Lisa Myers (NBC News) conducted a special investigation into the Army’s seemingly unwillingness to adopt an Israeli RPG defense system which has been successfully tested in field conditions. The “Trophy” system, produced by Rafael (and shown here on a Stryker vehicle), was cited by the DOD’s Office of Force Transformation as a really good deal. But Army officials would rather wait five years for Raytheon to complete the development and testing of its “Quick Kill” RPG defense solution, which will be part of the Future Combat Systems program.
In part two of her investigation (which aired last night), she documented how the Army bent over backwards to ensure that Raytheon remained in the competition — not that there was a competition. The Army was supposed to have a shoot-off between the two systems, but because the Raytheon system was still on the drawing board, the Army canceled the shoot-off and issued a single-source selection for the Raytheon solution. I’m shocked… shocked to discover that a military acquisition office might be biased towards one of the largest U.S. defense firms. Why, I’ve never heard of such outlandish behavior. I declare, I do believe I have the vapors…
First of all, this might have been a good news report — in APRIL, when this issue was made public (see this DefenseTech post). Or maybe Lisa might have done an internet search and found Noah’s Popular Mechanics article in August. Both articles discuss the Army’s concern that, yes, this seems to be a good idea, but there are some outstanding issues:
“It is not just about giving [soldiers] an APS system. How do the soldiers work with it? How does it tie into the network? How do you know when to turn it on? When not to turn it on?” said Future Combat Systems program manager Brig. Gen. Charles Cartwright. “We could put something over there … overnight but have I got the logistics to be able to support,” the technology.
Some of you may be familiar with David Drake’s Hammer’s Slammers — he has written a number of scifi novels about this mercenary tank regiment, which has nuclear-powered tanks and armored cars that move around like hovercrafts. The vehicles also feature an anti-projectile defense system which, when activated, shoots out like a shotgun to defeat the incoming projectile (also good for shredding light infantry in the way). Issue is, it can be set for manual rather than automatic. These concept of operation issues need to be worked out (also see Murdoc’s take on this issue).
I have to tell you, Colonel Don Kotchman showed that he had clearly taken the “how to deal with the media” class that every acquisition manager has to take. Get a load of this:
Lisa Myers: Was the Raytheon system tested by the Pentagon?
Col. Donald Kotchman: The Army did not specifically test the Raytheon system.
Instead, Raytheon tested its own system this February.
Myers: How well did the Raytheon system do in its own testing?
Kotchman: I don’t have that information.
Myers: Were there any Pentagon officials present for the Raytheon testing?
Kotchman: I do not know.
—————-
In May, a technical team was chosen and given the task of evaluating competing RPG defense systems. But here again, Raytheon had a leg up.
Myers: Do you know how many of the 21-person technical team worked for Raytheon?
Kotchman: To the best of my knowledge, none.
Army documents obtained by NBC News, however, reveal that nine of the 21 technical experts as well as all the administrative personnel were from Raytheon. The team ultimately concluded that of the seven RPG defense systems examined, Raytheons was the clear winner.
Raytheons Quick Kill solution which the Army concedes will not be fielded before 2011 at the earliest won out over Trophy, the Israeli system championed by the Pentagons Office of Force Transformation.
Myers: It appears as though Raytheon was allowed to select itself.
Kotchman: I dont know that to be a fact, and so I really can’t comment on it.
Priceless. Bravo, colonel, bravo. You survived the interview. Best that you can hope for. I have to say, this isn’t news — that is to say, it’s a shame that our acquisition process works this way, but it’s normal procedure. Eisenhower was right about the military-industrial complex, we know he was right, but there’s no way to fix the system short of finding a new set of honest congressmen and women, defense contractors who don’t see dollar signs as the bottom line, and military acquisition officials who want to be promoted while in uniform and have a nice job when they retire.
– Jason Sigger, crossposted at Armchair Generalist
UPDATE 8:58 AM: Noah here. While I appreciate Jason’s shout-outs, the real credit should go to Defense News scoopmasters Greg Grant and Barbara Opall-Rome, who did most of the original reporting on this story. I just sorta played clean-up. Oh, and if all this hasn’t satisfied your RPG defense fix, check out what Murdoc has to say.
UPDATE 6:48 PM: JH reminds us that there’s another, potentially more interesting Israeli grenade-stopper out there. Ladies and gents: the Iron Fist.
MAybe the reason they are holding off purchasing an IDF solution is that they have already spent millions on their own version… contracts have been signed… targets set and jobs depend on it.
Its the same deal with all new inventions..
but thats how we learn as a species. Just cause you can buy something doesn’t mean you ought to.
So perhaps it’s a bit slow on the uptake, but isn’t it good that a mainstream tv news outlet is actually reporting on this? Did I miss something where they did poor investigative work?
If TROPHY is so great then why were Israeli tanks being taken out left-and-right in Lebanon recently?
It is no crime for the US military to have a strong bias towards American contractors. Every other country does this unless they have no choice. It keeps American money in America, subject to US taxes, instead of lining the pockets of a foreign corporation.
The argument that the US military ought to be focused on casualty prevention and nothing else is short-sighted and foolish. The army already places a very high priority on preventing casualties.
If I had to pick between being protected by slat armor and TROPHY, I’d pick the slat armor. If TROPHY is a matter of saving weight and not a matter of saving lives, then the media needs to drop this “Raytheon lied, soldiers died” bullsh*t.
No mention why the IDF didnt use Trophy in Lebanon? I bet for the same reasons — they got troops on the ground around these tanks.
It does sound like a lot of the tanks that were taken out by Hezbollah were taken out with mines, not RPGs, which is what you get when you take on the enemy on turf that he’s had the chance to prepare so well for your arrival. Somewhat gruesomely, it seems like a lot of the reports of Israeli troops being hit with RPGs involved dismounted troops. I was also waiting to see if there would be any mention of Trophy throughout the war, and didn’t catch any, which, as I see it, could mean a) the system was effective and the IDF was wisely coy about it b) the system was ineffective and the IDF was wisely coy about it or c) the system was not used, for any of the reasons given above, and RAFAEL was wisely coy about it.
Relying on foreign products is not a good solution, not even Israel which also makes foreign military sales to China, potential enemy of US. Imagine Pentagon bought weapons and relied on Chinese and Russian weapons. We do the opposite (put pressure) against European countries which attempts to sell weapons to unfriendly countries, such as Spain to Venezuela. The same thing could happen to us. It may be economic, but politically incorrect. We don’t need Trophy, we need something that is secured in our hands, and with technical information kept in hands as well. Otherwise, if Trophy was ever to be sold to Russia and China, they would be able to reverse engineer it, and understand its capabilities. That means alot for counter measures.
Good Morning Folks,
As much as it pains me I have to agree with “Robot Economist”, he has come up with a major fault with Trophy, the friendly “Dismounts”.
As a former Combat Infantryman I know first hand what it does to your morale when your “friendies?” are shooting at you, it can make you crabby for the whole day.
Another problem that was found with Trophy is that it can easly be defeated by multiple attacks.
The part of this story regarding Raytheon, and once again I must agree with “Robot Economist”, stands on its own. Unfortunately this is the way the DoD does business and is in no small way driven by the concerns of senior officers who are the “Project Managers” and their post military careers.
ALLONS,
ByronSkinner
I’d hope that Bryon doesn’t find agreeing with me too distasteful — I care a lot about the safe our troops and the success of our military. I imagine my constant skepticism can be frustrating, but in the end, I can assure you that we’re all playing on the same team.
Bryon also brings up a good point that my Army S&T coworkers have mentions as well — what is the capacity on Trophy and Quick Kill. Every test video I’ve seen involves about 2–3 RPGs fired in rapid sequence. What happens if a 4th is fired? Or a 5th? Does each interception negatively impact the system’s detection capability?
Slat armor appears to be working for now, so I think the Army is right to approach active protection systems cautiously.
Byron — my apologies for misspelling your name. Twice it appears. When blogging from the office, I sometimes don’t give my posts the editorial control they need.
I think overall, the Army is proceeding cautiously on this. There’s nothing wrong with that, especially when we aren’t in dire need of Trophy. Let’s face it, we aren’t getting hit by RPGs much in Iraq. Trophy doesn’t protect against roadside bombs.
Raytheon? Well, that looks fishy. But just because there appears to be corruption doesn’t mean they didn’t make the right decision.
Well, I don’t think DU is a worry. DU is cool because it’s hard enough to smash through armor, but you still have to put the force behind it to get through armor in the first place. You’re not gonna get that from an RPG-sized launcher.
I think the “airbag” idea may be the best. When a launch is detected, a parachute-like device is fired out in the way. It doesn’t have to destroy the RPG, all it has to do is deflect it. It really decreases the chance of friendly casualties (although, I suppose a guy could get all wrapped up in it and then have the rpg go off in his face).
US Army Defends Decision Not To Buy General Dynamics System
By Rebecca Christie
Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES
WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)
Dude, the Lisa Myers story got play tonight on Keith Olbermann and Scarborough. Myers said RPGs killed 130 servicemen and women in Iraq — which doesn’t seem like a lot compared to deaths caused by IEDs.
People need to realize that you can’t apply an infinite number of systems to protect our troops. Army and Marine engineers must make trade-offs and balance its defense kits against relevant threat profiles.
“Myers said RPGs killed 130 servicemen and women in Iraq“
How many of those deaths were in vehicles that could have been equipped with TROPHY? I’d bet the vast majority of troops killed by RPGs were unmounted or in lightly armored vehicles.
Also, how many casualties would trophy have CAUSED, both in US troops and civilian bystanders, if it had been deployed in sufficiently large numbers?
Lisa Myers doesn’t care, all she cares about, along with most others who take up stories like this, is trying to make the absurd claim that Bush and Rumsfeld are incompetent, and consequently we should all vote Democrat come November. That is what all these bullshit controversies are about people: politics.
Why didn’t we buy the Trophy from an Isrealie company? Another reason is the Army follows a staute known as the Buy American Act, and they remember too well those that lost their careers when the Army bought berets from China. If Meyers and other reporters did their homework, the Office of Force Transformation and General Dynamics made the choice not to consider the spirit of this law when they went ahead and conducted the demonstration. It is about time the media stop putting a liberal spin on stories and start printing objective news. Any colonist publically talking about vunerabilities of our Army during the American Revolution would have been considered treasonists. They would be lucky not to be killed by an angry mob of Early Americans. Americans need to wake up and stop supporting these networks that put damaging stories about our military vulnerbilities on the airways. I am sure Rome experienced a similiar lack of nationalistic committment from its mass media just before they toppled as well.
Good Morning Robot Economist,
I find compareing the numbers of military killed by RPG’s and IED’s a little demeaning to our troops in Iraq. Although I can understand your point and I will admit to being more then a little biased on this issue since I have been on the receiving of an RPG (the were B-40’s and B-41’s in my time) as well as Recoiless Rifles and Mortars more times then I can remember and walked away mostly unscared execpt for the last time, I see little value in the number 130 with out also stating how many service personal have suffered amputations and head wounds but managed to survive.
Being in the military is a risky job with few tangable rewards. I do agree with your point that PRG’s are an assigned risk and the military has to prioritize it’s weapons programs and yes I agree IED’s seem to be a more pressing problem the RPG’s.
Personaly I think more agressive tacts on the part of the Americans in Iraq could go a long ways is dealing with RPG’s. One tactic, like we used in Vietnam was to do more agressive dismounted patrols in area of known RPG activity. When we started moving around on foot among the locals on a regular basis a lot of good things started to happen.
About spelling, I would be the last here to object, he** I can’t spell my own name half the time either, so what, as I see it it give those who have no counter to my argurment(s) to plat too.
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner
The other story this site seldom tells.
Our Arabic allies refuse to allow Israel Military Industry equipment on their soils. There was a small mention of this in a MSNBC story at the start of the last Iraq war.
We can not use or transport IMI ammo, equipment or technology on their soils. Gee Imagine that we actually respect our allies wishes.
Too bad lisa didn’t do her homework.
D~W
Anyone know if Trophy really works against a tandem warhead projectile like a PG-29V? Presumably the second charge is reasonably well-protected against premature detonation (otherwise it could be destroyed by the explosion of it’s own first charge). In addition, it is relatively heavy and propelled by a powerful rocket motor. The greater momentum would make it harder to knock off course.
As the mother of an Army son currently undergoing an abbreviated Georgia pine forest training for deployment as a Humvee driver in Iraqi deserts, I’m worried. What protection is the Army providing now for soldiers in Humvees, and is there something better? How does one support our troops on this issue?
I still saw no points as to how the Raytheon system is superior, and you excuse the blatant corruption by saying it can’t be fixed. This is typical horse-hockey. You fix it by having zero tolerance for corruption, and heavy penalties for those that get caught. Maybe it’s time for the country to start a ‘war on corruption’, since you hawk types are so fond on wars on verbs (unless what you are warring against is also paying for your illegal black-ops). Get real.
I still saw no points as to how the Raytheon system is superior, and you excuse the blatant corruption by saying it can’t be fixed. This is typical horse-hockey. You fix it by having zero tolerance for corruption, and heavy penalties for those that get caught. Maybe it’s time for the country to start a ‘war on corruption’, since you hawk types are so fond on wars on verbs (unless what you are warring against is also paying for your illegal black-ops). Get real.
See also, the following update:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16548471/
I doubt many people want to hear this, but when it comes to military equipment, outsourcing makes a certain sense. Remember that the most vicious way the bad guys are getting at us is through our economy–it costs too much to build stuff here. It takes too long. I for one have long been impressed with the IDF–not so much the IAF, which for all its skill relies on sloppy seconds from the US, but the armored forces. Check out Raphael & Nimda links. My understanding is that even Israel prefers Iron Fist to Trophy, but Israel has long suffered from a lack of resources, financial & otherwise & gained from a superb capacity to adapt and innovate. They’ve developed brilliant light and (truly) modular automatic weapons platforms with land, naval & potential aerial applications. Nimda SPECIALIZES in taking Russian heavy weapons hulls (generously donated by the USSR through their Arab friends during the Six-Day War) & making them into effective, NATO-compatible fighting machines in various configurations. They’ve done the same with old US M-60s, British Centurions & whatever they’ve had available–even old M4s. The most numerous & effective example is probably the Achzarit, the original HAPC, which is based on old T-54/55 hulls. They do it with their own stuff, too. They do it better and cheaper. So buy from ‘em. And stop being paranoid about China, everyone. China and the US are in a tar-baby relationship, economically speaking. Neither one of us can get too cranky with the other without destroying both our economies. They’re Donald Trump circa mid-1980s. We’re the bank. We own each other. Cozy, ain’t it? Thank on more levels, gents.
Trophy has nothing to do with saving lives it has to do with winning a war.
Armor is a large expenditure and without it in CQB marine vs insurgents is about an equal fight considering numbers and logistics.
So armor is needed, but with a 3k or so missile taking out a multi million dollar tank, not to mention the training dollars that go into a tank crew and the cost to ship both tank + crew to war zone, it is plain to see something needs to be done to even thing up.
The idea behind armor is to make your army seem invincible, at the moment they are just a expensive sitting target.
Trophy is not needed to save live but to end the war… which will save lives
My negative, as my bosss brother was very sad. He said venting to find out the game we play games together, together fight monster, how to kill on how to kill. Later, we played the GuildWars game, my brother helped me apply a number, and she also bought some GW gold to me. Choose the name, I think a long time, in order to no longer immerse in the lovelorn, so I need to find individuals to love me, want to permanently, I hope that it is no longer the past fireworks fleeting. Finally, I choose love me 9 long time as my name. Brother saw and laughed; he said he hoped I will be happy. He let me go to play, beware of being cheated, do not give other people my phone and QQ.
Yesterday, because I miss you, I go back the game and I want to watch to see. The rohan crone that you give me is also in here. I unexpectedly met you; I think I should stay here because I still think around you. This afternoon, I let you played together me this night, you promised. In the evening I thought you would not have come, but I saw you really come, I really very happy.
Three years ago, after friends introduced, I played the Rappelz game. At that time, I dazed and confused, I like to go my own way, I have a lot of rappelz rupees, but I became the most evil villains in the game. Until I encountered her, I found the meaning of survival.
The friend took me to the game, but she own was leaving the game. A person to game is boring, every day, I only know to upgrade and earn ro zeny. I can not sad dot this mess of feelings and moving. Once, the two boys for me quarreled utterly, until I leaved and tool sad. Later, I found a boy to married, I think perhaps all this to change, and I pray to become a reality, a few days after he disappeared. A person was playing a marriage number, what would it have taken place.
Who knows the price of the system?