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 May, 2006

Homeland Security Cuts for NYC, DC

Wednesday, May 31st, 2006

Just when you thought the Homeland Security depart­ment couldn’t pos­si­bly get any dumber…

The two cities attacked on Sept. 11, 2001, will receive far less antiter­ror­ism money under plans unveiled today by the Department of Homeland Security, which has des­ig­nated more money for many smaller cities through­out the coun­try.
Washington and New York will receive 40 per­cent less in urban grant money com­pared to last year, with Washington drop­ping from $77 mil­lion to $46 mil­lion and New York falling from $207 mil­lion to $124 mil­lion, DHS offi­cials said. The com­bined total means that the two areas bear almost the entire brunt of a $120 mil­lion cut in the over­all bud­get for the pro­gram, the sta­tis­tics show.

Chris Beckner has a more char­i­ta­ble view. But I’m with House Homeland Security Committee chair­man Peter King on this one: “This is inde­fen­si­ble.”

Army’s Contrived Cash Crunch

Wednesday, May 31st, 2006

Empty-pockets.jpgTimes are tight at the Army — sorta kinda, at least for the moment. Vice Chief of Staff Gen. Richard Cody has ordered the ser­vice to stop buy­ing “non-​​critical” spare parts and sup­plies last week, Inside Defense reports. And if the Army doesn’t get some extra money from Congress soon, it’ll have to stop hir­ing new civil­ian work­ers, “freeze” all new con­tracts, and “release ser­vice con­tract employ­ees, [includ­ing] recruiters,” accord­ing to a May 26th memo from Cody.
Sure sounds like a cri­sis. But it’s actu­ally one Cody & Co. cooked up them­selves. For years, the Army has been rely­ing more and more on “sup­ple­men­tal” spend­ing bills — extra cash from Congress, ear­marked for oper­a­tions in Afghanistan and Iraq, that’s sup­posed to be pro­vided on an emer­gency basis.
Except now, the emer­gen­cies are rou­tine. Every year, the Army busts through its approx­i­mately $160 bil­lion bud­get. Every year, the ser­vice asks for more money — to cover war costs, sure. But also to pay for stuff like the Joint Network Node, a kind of wi-​​fi hotspot for the bat­tle­field. And to recon­fig­ure the Army into smaller brigades. It’s a form of black­mail, more or less: give us our money, Congress. Or risk being nailed as “anti-​​soldier.“
“I always tell peo­ple, thank God for the sup­ple­men­tal. We would not be able to do any­thing… with­out them,” Lt. Gen. Joseph Yakovac told an Association of the United States Army con­fer­ence in 2004. “If those dont hap­pen, were in a world of hurt.“
This year is no dif­fer­ent. Hence Cody’s plea for belt-​​tightening. But wouldn’t it be bet­ter — and smarter, and more hon­est — to be upfront about all these costs, instead of black­mail­ing the Hill into action?

Rapid Fire 05/​31/​06

Wednesday, May 31st, 2006

* Supremes dis whistle-​​blowers
* Border fence, for real
* Russia’s Space Ship One
* FBI’s biowar file
* “Satellite could open door on extra dimen­sion
* De-​​nuke
every Trident?
* It’s pretty easy being green (espe­cially in New York)

(Big ups: HLS Watch)

Chicago Cops Crack Heads, Ride Scooters

Wednesday, May 31st, 2006

Chicago cops have a well-​​deserved rep­u­ta­tion for being the tough­est guys in a tough town. But you’ve got to won­der how many heads they are going to have to crack to keep that rep­u­ta­tion up, now that more and more offi­cers are rid­ing around the Windy City on Segway scoot­ers.
segway_cop.jpgThe CPD is spend­ing about a half-​​million dol­lars to buy up 100 scoot­ers and parts. That’s on top of the 50 Segways already in use at O’Hare and Midway air­ports, and around the lake­front.
Cops have become a key mar­ket for the scooter-​​maker, after the machines failed to catch on with the gen­eral pub­lic. Around the coun­try, 125 law enforce­ment agen­cies now use Segways, the com­pany claims.

In Los Angeles County… offi­cers prize it because it allows them to stand a head taller than they would on foot, so they can see over crowds and cars and project a more promi­nent pres­ence at events like the Rose Bowl parade.
The scoot­ers, which travel as fast as 12.5 mph, also allow an offi­cer on patrol to cover a much greater dis­tance than on foot, and go indoors, onto ele­va­tors and other places big­ger vehi­cles can’t. Blair said the added effi­ciency allows a force to cut down on the num­ber of patrol offi­cers on each shift and recoup the Segway’s cost in as quickly as a month.
Several bomb squads such as those in Ventura County, Calif., and Little Rock, Ark., use Segways to trans­port offi­cers in bulky bombproof and hazardous-​​material suits that can weigh as much as 100 pounds. The Segway allows them to scoot in and out of a scene quickly, with­out hav­ing to wad­dle in on foot. 

Last year, Segway came out with its i80 police model, which fea­tures a longer bat­tery life, giv­ing the scooter the an energy effi­ciency equiv­a­lent of 450 miles per hour gal­lon — with no emis­sions. The machine also boasts “Reflective Trim [that] helps estab­lish your pres­ence and enhance offi­cer vis­i­bil­ity” and a “Comfort Mat [that] alle­vi­ates fatigue that can occur when stand­ing for long peri­ods.” Not that Chicago cops get tired. Ever.
(Big ups: Gizmag)

It Plays the New DVDs, Too

Tuesday, May 30th, 2006

The June edi­tion of National Defense has this short tech talk arti­cle about a new chem-​​bio detec­tor pro­duced by Purdue University. If suc­cess­ful, it could be a use­ful tool for peo­ple search­ing bags or con­tain­ers for chem-​​bio agents or as a quick foren­sic tool at a ter­ror­ist chem-​​bio incident.TT_Handheld.jpg

Miniature chemical-​​biological detec­tion devices, that in the future could be deployed in wire­less net­works to pro­tect build­ings, sub­ways and air­ports, have been per­fected by sci­en­tists from Purdue University in Lafayette, Ind.
Prototypes of the hand­held mass spec­trom­e­ters called Mini 10s are able to quickly iden­tify traces of the tri­ace­tone triper­ox­ide that was used in the London sub­way bomb­ing and is found in many impro­vised explo­sive devices. Many other mate­ri­als, includ­ing TNT and plas­tic explo­sives, have been tagged.
Test results are pro­duced in sec­onds, which com­pares to the cur­rent method of col­lect­ing sam­ples and then dis­patch­ing them to a lab­o­ra­tory for identification.

It may be slightly pre­ma­ture to run out and place stocks into this product’s future man­u­fac­turer, though. What the National Defense arti­cle didn’t men­tion, but the researchers admit, is that this is just a pro­to­type design that could use a few more years of test­ing and design work.

Sampling is done with a long, tube­like wand that both deliv­ers the gas and sucks up the result­ing ion­ized com­pound. It is this wand that the team likens to their blood­hounds new nose. The wands tip must come within 5 mil­lime­ters of the sam­ple to be effec­tive, but the group has also found a way to build a mass spec­trom­e­ter that weighs about 18 kilo­grams (40 pounds), which means it can be car­ried to the sam­ple, rather than forc­ing inves­ti­ga­tors to bring the sam­ple to it.
“This backpack-​​size device will be use­ful for field analy­sis of chem­i­cals, fill­ing a need in air­port bag­gage secu­rity and drug detec­tion,” said Wiseman, a grad­u­ate stu­dent work­ing on the project. “While the tech­nique obvi­ously can­not look inside pack­ages to see what is inside, residue from explo­sives and drugs often remains on the hands of who­ever packed it, and some is trans­ferred dur­ing han­dling to the pack­ages sur­face. That remain­ing residue is what this device will be good for detect­ing.“
While the team is opti­mistic about the devices poten­tial for appli­ca­tion in the lab and on the street, Gologan cau­tioned that a bet­ter under­stand­ing of its func­tion­ing was still needed. 

Still, it’s an inter­est­ing con­cept. I would haz­ard a guess that the military’s lab­o­ra­to­ries are too focused on devel­op­ing future gear for mil­i­tary com­bat oper­a­tions — not that any­thing new has come out of the DOD’s Chemical-​​Biological Defense Program for a few years now — and DHS’s lab­o­ra­to­ries have relied too much on unre­al­is­tic R&D projects from the National Labs to have any new equip­ment, either. Good to see that we have uni­ver­si­ties and indus­try to rely on for future com­bat­ing ter­ror­ist WMD tools.
Jason Sigger, Armchair Generalist

Rapid Fire 05/​29/​06 (UPDATED)

Monday, May 29th, 2006

* Drone video = Haditha key?
* Air-charter’s rocket stock­pile
* Darpa goal: bionic arm by ’09
* Fewer secrets in ’05
* Nanotech means smaller ships?
* Lasers enrich ura­nium?
* Kiwi crys­tals of death
* Ft. Hood turns out the lights
* Wings could let para­troop­ers fly 200 km
* Owen West: Get over 2003, already
* Michel: Haditha “shows the warn­ing signs of infamy… [But] we will not be party to gen­er­al­iza­tions and nave over­sim­pli­fi­ca­tions about… con­duct in bat­tle.“
* Pantano: don’t rush to judge Haditha

(Big ups: CC, RC, DS, Winds, AT)
UPDATE 4:19 PM: Haninah is call­ing BS on the laser enrich­ment story.

Beijing Feeds the Hype

Monday, May 29th, 2006

In the last few days, China has voiced its dis­ap­proval of the new Pentagon report eval­u­at­ing Chinas mil­i­tary. The com­ments have been about what youd expect, along the lines of the Foreign Ministry spokesman that accused the Pentagon of a “Cold War men­tal­ity.“
But that didn’t stop Beijing from feed­ing the hype by unveil­ing an ambi­tious new pro­gram to enhance its capa­bil­ity to inno­vate, develop and rapidly sup­ply new-​​generation weaponry on the same day it was crit­i­ciz­ing the US for “con­tin­u­ing to ped­dle the so-​​called ‘China threat.’”
Sino Tech army.jpg The 15-​​year endeavor will include new and high-​​technologies for the space indus­try, avi­a­tion, ship and marine engi­neer­ing, nuclear energy and fuel, and infor­ma­tion tech­nol­ogy for both mil­i­tary and civil­ian pur­poses, with a focus on devel­op­ment of new and high-​​tech weaponry.
The effort to develop new tech­nolo­gies may run up against Chinas con­tin­u­ing dif­fi­cul­ties with fraud in its sci­en­tific and R&D com­mu­ni­ties, although the gov­ern­ment is also intro­duc­ing ini­tia­tives to con­front these prob­lems.
In truth, the new mil­i­tary tech­nol­ogy plan doesnt appear to mark any actual depar­ture from the trends the Pentagon report already noted this is new PR and pack­ag­ing, not new pol­icy. But youd think some­one would real­ize that its dif­fi­cult to pro­tect your inter­na­tional image as a peace­ful, sta­bi­liz­ing pres­ence the same day youre try­ing to instill national pride in your new, pow­er­ful, high-​​tech mil­i­tary. Maybe they should divert a few yuan to mod­ern­iz­ing their media oper­a­tion.
Its actu­ally been a rough cou­ple of weeks for Chinese spokes­men address­ing secu­rity rela­tions with the US. Last week, they had to deal with a Taiwanese sales rep for Lockheed who pled guilty to spy­ing for China and attempt­ing to pur­chase US mil­i­tary tech­nol­ogy for ship­ment to China. A few days later, they were crit­i­ciz­ing a State Dept announce­ment that none of the Departments thou­sands of new Lenovo com­put­ers would be used on clas­si­fied net­works, out of secu­rity con­cerns with the Chinese com­pa­nys sys­tems. The FBIs Chinese spy is still in the news as well.
So it looks to be a trend of hawks and pes­simists steer­ing the technology/​security poli­cies of both coun­tries lately. Not to worry our China pol­icy remains as mud­dled as ever: In devel­op­ments that are appar­ently com­pletely unre­lated, this month China (and the American Chamber of Commerce in China) asked the US to relax export con­trols of high-​​tech goods, and appar­ently that wont be a prob­lem.
Matthew Tompkins

What do you do?

Saturday, May 27th, 2006

On November 19, Marines from Kilo Co., 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines were patrolling the town of Haditha in west­ern Iraq when a road­side bomb exploded. Lance Cpl. Miguel Terrazas, 20, was killed.
“Everybody agrees agrees that this was the trig­ger­ing event,” lawyer Paul Hackett told The Washington Post. “The ques­tion is, what hap­pened after­ward?“
marines.jpgThe Marine Corps reported that one Marine and 15 civil­ians were killed in the bomb­ing. The Post and The New York Times quote wit­nesses say­ing that only Terrazas died in the bomb­ing, and that enraged Marines stormed sev­eral houses and killed as many as two dozen inno­cent Iraqi civil­ians in retal­i­a­tion. Sen. John Warner (R-​​Vir.), chair­man of the Armed Services Committee, which is inves­ti­gat­ing the inci­dent, insists there was no cover-​​up.
I don’t know what hap­pened in Haditha that day. But I do know this: the U.S. Marine Corps trains its peo­ple to respect rules of engage­ment and to pro­tect inno­cent lives on the bat­tle­field.
“In a counter-​​insurgency, you don’t have a clear delin­eation of bound­aries [between civil­ians and com­bat­ants], so the rules of engage­ment and the esca­la­tion of force a Marine needs to take … we’re empha­siz­ing those more,” Lt. Col. Tracy Tafolla, head of Marine Air-​​Ground Task Force Training Branch, U.S. Marine Corps Training and Education Command, told me recently. He con­tin­ued:
One of our most impor­tant lessons is [regard­ing] cul­tural train­ing. We’ve incor­po­rated [cul­tural] train­ing across our train­ing con­tin­uum. Marines are receiv­ing that all the way from the School of Infantry to service-​​level exer­cises, to the point where we have Arabic-​​speakers as role-​​players [in exer­cises], giv­ing us good feed­back. The role-​​players responses to the Marines and their actions — that is some­thing that we’ve tried to make sure our Marines under­stand. Something we as Marines don’t think twice about may be an offense to peo­ple over there [in Iraq]. We try to make sure we treat Iraqis fairly and with respect. We don’t want to do any­thing to dis­re­spect those who might be friendly to us. You must under­stand who you’re deal­ing with, what are their ways. You keep those who are friendly, friendly.
There has been no resis­tance to the train­ing. As a mat­ter of fact, the infor­ma­tion we get back [from Marines] is good. If we’re miss­ing the mark, its crit­i­cal that the Marines tell us what we need to do. Across the board, Marines are glad to get the train­ing.

Maj. Gen. Keith Stalder, chief of Training and Education Command chimed in too:
How to get along with the civil­ian pop­u­la­tion is at the core of [our cul­tural train­ing]. Marines get enough lan­guage train­ing to be con­ver­sa­tional, to be polite, sen­si­tive and in fact to oper­ate in a more coher­ent way in an insur­gency envi­ron­ment. We stress the cul­tural inter­ac­tion. We use what we call vignettes where we chal­lenge units to react prop­erly given a very very chal­leng­ing prob­lem.
Consider Haditha the most chal­leng­ing prob­lem ever. You’ve just been blown up. Your buddy is dead. You’re angry. You feel vul­ner­a­ble. You have great power at the end of your trig­ger fin­ger, power to lash out, pun­ish some­one — any­one — for the pain you’ve suf­fered.
What do you do?
What do you do?
These Haditha alle­ga­tions have the poten­tial to cause great harm to the U.S. war effort and to the U.S. Marine Corps. We should not shrug from the truth. Nor should we for­get that a few bad Marines do not rep­re­sent the entire Marine Corps or the entire U.S. mil­i­tary.
I’ll be cov­er­ing Haditha for Military​.com. Anyone with any tips or thoughts on the sub­ject, please email me ASAP.
David Axe

Take Back Memorial Day

Friday, May 26th, 2006

This morn­ing I opened the paper and a series of cir­cu­lars spilled onto my lap bright, col­ored pages with bold fonts and fre­netic lan­guage: Now through Memorial Day only! and A Dont Miss Memorial Day Sales Event! As I took a deep breath and gath­ered up the pages that had spilled to the floor, at once it struck me: We owe more than com­merce to those who sac­ri­ficed the bal­ance of their lives for their coun­try. It’s time to take back Memorial Day.
Memorial Day is meant to be a solemn occa­sion, a uniquely mil­i­tary hol­i­daythe only one that hon­ors fallen sol­diers. But since the first one on May 30, 1868, a lit­tle after the Civil War (then known as Decoration Day) when flow­ers were placed on the graves of sol­diers from both the North and the South, Memorial Days quiet rev­er­ence has slowly been lost to the noise of com­merce and the American pur­suit of recre­ation. This didnt hap­pen overnight; it snuck up on us. And its not nec­es­sar­ily the fault of the American peo­ple who time and again have proved them­selves patri­ots.
Even more sur­pris­ing is that this dis­ap­point­ing trend hasnt ebbed since the Long War began more than four years ago. Today the solem­nity once asso­ci­ated with this day should be closer to the sur­face. Our nation is at war, which is to say our friends, fam­ily, and neigh­bors are fight­ing. Some of them do not make it home. In recent years, too many Americans have been per­son­ally touched by the sac­ri­fice of bat­tle. But the unfor­tu­nate real­ity is that for most peo­ple, the war remains a dis­tant con­cept, some­thing that hap­pens on TV.
Losing brave Americans on fields of strife is not a new phe­nom­e­non. Its part of our her­itage. For over two hun­dred and twenty five years, our troops have made the ulti­mate sac­ri­fice for what they believed was worth more than their own lives: Freedom. Not just the notion of free­dom or the sound bite called forth in polit­i­cally expe­di­ent ways, but free­dom prac­ticed by Americans every day.
This free­dom is a gift across time, given most often anony­mously. And now it is Memorial Day. How can Americans take it back and do right by the valor that cre­ated this day?
By action. For starters, the National Moment of Remembrance res­o­lu­tion asks that at 3 PM local time on Memorial Day all Americans should vol­un­tar­ily and infor­mally observe in their own way a moment of remem­brance and respect, paus­ing from what­ever they are doing for a moment of silence.
Beyond that, Americans can honor the dead by sup­port­ing the liv­ing, espe­cially those who serve. Send a note or visit the fam­ily of a ser­vice­mem­ber who has died. Visit a vet­eran who is con­va­lesc­ing. Make a dona­tion to the Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors, Armed Forces Relief Trust, or the Armed Services YMCA. Volunteer to work with local vet­er­ans groups. Encourage your employer to pub­licly rec­og­nize the vet­er­ans who work with you. Better yet, com­mit to hire vet­er­ans or mil­i­tary spouses in the com­ing year.
Visit the graves of fallen sol­diers. Leave a flower on the stone. Consider the grave and behold the cost of free­dom.
Or sim­ply shake a Soldiers hand. Support for the troops is more than a sticker on an SUV. Whatever we do, lets make it per­sonal, not com­mer­cial.
Let us take back Memorial Day, not for abstract ideas or guilt for hav­ing for­got­ten, but to pay a debt. To remem­berand to act on the mem­o­ryis the least we can do for the men and women who said, I will die so strangers lives will be bet­ter. Make Memorial Day a per­sonal reflec­tion of a strangers costly gift.
Chris Michel

Stop Funding America’s Enemies

Friday, May 26th, 2006

Imagine if, in the mid­dle of World War II, the U.S. gov­ern­ment and its peo­ple gave Hitler bil­lions of dol­lars, to train troops and build new weapons. Sounds impos­si­ble, right? But that’s more or less the sit­u­a­tion we find our­selves in today, for­mer CIA direc­tor Jim Woolsey recently told the Naval Postgraduate School.
2002146.jpgThe U.S. is in the open­ing stages of a “Long War” with Islamic extrem­ists. And these adver­saries — whether they’re found in madras­sas in Riyadh or the gov­ern­ment in Tehran — are funded, in so small part, by oil rev­enue. Petrodollars go, more or less directly, to train­ing rad­i­cals. Petrodollars get fun­neled to those who make and plant bombs.
“Except for our own Civil War,” Woolsey notes, “this is the only war that we have fought where we are pay­ing for both sides. We pay Saudi Arabia $160 bil­lion for its oil, and $3 or $4 bil­lion of that goes to the Wahhabis, who teach chil­dren to hate. We are pay­ing for these ter­ror­ists with our SUVs.“
And we are pay­ing for them with our tanks, our Bradleys, and our fighter jets, observes Defense Technology International, which has a spe­cial issue out on “The Military and the End of Oil.” In 2004, the U.S. mil­i­tary gob­bled up 400,000 bar­rel of fuel a day, at cost of $6.7 bil­lion. A year later, those costs had climbed to $8.8 bil­lion. In 2006, the price tag is expect to total $10 bil­lion.
“Meanwhile, advanced green tech­nolo­gies like hybrid drive vehi­cles [despite their lim­i­ta­tions] offer both fuel econ­omy and stealth ben­e­fits in com­bat, a sig­nif­i­cant plus in the urban war­fare sce­nar­ios that appear to be such a big part of future wars,” writes Joe Katzman, who’s been all over this issue.

The truth is that the mil­i­tary can’t live with­out fuel, but every gal­lon of it is both a logis­tics bur­den and a finan­cial bur­den… Now add the fact that diver­si­fied “green infra­struc­ture” low­ers vul­ner­a­bil­ity to the kind of “sys­tem dis­rup­tion” attacks one sees in Iraq, and the military/​security ben­e­fits become compelling. 

It sure does. Throughout the mil­i­tary today, there are lots and lots of indi­vid­ual R&D efforts under­way to find alter­na­tives to fund­ing our ene­mies. But a col­lec­tion of engi­neer­ing projects is not enough. If we’re seri­ous about fight­ing this Long War, break­ing the military’s addic­tion to oil has to become a top priority.