tra­di­tional weapons pro­grams as a result of the Defense Department’s 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), due in February. But on Oct. 26, Defense News quoted Ryan Henry, deputy under­sec­re­tary of defense for pol­icy, say­ing the QDR would instead focus on how to adapt tra­di­tional weapons to non­tra­di­tional war­fare like that in Iraq. Henry cited the now-​​cliche exam­ple of B-​​52s drop­ping satellite-​​guided bombs over Afghanistan.
b52dt.jpgHenry’s state­ment is inter­est­ing in light of recent reports from Air Force Times that the EB-​​52 mod­i­fi­ca­tion pro­gram is on the QDR chop­ping block. The EB-​​52 pro­gram would mod­ify 16 1962-​​vintage B-​​52Hs to carry pod­ded elec­tronic noise jam­mers to foil air defenses. The first EB-​​52 would be ready in 2014. Currently the jam­ming mis­sion is han­dled by the Navy’s 100 or so geri­atric EA-​​6B Prowlers, which are due to be replaced by 90 EA-​​18Gs in a few years. The EB-​​52s would give the Air Force an air­borne jam­ming capa­bil­ity it has lacked since retir­ing the EF-​​111 in 1998. While stand­off jam­ming is def­i­nitely a mis­sion for the kind of high-​​intensity war­fare the Pentagon has been de-​​emphasizing of late, jam­mers like the EA-​​6B have proved adapt­able to low-​​intensity war­fare. This year, Prowlers began fly­ing mis­sions over Iraq to jam the sig­nals that det­o­nate IEDs.
There’s more at stake in the EB-​​52 pro­gram than its rel­e­vance to both high-​​and low-​​intensity war­fare. NATO gen­er­als reg­u­larly cite air­borne jam­ming as one of Europe’s major capa­bil­ity short­falls. That means the West depends almost entirely on a small num­ber of U.S. jam­ming air­craft to sup­press air defenses in coali­tion air cam­paigns like those over Kosovo and Iraq. The EB-​​52 would do a lot to relieve the pres­sure on the sure-​​to-​​be-​​overworked EA-​​18G crews.
David Axe

Mind Meld for Sat Sort

Friday, October 28th, 2005

Sorting through satel­lite imagery is tough. There are tons and tons of mate­r­ial, only a frac­tion of which can be reviewed in any­thing resem­bling a timely fash­ion. And very lit­tle of that is of any mil­i­tary use at all. Software sys­tems can help, a bit. But, accord­ing to the mad sci­en­tists at Darpa, “the human visual sys­tem is still the best tar­get detec­tion appa­ra­tus” there is.
Spock_mind_meld.jpgThe agency would like to har­ness that sys­tem bet­ter. Not just the con­scious mind. But the auto­matic and instant fir­ing of neu­rons that goes on every time we take a look at some­thing.
“Preliminary research shows that an ana­lysts brain reg­is­ters the dis­cov­ery long before the [imagery] ana­lyst becomes cog­ni­tively aware of it. Thus, the brain can sig­nal the dis­cov­ery three times faster than the ana­lyst can respond,” agency pro­gram man­ager Amy Kruse told the DarpaTech con­fer­ence last August.
As part of her “Neurotechnology for Intelligence Analysts” (NIA) effort, Kruse wants researchers to “dis­cover and char­ac­ter­ize the neural sig­na­tures for tar­get detec­tion events in the human brain.” The goal of the year-​​long study is to demon­strate “an image ‘triage’ sys­tem in which sub­jects are rapidly shown sta­tic imagery. Signals are clas­si­fied in real time and the cor­re­spond­ing imagery shown is then sorted based on the clas­si­fi­ca­tion of the neural sig­na­tures into sets of images that con­tain targets/​regions of inter­est ver­sus those that con­tain none.“
Lotsa luck.

The Carter Chronicles

Thursday, October 27th, 2005

It was some time in January of ’03, only a few days after Defense Tech went live, that I first got an e-​​mail from Phil Carter. He dug the site, and I sure liked his blog, Intel Dump. In the two and a half years since, we’ve become pals. We’ve shared beers on both coasts. Pigged out at Kosher and Cuban joints. Even split a hotel room, once. More impor­tant, maybe, the for­mer Army cap­tain has been a ground­ing influ­ence on me as I’ve picked my way through mil­i­tary issues, pro­vid­ing level-​​headed responses to my not-​​infrequent hys­te­ria.
So I got a lump in my throat when Phil called me one night, to tell me he was back in the Army, and headed for Iraq.
This week, Phil — a fre­quent Slate con­trib­u­tor — has a week-​​long diary on his return to uni­formed life. It’s a must-​​read.

My dad vol­un­teered to throw a back­yard going-​​away party to gather all my friends and fam­ily in one place to send me off. The party started in a fairly jubi­lant mood, given the occa­sion; my fam­ily doesn’t do a lot of big get-​​togethers, so this was spe­cial despite its cause. But as the night went on and peo­ple started to leave, and I had to start say­ing good­bye, the night became much tougher. I had resolved not to drink much because I wanted to remem­ber every­one and every­thing about my last night in Los Angeles with every­one. But when it came time to hug my grand­mother for the last time, I sud­denly wished I had fin­ished the case of Sam Adams I had brought. After my fam­ily departed, leav­ing only my close friends, the con­ver­sa­tion finally veered to my sub­ject of my deploy­ment itself. I tried to explain as much as I could, but found myself say­ing “I don’t know” more than any other phrase.
By the time the day came to report, I had numbed to the thought of my deploy­ment. My check­list of tasks was com­plete: I had moved out, closed out my legal prac­tice, hugged my dog, packed my bags, and said my good­byes. Eventually, the time came to leave. My par­ents drove me to the air­port so I could catch the 4:30 p.m. Southwest flight from Los Angeles to Nashville. We hugged at the curb­side briefly, and that was it. I walked into the air­port, went through secu­rity with­out a has­sle, and sat down at Gate 13 with my bags to wait for the flight. I spent an hour hand-​​writing my will on the legal pad I had brought with me to write let­ters home, and then spent the next hour lis­ten­ing to my iPod, try­ing to relax while wait­ing for my flight. It would be a while before I saw Los Angeles again.

Northcom Negs New Powers

Thursday, October 27th, 2005

After the Katrina deba­cle, there was a need for action — or, at last, a need for the appear­ance of action. So President Bush went down to Jackson Square in New Orleans, and “called for a vastly expanded mil­i­tary role in dis­as­ter relief, includ­ing ‘recon­sid­er­a­tion’ of a century-​​old law ban­ning the active-​​duty mil­i­tary from law-​​enforcement duties,” Defense Tech pal Spencer Ackerman notes in this week’s New Republic.
soldier_boat.jpg

That law, the Posse Comitatus Act (PCA) of 1878, is widely con­sid­ered to be a cor­ner­stone in the devel­op­ment of U.S. lib­erty. Enacted after Reconstruction, when much of the South was under mil­i­tary occu­pa­tion (and fed­eral troops mon­i­tored polit­i­cal ral­lies and stood guard at polling places), it sought to pre­vent any sub­se­quent use of the mil­i­tary to per­form tra­di­tional police duties.

There’s a num­ber of strange things about Bush’s request to recon­sider PCA. First off, “there’s no evi­dence that the PCA had any­thing to do with the administration’s bun­gled response to Hurricane Katrina,” Ackerman observes. Second, there doesn’t seem to be any­one in the military’s upper ech­e­lons who thinks PCA is get­ting in their way.

When I asked Bush’s senior Pentagon offi­cial for home­land defense, Assistant Secretary Paul McHale, whether the PCA is a relic of an out­moded era, he imme­di­ately responded “absolutely not.” And, last week, Admiral Timothy Keating, who heads U.S. Northern Command, told The New York Times that “I’m not at all con­vinced that we need to go back and revise Posse Comitatus…“
The real obsta­cle to more effec­tive dis­as­ter relief isn’t the PCA; it’s the com­po­si­tion of the mil­i­tary itself. Three years after its estab­lish­ment, NORTHCOM — the regional mil­i­tary com­mand respon­si­ble for the con­ti­nen­tal United States — still doesn’t have much in the way of des­ig­nated mil­i­tary assets, such as air­craft or ships, that can facil­i­tate rapid deploy­ment of troops or civil­ian aid work­ers in the event of a cat­a­strophic dis­as­ter. (To his credit, Keating is work­ing on a plan to cre­ate a rapid-​​response active-​​duty force to assist Guardsmen in a domes­tic cri­sis…)
“If we expect [Defense] to arrive on the scene in large num­bers 24 hours after an event,” says McHale, “we’re going to have to sig­nif­i­cantly alter our force struc­ture, train­ing, and equip­ping of this depart­ment, and sig­nif­i­cantly reduce our expec­ta­tions of response nor­mally tasked to state and local gov­ern­ments under our fed­eral system.” 

Talkin’ Tasers

Wednesday, October 26th, 2005

The ironies started early. Here we were, in a museum devoted to things that kill — from lances to revolvers to laser weapons of the “Western Space Alliance.” But inside the cranberry-​​colored audi­to­rium at the Royal Armouries in Leeds, we 120-​​or-​​so white guys gath­ered to talk about weapons that are specif­i­cally designed not to cause last­ing harm.
taser_side_mirror.JPGMost of the pre­sen­ters at Jane’s 8th Annual Less-​​Lethal Weapons Conference — and most of the audi­ence — were cops or sol­diers or weapons sales­men or military-​​funded aca­d­e­mics. So I fig­ured the pre­sen­ta­tions would mostly sing the praises of these weapons. That’s the way it would’ve worked back home, in the U.S.
But things were dif­fer­ent here. Of the eleven speak­ers today, two were out­wardly hos­tile. Five more expressed seri­ous reser­va­tions about “less-​​lethals,” gen­er­ally — and about specif­i­cally about Tasers, the high­est pro­file of the weapons.
As the cri­tiques piled up, how­ever, I got increas­ingly ner­vous. Because I had been told it was my job to “stir things up” at the con­fab. So I had pre­pared a pretty tough analy­sis of the often ham-​​handed, often squir­relly way that Taser International mar­kets its prod­ucts and deals with the press. (Click here for the pre­pared text.)
So I gulped, and got on stage. Instantly, I was told by the mod­er­a­tor to make it quick, because things were run­ning behind sched­ule. Gulp again. But I took the time to start with a beer joke. At least it would get the Canadians in the room laugh­ing.
As I plowed through my talk , I could see the host get­ting more and more uncom­fort­able. See, Taser was one of the main spon­sors of the con­fer­ence. And I was at least the fifth or sixth guy pee­ing on the company’s parade. About three-​​quarters of the way through the talk, the mod­er­a­tor cut me off. I guess it was get­ting late. Plus, the mod­er­a­tor wanted to assure the audi­ence — and the folks from Taser, stand­ing in the back — that my talk was “billed” as a speech on “press rela­tions.” It was a mis­take to focus too much on one com­pany, he added.
I got back on the mic, and empha­sized that I wasn’t try­ing to beat up on the com­pany (well, not its prod­ucts, any­way). Taser was just a case study. It’s the less-​​lethal weapons-​​maker we all knew best in the States. And how it’s per­ceived will reflect on other less-​​lethal firms — and users — for years to come. The audi­ence clapped to that. And after­wards, a rep from Taser said he had enjoyed the talk. He’d fly in from London, he told me, to per­son­ally show me around the company’s Arizona HQ.

(more…)