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 November, 2007

“Hey, Rocko, Help the President Find His Checkbook!”

Thursday, November 29th, 2007

F-22.jpg
Our friend Amy Butler over at Aviation Week reports the following:

U.S. Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne says his push to gar­ner an extra $20 bil­lion per year to boost the service’s pro­cure­ment plans is “begin­ning to get some trac­tion” with the White House.
Wynne and Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. T. Michael Moseley have con­sis­tently told Congress that the extra fund­ing is required to pay for air­craft — includ­ing the F-​​22, Joint Strike Fighter, future refu­el­ing tanker and next-​​generation com­bat search and res­cue heli­copter — in higher quan­ti­ties and at lower per unit costs.
“We are actu­ally start­ing to hear a lit­tle bit of melody,” on this ini­tia­tive, Wynne told an audi­ence Nov. 28 at the Aerospace & Defense Finance conference …

Read the rest at Military​.com.

Ward

Secret Service Whoop Ass

Thursday, November 29th, 2007

Mount a mini-​​gun on a hard SUV and what do you get? I’m not sure but it sure does have a high rate of fire. Heads up, Code Pink bad peo­ple who could be viewed as a threat to state officials …

– Ward

BREAKING!!! F-​​15s Grounded Again

Wednesday, November 28th, 2007

f-15-canopy.jpg

We just got this break­ing news at Military​.com in a few min­utes ago and I wanted to get the word out to DT readers…

An informed DT reader told me this after­noon the Air Force had re-​​grounded its fleet of F-​​15s after they were returned to flight last week.

Military​.com reporter Bryant Jordan got the details…

Barely more than a week after return­ing the F-​​15 Eagle fleet to flight the Air Force is once again ground­ing most of the planes, Military​.com has learned.

F-​​15 mod­els A through D — a total of 442 planes — were ordered grounded by Air Combat Command,Langley Air Force Base, Va., late on Nov. 27, ACC spokesman Maj. Thomas Crosson said in an interview.

The lat­est prob­lem is with cracks in the planes’ metal sup­port beams, called longerons, that run the length of the air­craft, and make up the sill on which the canopy sits, Crosson told Military​.com.

The entire F-​​15 fleet was ordered grounded in early November after the break up and crash of a Missouri Air National Guard Eagle. The Air Force began lift­ing the restric­tions on the fleet Nov. 19 — start­ing with F-​​15E Strike Eagles — fol­low­ing aggres­sive inspec­tions of the planes.

ACC called for the new ground­ings after met­al­lur­gi­cal analy­sis of the planes sug­gested there could be pos­si­ble crack­ing prob­lems with the longerons.

Officials now are work­ing at Warner Robins Air Force Base, Ga., to develop an inspec­tion list that will be sent out to F-​​15 main­tain­ers across the Air Force.

Crosson said the list should be com­pleted in a day or two, and will include a time­frame for how long the actual inspec­tions should take.

He could not say how long it would before the lat­est restric­tions would be lifted from the entire fleet. 

– Christian

Iraqi Spooks Come in from the Cold

Wednesday, November 28th, 2007

iraq-intel-frost.jpg

From Today’s Front Page at Military​.com:

The top American offi­cial respon­si­ble for train­ing the new Iraqi intel­li­gence ser­vices said Tuesday that country’s spies could be ready to go it alone by the end of next year. 

After years of fits and starts, the Iraqi mil­i­tary and min­istry of defense intel ser­vices are up and run­ning, and, with coali­tion help, scor­ing some sig­nif­i­cant wins against insur­gent groups, bombers and cross-​​border infiltrators. 

“I would say by this time next year they would be likely self-​​sufficient to the extent that within the capa­bil­ity they have, both tech­ni­cal and human, that they can, in fact, col­lect, ana­lyze and dis­sem­i­nate infor­ma­tion to pro­vide sup­port to the Iraqi ground forces,” said Dan Maguire, the senior American trainer for Iraqi intel­li­gence ser­vices, in an inter­view with mil­i­tary blog­gers Nov. 27. 

Read the entire tran­script of the inter­view with Dan Maguire.

Maguire said in and around Baghdad the num­ber of tar­gets Iraqi intel­li­gence per­son­nel develop has jumped from less than a dozen per week before this year’s troop buildup to an aver­age of 50 to 60 tar­gets per week. 

Moreover, Iraqi intel ser­vices are now able to go after about 90 per­cent of the bad guys they fin­ger, where before the surge few tar­gets had hard enough intel­li­gence to nab. 

Check out more intel news at Norman Polmar’s Spy Corner.

The new intel ser­vices have been able to develop their own infor­ma­tion, ana­lyze it and grab insur­gents using Iraqi mil­i­tary and police forces about 30 per­cent of the time, “so they are right now on par in terms of going after tar­gets and hav­ing suc­cess on that with the rest of the coali­tion forces,” Maguire said. 

But that doesn’t mean Iraqi intel­li­gence ser­vices don’t have some work to do before the U.S. can cut the cord. 

Maguire said his pupils are short on basic sig­nals intel­li­gence tech­nol­ogy that can help them inter­cept enemy com­mu­ni­ca­tions, there are too few Arabic-​​language intel­li­gence analy­sis soft­ware options — which ham­pers the exploita­tion of the infor­ma­tion gained from sources — and there’s a last­ing sus­pi­cion among mil­i­tary com­man­ders that their intel­li­gence per­son­nel are sim­ply spy­ing on them. 

“Many com­man­ders view the tac­ti­cal intel­li­gence orga­ni­za­tions in a divi­sion as being there to spy on the com­man­ders, because that’s their expe­ri­ence or their knowl­edge­abil­ity from the Saddam era days,” Maguire explained. “We are work­ing very hard to rec­tify that by direct inter­face with divi­sion com­man­ders, by recruit­ing and putting in place G-​​2s at each of those divi­sion lev­els and work­ing closely with them so that the com­man­der and the G-​​2 build a bond and a trust so that they can, in fact, uti­lizes the resources effectively.“ 

At the higher lev­els, how­ever, Maguire likes what he sees. 

“Their joint staff [intel­li­gence offi­cer], and his staff are a very, very com­pe­tent group of indi­vid­u­als,” Maguire said. “We have a new [chief intel­li­gence offi­cer] that’s only been in place now for about a month and a half, who is a for­mer offi­cer in the Saddam era, was an instruc­tor at their National War College equiv­a­lent insti­tu­tion, a very, very bal­anced indi­vid­ual, very knowl­edge­able, very, very good at lead­ing and men­tor­ing his staff. And they are really start­ing to get it and put it together.”

(more…)

NATO’s Helo Woes

Wednesday, November 28th, 2007

NATO is des­per­ately short of attack and trans­port heli­copters that can sup­port its International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan, senior sources in NATO Headquarters say. In recent weeks, the alliance has been exam­in­ing mul­ti­ple options to cor­rect the short­fall.
nato-helos.jpg

Proposals on the table range from improved train­ing and logis­tic sup­port for deployed heli­copters, to a com­monly funded mod­ern­iza­tion of 20-​​odd Russian-​​built, Czech-​​owned Mil Mi-​​8 Hip trans­port helos that could then be used to form a multi­na­tional trans­port pool for Afghanistan-​​type operations.

Representatives from sev­eral NATO nations will be dis­cussing these options at a sem­i­nar in Brussels, a senior European diplo­mat in NATO Headquarters tells Aviation Week & Space Technology.

“I believe the U.S. will also shortly come for­ward with spe­cific pro­pos­als to help solve this prob­lem,” he adds.

The heli­copter short­age is the “sin­gle biggest oper­a­tional prob­lem” that is ham­per­ing the day-​​to-​​day oper­a­tions of ISAF, a 41,000-strong multi­na­tional mis­sion led by NATO and com­pris­ing troops from 38 nations, includ­ing 14 that are not mem­bers of the alliance.

“Were beseech­ing, beg­ging, doing every­thing we can to con­vince nations to con­tribute more rotary-​​wing avi­a­tion assets, both trans­port heli­copters and attack heli­copters,” a Canadian NATO offi­cial says.

“Its not that NATO nations dont have heli­copters. The prob­lem is that theyre very expen­sive to ship to Afghanistan and to oper­ate and main­tain them there. I think there are sev­eral nations that pre­fer to keep their heli­copters at home for this reason.”

At the Shephard Heli-​​Power con­fer­ence in The Hague, oper­a­tional com­man­ders stressed that ISAF is strug­gling with a “con­stant imbal­ance of demand ver­sus avail­abil­ity of both attack and trans­port helicopters.”

“Without heli­copters, oper­a­tions in south­ern Afghanistan are not pos­si­ble. Theres a lack of road infra­struc­ture and a high threat of impro­vised explo­sive devices and ambushes by Taliban and other oppos­ing mil­i­tant forces,” says Maj. Gen. Ton van Loon of the Royal Netherlands Army. He returned from Kandahar ear­lier this year after hav­ing com­manded ISAFs Regional Command (RC) South.

Read more about NATO’s helo woes from our Aviation Week part­ners at Military​.com.

Christian

Your Lunar Vacation Home

Wednesday, November 28th, 2007

lunar-base.jpg

Moderate tem­per­a­tures, nearly per­pet­ual sun­shine, flat land­ing areas and sub­ter­ranean resources make the rim of the Shackleton Crater — sit­u­ated within the solar system’s largest impact crater — an ideal loca­tion for a lunar home­stead, down near the moon’s south pole. NASA hopes to send the first pio­neers there by 2020.

“Hardscrabble” was what future pres­i­dent Ulysses S. Grant named his ram­shackle home­stead on the pre-​​Civil War Missouri fron­tier. That might be an apt title for NASA’s planned lunar out­post, for its res­i­dents will find the moon a harsh place to set­tle. Survival will depend on their abil­ity to evade microm­e­te­oroids, extract oxy­gen from rocks and even, like Grant, grow wheat.

The space agency announced its strat­egy to return to the moon last December. Instead of emu­lat­ing the series of six Apollo land­ings, it chose as its ini­tial goal the estab­lish­ment of a sin­gle lunar out­post. Using the new crew explo­ration vehi­cle, Orion, NASA plans to send four astro­nauts to the moon as early as 2020 (“Mission: Moon,” March ’07). Eventually, four-​​man crews will rotate home every six months. Their goal will be to live off the land, extend sci­en­tific explo­ration and prac­tice for an even­tual leap to Mars.

The moon, says NASA, is the place to get our space-​​suited hands dirty. “The lunar base is part of an over­all plan that has legs, that makes sense,” says Wendell Mendell, chief of the Office of Lunar and Planetary Exploration at Johnson Space Center. “We’re mov­ing the human species out into the solar system.”

Learn how NASA plans to build a Moon colony at Military​.com.

Christian

Brits See Longbow as Key to Apache Ops

Tuesday, November 27th, 2007

longbow.jpg

British army Apache attack heli­copters in Afghanistan are the only Apaches in the coun­try that fly with the mast-​​mounted Longbow radar installed — and that is giv­ing them a dis­tinc­tive edge in the NATO-​​led oper­a­tions against Taliban and other oppos­ing mil­i­tant forces, the com­man­der of the unit says.

Lt.Col. Jon Bryant, com­mand­ing offi­cer of the Apache-​​equipped No. 3 Regiment (Army Air Corps) at Wattisham, Suffolk, says that the Longbow radar is “extremely use­ful in air­space decon­flic­tion terms.”

“When on patrol, we are shar­ing the air­space with other Apaches, Chinooks, Lynxes, fixed-​​wing air­craft and unmanned aer­ial vehi­cles,” says Col. Bryant, who recently returned from a tour as com­mand­ing offi­cer of Britain’s Joint Helicopter Force (Afghanistan) at Kandahar Air Field, south­ern Afghanistan.

Especially at night, the radar helps pilots to build up sit­u­a­tional aware­ness and to pre­vent get­ting dan­ger­ously close to other air­craft dur­ing tac­ti­cal maneuvers.

See the rest of this arti­cle from our Aviation Week part­ners at Military​.com.

– Christian

PowerSwim May Make SEALs Superhuman

Monday, November 26th, 2007

powerswim.jpg

America’s under­wa­ter spe­cial forces ops might not like it at first, but this dol­phin­like device, PowerSwim, will let them reach tar­gets fast — and with­out hav­ing to catch their breath. The device is com­pat­i­ble with stan­dard scuba gear, as well as the front-​​mounted rebreathers (artist sketch, above) used by spe­cial oper­a­tions per­son­nel to avoid tell­tale bub­ble trails.

Humans are ter­ri­ble swim­mers, con­vert­ing roughly 3 per­cent of their kicks, strokes and gen­eral under­wa­ter exer­tions into for­ward motion. We can boost our effi­ciency to 10 per­cent by adding fins, but dol­phins, by com­par­i­son, can turn 80 per­cent of their energy into thrust. Not to be out­done, the Pentagon’s research wing, DARPA, is devel­op­ing a con­trap­tion that lets Navy SEALs and other com­bat divers swim faster, and with less effort.

Instead of kick­ing, PowerSwim calls for a kind of undu­la­tion as its hinged foils pivot up and down. Similar to the way a dol­phin or tor­toise pumps its fins, this motion gen­er­ates both lift and thrust. And while arti­fi­cial fins oper­ate within the swimmer’s own wake (they form a kind of expand­ing cone, start­ing at a swimmer’s shoul­ders), the PowerSwim’s lead foil — or propul­sor foil — sweeps through the water just out­side that wake.

See how the PowerSwim works at Military​.com.

– Christian

Scan Eagle From a DDG

Monday, November 26th, 2007

Here’s an inter­est­ing story we’re run­ning at Military​.com today. The use of UAVs on an increas­ing num­ber of Naval plat­forms is remark­able in its own right. But it seems to me also that as this con­tin­ues, the size of the plat­form from which UAVs oper­ate could get smaller and smaller.
scan-eagle2.jpg

Guided-​​missile destroyer USS Oscar Austin (DDG 79), com­pleted a robust test­ing phase of the ScanEagle, unmanned aer­ial vehi­cle (UAV), Nov. 17, en route to the Central Command area of oper­a­tions as part of the ongo­ing rota­tion to sup­port Maritime Security Operations.

“ScanEagle is an incred­i­ble asset not only for this ship, but the Navy too,” said Oscar Austin’s Commanding Officer, Cmdr. Eric Weilenman. “It gives me great [sub­ject aware­ness] on what’s around the ship and allows me to keep my visit, board, search, and seizure teams aware of their envi­ron­ment because the UAV pro­vides pos­i­tive iden­ti­fi­ca­tion on ves­sels of inter­est, which allows me to pass accu­rate secu­rity infor­ma­tion to my Sailors as they pre­pare to board.”

While in flight, ScanEagle pro­vides live, high-​​quality video that helps develop and main­tain a Recognized Maritime Picture and fur­ther enhances Maritime Domain Awareness. 

It seems to me that you could walk down this log­i­cal path to the Army’s Future Combat Systems con­cept. As the launch and recov­ery method­olo­gies get more deploy­able, it’s not too much of a stretch to imag­ine tanks and APCs car­ry­ing their own UAVs to sur­vey the road ahead and recover back to the tank.

Contractors oper­ate the UAV while Navy intel­li­gence spe­cial­ists and flight deck crew work side-​​by-​​side with the civilians.

“ScanEagle is launched by a pneu­matic wedge cat­a­pult launcher and flies off pre-​​programmed com­put­er­ized files or oper­a­tors (like myself) to ini­ti­ate the mis­sion,” said Hamann.

“When retrieved, we use what is called a ‘Skyhook’ sys­tem, where the UAV catches a rope that is hang­ing from a 50-​​foot high pole,” Hamann added.

The last ship that deployed with ScanEagle, USS Carter Hall (LSD 50), com­pleted 19 mis­sions and 933 flight hours. 

The soft­ware and back-​​end tech­nol­ogy are there, but maybe it’s the band­width and launch/​recovery phase that are still the stick­ing points (and money and com­plex­ity, ya ya ya…).

(Gouge: ED)

Photo from Boeing

Christian

Israel’s Cyber Shot at Syria

Monday, November 26th, 2007

ew-ac.jpg

Our friends at Av Week have this story so wired, I couldnt wait to post this update. And, as you well know, Im a bit obsessed with it.

It now seems that one of Israels first shots in its raid into Syria in September was a fusil­lade of 1s and 0s.

From Aviation Week:

The U.S. was mon­i­tor­ing the elec­tronic emis­sions com­ing from Syria dur­ing Israels September attack; andalthough there was no direct American help in destroy­ing a nuclear reac­torthere was some advice pro­vided before­hand, mil­i­tary and aero­space indus­try offi­cials tell Aviation Week & Space Technology.

That sur­veil­lance is pro­vid­ing clues about how Israeli air­craft man­aged to slip past Syrian air defenses to bomb the site at Dayr az-​​Zawr. The main attack was pre­ceded by an engage­ment with a sin­gle Syrian radar site at Tall al-​​Abuad near the Turkish bor­der. It was assaulted with what appears to be a com­bi­na­tion of elec­tronic attack and pre­ci­sion bombs to enable the Israeli force to enter and exit Syrian air­space. Almost imme­di­ately, the entire Syrian radar sys­tem went off the air for a period of time that included the raid, say U.S. intel­li­gence analysts.

There was no U.S. active engage­ment other than con­sult­ing on poten­tial tar­get vul­ner­a­bil­i­ties, says a U.S. elec­tronic war­fare specialist.

Elements of the attack included some brute-​​force jam­ming, which is still an impor­tant ele­ment of attack­ing air defenses, U.S. ana­lysts say. Also, Syrian air defenses are still cen­tral­ized and depen­dent on ded­i­cated HF and VHF com­mu­ni­ca­tions, which made them vul­ner­a­ble. The ana­lysts dont believe any part of Syrias elec­tri­cal grid was shut down. They do con­tend that net­work pen­e­tra­tion involved both remote air-​​to-​​ground elec­tronic attack and pen­e­tra­tion through computer-​​to-​​computer links.

There also were some higher-​​level, non­tac­ti­cal pen­e­tra­tions, either direct or as diver­sions and spoofs, of the Syrian command-​​and-​​control capa­bil­ity, done through net­work attack, says an intel­li­gence specialist.

These obser­va­tions pro­vide evi­dence that a sophis­ti­cated net­work attack and elec­tronic hack­ing capa­bil­ity is an oper­a­tional part of the Israel Defense Forces arse­nal of dig­i­tal weapons.

Despite being hob­bled by the restric­tions of secrecy and diplo­macy, Israeli mil­i­tary and gov­ern­ment offi­cials con­firm that net­work inva­sion, infor­ma­tion war­fare and elec­tronic attack are part of Israels defense capabilities. 

And the cool thing was that it seems that Israel was able to do this cyber attack from the air.

That abil­ity of non­stealthy Israeli air­craft to pen­e­trate with­out inter­fer­ence rests in part on tech­nol­ogy, car­ried on board mod­i­fied air­craft, that allowed spe­cial­ists to hack into Syrias net­worked air defense sys­tem, said U.S. mil­i­tary and indus­try offi­cials in the attacks aftermath.

Network raiders can con­duct their inva­sion from an air­craft into a net­work and then jump from net­work to net­work until they are into the tar­gets com­mu­ni­ca­tions loop. Whether the net­work is wire­less or wired doesnt mat­ter any­more, says a U.S. indus­try specialist. 

And it seems the Syrian gov­ern­ments self-​​imposed secrecy was partly to blame for the shut-​​down.

The raid on Syria was a strate­gic sig­nal, not a threat, says a retired senior mil­i­tary offi­cial who flew com­bat in the region for decades. This [raid] was about what we per­ceived are their capa­bil­i­ties [for devel­op­ing weapons of mass destruc­tion] and about deter­rence more than cre­at­ing damage.

He con­tends that Syrian pro­ce­dures even con­tributed to the suc­cess­ful bomb­ing raid.

Part of the vul­ner­a­bil­ity of the Syrian facil­ity was that they kept it so secret that there wer­ent enough air defenses assigned to it, the offi­cial contends. 

Be sure to read the rest of this fas­ci­nat­ing story and really kick ass report­ing HERE.

(Gouge: NC)

Christian