US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

thunderchief said:

Don't know what to say about this

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

U.S. to commit more forces to NATO efforts
Mar. 26, 2014 - 06:00AM |


By Jim Kuhnhenn and Julie Pace
The Associated Press

BRUSSELS — The United States plans to join with other NATO nations in increasing ground and naval forces in Eastern Europe as part of the military alliance’s response to Russia’s incursion in Ukraine, the White House said Wednesday.

The specifics of the NATO plan were still being finalized, including the size of the force increase. Rather than significantly boosting U.S. military presence in the region, the move seemed aimed instead at showing symbolic support for NATO members near Russia’s borders.

President Obama’s deputy national security adviser, Ben Rhodes, said NATO was aiming to provide “a continuous presence to reassure our allies.” While he would not detail specific countries where the additional resources would be sent, he noted that the U.S. was particularly focused on efforts to bolster Poland, Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia.

Rhodes briefed reporters as Obama traveled to Rome from Brussels, where he met with NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen, as well as European Union leaders. In a speech from the heart of Europe, Obama declared the crisis in Ukraine a global “moment of testing.”

Obama appealed to Europeans to retrench behind the war-won ideals of freedom and human dignity, declaring that people voicing those values will ultimately triumph in Ukraine. Painting a historical arc across the major global clashes of the last century and beyond, he said young people born today come into a world more devoid of conflict and replete with freedom than at any time in history, even if that providence isn’t fully appreciated.

The president also urged the 28-nation NATO alliance to make good on its commitment to the collective security that has fostered prosperity in the decades since the Cold War concluded.

“We must never forget that we are heirs to a struggle for freedom,” Obama said, adding that the Ukraine crisis has neither easy answers nor a military solution. “But at this moment, we must meet the challenge to our ideals, to our very international order with strength and conviction.”

Calm in Europe has been upended by Russian President Vladimir Putin’s foray into the Ukrainian region of Crimea. Defying the global community, Moscow annexed that peninsula this month, stoking fears among Russia’s other neighbors as Europe was plunged back into an East-West mentality that many had thought was left behind at the end of the last century.

In response to the crisis, the U.S. already has taken some steps to bolster cooperation with NATO, including stepping up joint aviation training with Polish forces. The Pentagon also has increased American participation in NATO’s air policing mission in its Baltic countries.

Obama came to Europe intent on shoring up commitments from allies, but also to make a larger point about European security a quarter-century after the fall of the Iron Curtain. In a nod to the U.S. perception that America has borne too much of the burden for NATO members’ security, Obama said he wanted to see every NATO partner “chip in” for mutual defense. He said members should examine their defense plans to make sure they reflect current threats.

“I have had some concerns about a diminished level of defense spending by some of our partners in NATO,” Obama said. “The situation in Ukraine reminds us that our freedom isn’t free.”

Despite the focus on NATO resources, Obama and other alliance leaders have said they do not intend for the dispute with Russia to turn into a military conflict.

Drawing on modern struggles, like gay rights, as well as the ethnic cleansing and world wars of a bygone era, Obama sought to draw a connection between the U.S. experiment in democracy and the blood spilled by Europeans seeking to solidify their own right to self-determination.

“I come here today to say we must never take for granted the progress than has been won here in Europe and advanced around the world,” Obama said.

Obama’s remarks came midway through a weeklong trip to Europe and Saudi Arabia that has been dominated by efforts to coordinate the European and American response to Putin and his government’s actions in Ukraine. In Italy, where he arrived late Wednesday, he planned to meet with Pope Francis and Italian political leaders.

Another reminder of the cost of freedom came earlier Wednesday during a solemn pilgrimage to a World War I cemetery where hundreds of fallen U.S. troops are buried. Followed by the stirring sound of a bugler playing taps, Obama joined Belgian Prime Minister Elio Di Rupo and King Phillipe to lay wreaths at the memorial at Flanders Field American Cemetery and Memorial in northwest Belgium.

“To all who sleep here, we can say we caught the torch, we kept the faith,” Obama said, invoking language from “In Flanders Fields,” the famous war poem.

Pace reported from Rome.

Click to expand...

Inside the Ring: Pentagon goes hypersonic with long-range rapid attack weapon

By Bill Gertz-The Washington Times Wednesday, March 19, 2014

An experimental scramjet-powered, ultrahigh speed strike vehicle is emerging as the Pentagon's main choice for a new long-range, rapid attack weapon, a senior Pentagon official says.

Alan R. Shaffer, principal deputy assistant defense secretary for research and engineering, told a defense industry conference that prototypes and recent tests proved concepts for hypersonic arms, and several systems are part of a high-priority effort by Pentagon weapons developers, despite the era of sharply-diminished defense spending.

Hypersonic vehicles can deliver nuclear or conventional payloads in precision strikes against increasingly hard-to-penetrate air defenses of countries like China, Russia and Iran, he said.

"We, the U.S., do not want to be the second country to understand how to have controlled scramjet hypersonics," Mr. Shaffer told the Precision Strike Association's annual review on Tuesday.

The comments come 2 1/2 months after China's surprise Jan. 9 test of a new hypersonic glide vehicle, dubbed the Wu-14. That ultrahigh speed maneuvering vehicle test represents a major challenge for current U.S. missile defenses, which are designed to counter non-maneuvering ballistic missile threats.

Lee Fuell, a technical intelligence specialist with the Air Force National Air and Space Intelligence Center, told a congressional China commission hearing Jan. 31 that China's hypersonic glide vehicle is a ballistic missile-launched system that glides and maneuvers to its target at speeds up to Mach 10 (about 7,611 mph).

"At this point, we think that's associated with their nuclear deterrent forces," said Mr. Fuell, who noted the Chinese could use the system with conventional warheads for long-range precision strikes.

Mr. Shaffer declined to comment on how the Chinese hypersonic test has changed U.S. plans for hypersonic weapons.

But the senior weapons research official said the Pentagon's most promising hypersonic vehicle is the X-51, a cruise missile-sized weapon powered by an advanced engine called a scramjet. The X-51, developed by Boeing, flies at up to 3,882 mph, or Mach 5.1, and is launched from under the wing of a B-52 bomber.

The experimental aircraft is a good candidate to win this year's Collier Trophy, the annual award recognizing the most significant recent achievement in air or space flight, Mr. Shaffer said.

Mr. Shaffer said hypersonic weapons, when fully developed, will be less expensive than current jets and cruise missiles powered by complex turbine engines with many parts. A scramjet, or supersonic combusting ramjet, hypersonic vehicle has few moving parts.

After three difficult tests, including one described awkwardly by testers as an "un-ignition event," the X-51 scored a breakthrough last year. During a successful flight test, the vehicle flew for just 300 seconds but traveled several thousand miles and reached a height of 80,000 feet — considered near-space — at over Mach 5.

"It's the second time we have shown a scramjet can ignite and give positive acceleration," Mr. Shaffer said. "That is a huge deal. That means we are now starting to understand hypersonics."

The next step is for weapons engineers to make the system affordable, and Mr. Shaffer urged engineers to tackle the problem.

Another hypersonic weapon on the Pentagon's drawing board is the HTV-2, or Hypersonic Technology Vehicle, that is boosted by a missile — like the Chinese WU-14 — and then maneuvers and glides to its target at very high speeds.

Mr. Shaffer said that system in tests flew a long distance at very high speeds and made a controlled re-entry. Despite not meeting test goals, the tests generated substantial data.

Another system is the Army's Advanced Hypersonic Weapon, a missile-launched glide vehicle that had a successful test. It will fly at speeds faster than Mach 5.

A fourth system is the hypersonic international flight research experimentation program or Hifire, a Mach 8 weapon being developed with Australia.

A briefing slide during Mr. Shaffer's talk emphasized the benefits of hypersonic weapons as — long range, high speed and effective payloads.

The weapons will provide "rapid, responsive strike in anti-access/access denied environments" — the Pentagon euphemism for China's high-technology weapons designed to push U.S. forces out of Asia.


Russia's military forces are not the only problem for Ukraine: Reports from the region indicate that Russian saboteurs are working to foment instability and increase pro-Russian sentiment, especially in the eastern part of the former Soviet republic.

Ukrainian Justice Minister Pavlo Petrenko told reporters Monday in Kiev that security services are seeking to counter Russian sabotage groups in the southern and eastern regions.

Mr. Petrenko said intelligence has identified "specially trained sabotage groups for destabilizing the situation in the southern and eastern regions." The groups are engaged in subversion, he said.

"At present, Ukraine's security services are working out special measures for the liquidation and detention of these sabotage groups that are operating in the east," Mr. Petrenko said, according to the Kiev online news outlet Ukrainska Pravda.

The minister denounced members of the Crimea legislature following Sunday's vote of independence from Ukraine, and Russia's expected annexation of the Crimean Peninsula.

The Security Service of Ukraine, internal security forces known as SBU, told the Unian news agency Friday that it had captured a Russian GRU military intelligence officer as part of a sweep of subversives.

The agent was arrested at a checkpoint near Kherson, north of Crimea, and was armed with an AKC-74 assault rifle and five magazines. He was dressed in the black uniform of the Russian special operations forces but without any Russian military insignia.

"The foreigner had on him several IDs issued for different names," the security service said in a statement. "The SBU obtained a document confirming that the detainee is an employee of the military intelligence of the Russian Armed Forces."

The service said the Russian was engaged in intelligence gathering and subversion in the Kherson region.

Military analysts said the captured commando is likely part of the two main military forces that took over the Crimea in early March. Those forces have been identified as elements of Russian 76th Guards Air Assault Division, based in Pskov near St. Petersburg, and a GRU special operations unit based at Kubinka, near Moscow.

Black-clad "Spetsnaz" commandos with no Russian military insignia also conducted operations in Chechnya in 1994.

SAUDIS SHIFT EAST FROM U.S.

Saudi Arabia is moving away from its long, close relationship with the U.S. as a result of the Obama administration's policies in the Middle East.

Instead of relying on the U.S., Riyadh is moving closer to the Pakistan, fueling new concerns about a secret agreement between the two states to share Pakistan's nuclear weapons in a future crisis or conflict.

Saudi Crown Prince and Defense Minister Salman Bin-Abd-al-Aziz Al Saud visited Pakistan last month and reports of the visit indicate the Saudis are looking at buying Chinese-designed JF-17 multi-role combat fighter from Pakistan this year.

Additionally, Saudi Deputy Defense Minister Prince Salman bin Sultan reportedly visited Pakistan's Heavy Industries Taxila regarding a deal to purchase the Chinese-Pakistani Al-Khalid tank.

Newsweek reported in January that the Saudis also secretly purchased medium-range DF-21 missiles from China in 2007. The road-mobile DF-21 is one of China's most advanced systems, and the new missile reportedly is meant to upgrade Riyadh's aging DF-5 intermediate-range missiles — nuclear-capable weapons that analysts say are not accurate enough to be useful for conventional warheads.

The DF-21, by contrast, is the basis for China's advanced DF-21D, a precision-guided ballistic missile capable of hitting U.S. aircraft carriers at sea.

The shift in military alignment away from the United States and toward China and Pakistan is being read in Washington as a sign of Saudi Arabia's anger over certain U.S. policies. The Saudis are not happy with the U.S.-led talks with Iran that have legitimatized Tehran's uranium enrichment. The two countries also differ on how to deal with the civil war in Syria.

The Saudis also are said to be upset at the declining interest by the U.S. in Middle East affairs and the tendency of the Obama administration to mishandle its friends and allies while reaching out to enemies in the region.



Read more:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

Click to expand...

Rivals line up for USAF trainer battle
By: JON HEMMERDINGERWASHINGTON DC Source: 5 hours ago
Four defence contractors and their partners are lining up bids to build the US Air Force’s next-generation fighter trainer, via the service’s long-awaited T-X programme.

The competitors include partnerships of Alenia Aermacchi/General Dynamics, BAE Systems/Northrop Grumman and Korea Aerospace Industries/Lockheed Martin (T-50 pictured below) – which plan to pitch versions of existing aircraft – and Boeing, which will propose a clean-sheet design in partnership with Saab.

asset image
Lockheed Martin

Analysts say that the three known aircraft candidates give the USAF a broad range of options, both in terms of price and performance. “They all have a good product, and I don’t think anyone has a particular advantage,” believes Mark Gunzinger, from the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.

The programme calls for the acquisition of 350 aircraft to replace the USAF’s 1960s-era Northrop T-38 Talons, which the USAF’s Air Education and Training Command says lack the technology and performance necessary for fifth-generation fighter training.

asset image
US Air Force

As of now, the service’s requirements allow for a single- or twin-engined aircraft with either a side stick – like Lockheed Martin’s F-22 and F-35 – or a centre stick. The service is also considering either a supersonic or subsonic trainer, and says its cockpit displays should “closely replicate” fifth-generation aircraft.

The selected type should be capable of performing an 8g manoeuvre at half-fuel weight, and of sustaining 6.5g for a period of 15s. Operating and support costs should be no more than $35.3 billion for the fleet over a 20-year period. The service’s fiscal year 2015 budget proposal and new five-year spending plan would inject $667 million into T-X through FY2019, and it envisions spending another $581 million in later years. Initial operational capability is expected around 2023 for a US-built aircraft.

Congress must still approve the budget, but observers expect that this particular request will get the green light.

“This doesn’t have a whole lot of controversy associated with it,” says Gunzinger.

Richard Aboulafia, vice-president of analysis at Teal Group, calls the KAI/Lockheed T-50 Golden Eagle the “most capable” option – but also probably the most expensive to buy and operate. Lockheed declines to discuss prices, but Aboulafia estimates the T-50’s flyaway cost will be $26 million per aircraft.

Currently built in South Korea and flown by that country’s air force and that of Indonesia, the T-50 was designed specifically to train fifth-generation fighter pilots, Lockheed says. “A student doesn’t need extensive training in the operating squadron to learn high-speed manoeuvring” after flying the type, it adds.

The T-50, which has been in service since the mid-2000s, can reach Mach 1.5 and pull 8g, Lockheed says. The type’s single General Electric F404 engine also has an afterburner. “If the [USAF] has the budget, and they want [pilots] to [transition] easily into an F-22 or F-35, the T-50 is the choice,” says Aboulafia.

He estimates the least expensive option, at about $21 million each, is the BAE/Northrop Hawk *advanced jet training system, which is derived from a aircraft model originally introduced in the 1970s. “If you want to put a pilot in the air and give him good cockpit training at the lowest cost, [the Hawk is] the way to do it,” says Aboulafia.

The aircraft BAE will pitch to the USAF will be similar to the Hawk T2 (below) operated by the UK Royal Air Force, and also ordered by Oman and Saudi Arabia. Used to prepare pilots for types including the Eurofighter Typhoon and future F-35, the aircraft has a FADEC-equipped Rolls-Royce Turbomeca Adour 951 turbofan and can reach 555kt (1,030km/h), BAE says. The T2 also has advanced simulation architecture that emulates sensors and communicates with other aircraft to mimic threats, it adds.

asset image
Crown Copyright

Operators of earlier Hawk variants include Australia, Bahrain, Canada, Finland and the United Arab Emirates, according to Flightglobal’s MiliCAS database. The US Navy also flies the *Boeing/BAE T-45 Goshawk, which is derived from the same design. “Some competitors build a few airplanes, but nobody [has] anywhere close to [our] customer domain,” BAE says.

Aboulafia says Alenia Aermacchi’s T-100 – a derivative of its M-346 trainer – holds the middle ground. The aircraft are “very modern”, have “great flying characteristics” and will likely cost about $24 million each, he estimates. The M-346 (below) is powered by two Honeywell F124-200 turbofans, can pull 8g and reach 590kt at 5,000ft (1,520m), according to Alenia Aermacchi. The type is operated by Italy and Singapore, and has also been ordered by Israel and Poland.

asset image
Alenia Aermacchi

“It’s a good compromise,” says Aboulafia of the T-100. “The market has spoken to that. Israel and Singapore [are] two of the most prestigious militaries around.”

Little is known about the Boeing/Saab design, and Boeing refers questions to a press release issued last December.

“Teaming with Saab will bring together our’ formidable technical expertise, global presence and willingness to present an adaptable and affordable advanced pilot training solution,” says Boeing.

Click to expand...

Jura said:

I didn't know the F-35 should be nuclear-capable ... until a moment ago:

Posted on InsideDefense.com: March 26, 2014
Even as the F-35 program strives to deliver an interim software capability to the Marine Corps next year, the program will submit its follow-on software development plans -- some parts of which will not be fielded until the mid-2020s -- to the Pentagon for validation in a matter of months.

That schedule for Block 4, which is divided into Blocks 4A and 4B, is necessary because of the extremely long cycle time for defining software load requirements, coding that material, lab-testing it and ultimately testing it in flight.

The F-35 aircraft in the field today are utilizing either Block 1B or 2A software, both with limited capability, and the program is currently flight-testing Block 2B, a slightly more advanced version that the Marine Corps plans to declare initial capability on in 2015. The JSF program's system development and demonstration phase includes two more loads of true developmental software -- Block 3i, nearly identical to 2B, and then Block 3F, a much more capable and risky endeavor.

Block 3F is not due for delivery until August 2017, but program officials are already well on their way to beginning development of additional capabilities beyond that time frame. Follow-on efforts are split into two segments, Block 4A and Block 4B.

F-35 joint program office spokesman Joe DellaVedova said in a March 21 email that the package of capabilities to be included in Block 4 will go before a Defense Department evaluation board for certification around the end of the year. That would set the stage for a contract award to prime contractor Lockheed Martin.

"[A] Block 4A and 4B Capability Development Document will be approved by the Joint Requirements Oversight Council in the early FY-15 time frame," he said. "After we have enterprise-approved requirements the JPO will start negotiations for a full follow-on development engineering and manufacturing development (EMD) contract in 2016."

As is frequently noted, the F-35 program's struggles can be traced to concurrent development and production, and while Block 4 includes a number of desirable qualities -- including nuclear certification -- its presence later this decade will extend concurrency by a number of years. For example, Lockheed will most likely be working on software blocks 3i, 3F, 4A and 4B at the same time in some capacity.

JSF Program Executive Officer Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan wrote in prepared testimony to Congress this week that Block 4A development will span from 2016 to 2022, and Block 4B from 2018 to 2024. Bogdan appeared before the House Armed Services tactical air and land forces subcommittee on March 26.

The general described the status of the F-35's nuclear certification -- commonly referred to as transforming the jet into a dual-capable aircraft, or DCA -- in his testimony. The aircraft is intended to carry the B61 gravity bomb, which is undergoing a life-extension program and will be ready for fielding in the early 2020s.

"With regards to the Dual Capable Aircraft, we are continuing to execute a risk-reduction strategy to prepare for DCA integration during Block 4 Follow-on Development," he wrote. "Our risk-reduction efforts include developing a detailed planning schedule for B61 integration on the aircraft, maturing the nuclear architecture design, refining the cost estimate, Nuclear Certification Requirements planning, and the initial Concept of Operations documentation. All F-35 DCA Risk Reduction benchmarks will be complete by Summer 2015."

Bogdan went on to say that F-35 nuclear certification is not actually expected until 2025. Software development, flight test and certification activities will take place during the course of Block 4's 2016 to 2024 time period, "resulting in an F-35 design certification in 2024." The Air Force would then perform an operational evaluation to clear the jet for nuclear weapons carriage.

DCA is one of very few unique requirements for the Air Force in Block 4. Other requirements include the integration of certain weapons that partner nations are looking for but the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps do not envision utilizing on their own jets.

AFB, I checked Air Force Magazine on this!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

New helmet technology could be used on most USAF aircraft
By: JON HEMMERDINGERWASHINGTON DC Source: Flightglobal.com 2 hours ago
The US Air Force confirms that its digital helmet-mounted display (DHMD) project seeks to develop technology for use on a variety of aircraft, including tankers, transports and most jet fighters.

The service tells Flightglobal its DHMD effort, detailed in documents posted on the government’s procurement website, aims to develop technology that could be paired with Gentex HGU-55/P and HGU-56/P helmets. Pilots who fly all USAF fighter aircraft, with the exception of Lockheed Martin's F-35, use HGU-55/P helmets, it says, as do some pilots of USAF fixed-wing cargo, tanker and airlift aircraft.

Pilots of Bell UH-1 and Sikorsky HH-60 Pave Hawk helicopters, and Bell-Boeing CV-22 tiltrotors use HGU-56/P helmets.

Flightglobal reported on 21 March that the USAF had released a request for information about new helmet display technology, but this did not specify the aircraft for which the system was intended. The service wants technology that improves a pilots' situational awareness and helps better identify ground targets.

A new helmet display system would digitally incorporate night vision, make better use of symbols and have eye-tracking technology that displays information where pilots look, rather than where they face, the USAF says.

In addition, the USAF wants helmet technology that monitors pilots’ health and the oxygen and carbon dioxide levels in their helmets. Oxygen-related issues in Lockheed F-22s were found to have caused a series of hypoxia-like incidents that led to a four-month grounding of the Raptor fleet in 2011. An oxygen system problem also preceded one fatal crash.

In a related development, the New Jersey Air National Guard’s 177th Fighter Wing announced on 27 March that it acquired helmet-mounted integrated targeting (HMIT) systems, which will be paired to HGU-55/P helmets.


Pilots in several National Guard squadrons of Lockheed F-16s and Fairchild Republic A-10s will use the systems, the 177th Fighter Wing says.
The HMIT system has a glass eyepiece and improves air-to-ground targeting by slewing the sensor in an aircraft's targeting pod in the direction that the pilot looks, it says. This “head-steered weapons” ability allows pilots to maintain a safer distance by acquiring targets while flying parallel to them, a document from the National Guard Association of the United States states.

“Currently, pilots typically acquire targets by pointing the aircraft at the target. This tactic is both time-consuming and requires the pilot to manoeuvre their aircraft closer to the threat,” the Guard Association says.

The HMIT eyepiece also can identify friendly and enemy forces.

“This is definitely going to extend the lifespan of the F-16, and we are probably one of the first units to get it,” the 177th Fighter Wing tells Flightglobal.

Click to expand...

USAF must modernize at expense of legacy aircraft: USAF general
By: JON HEMMERDINGERWASHINGTON DC Source: Flightglobal.com 17 hours ago
Defence spending cuts have left the US Air Force with two options: It can continue flying equipment that will be obsolete in a decade, or it can ground older aircraft and channel savings into new technology.

USAF Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Welsh delivered that message on 27 March during a speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, DC.

“Every decision hurts,” says Welsh. “Everything in our budget this year will result in a combatant commander having less capability, less capacity, less ability to respond [and] less flexibility.”

But the USAF’s decision is clear, according to Welsh.

Modernisation “is not an optional thing for the Air Force,” he says. “You can’t dress up a fourth-generation airplane, a legacy fighter, and make it competitive with an F-35. It can’t be done.”

Welsh used much of his roughly 40min speech to explain the reasoning behind the service’s strategy to invest in new equipment while divesting older platforms like it’s ageing fleet of Fairchild Republic A-10s and Lockheed U-2s.


Fairchild Republic A-10 close-air support aircraft. USAF.
That plan, outlined in a budget proposal released in March, calls for committing billions of dollars to longer-term projects like the long-range strike bomber, the joint surveillance target attack radar system (JSTARS) replacement and the T-X fighter trainer replacement.

The budget proposal, a response to dwindling defense spending, still needs Congressional approval.

“Ten years from now, the older stuff won’t be competitive in the battle space,” he says.

Welsh calls the A-10’s close-air support role more critical to counter-insurgency operations like those in Iraq and Afghanistan than to larger-scale conflicts.

“But that’s not why super powers have air forces,” Welsh says. “[Super powers] have air forces to fight a full-spectrum high-end fight.”

Grounding A-10s is “actually the right choice if you are worried about fighting a large conflict,” he says.

The USAF has also proposed cutting its fleet of Boeing F-15C fighters by 51 aircraft.

That move, Welsh says, will allow the service to afford upgrades to the F-15C’s Raytheon AVG-63(V)3 active electronically-scanned array (AESA) radar.

“The F-15C’s radar needs to be updated or it’s not going to be competitive, even against today’s threats in some scenarios,” Welsh says. “We will upgrade that radar… But we are going to cut the overall fleet because we can’t afford to do both.”


The USAF says it needs to update radars in its McDonnell Douglas F-15C fighters. Here, an F-15C breaks away after refueling over Iceland on 19 November 2013. USAF.
The downsizing outlined in the USAF’s five-year budget comes as the service struggles to maintain operational readiness, which Welsh says has been “slowly declining” for at least 10 or 11 years.

The service already does not meet standing requirements for bomber and fighter squadrons or for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance platforms, he adds.

“Our ability to do things as a nation is going to diminish” with more budget cuts,” Welsh warns. The cuts “will actually change our ability to do things around the world.”

Click to expand...

GAO Issues More Cost Warnings For F-35
By Bill Sweetman [email protected]
Source: AWIN First

March 24, 2014
Credit: Lockheed Martin
Lower-than-expected reliability threatens the future of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program, along with doubts as to whether the Pentagon can afford the planned production rate, according to the latest report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office.

The program’s continued failure to develop and test mission software on schedule will also either result in delayed initial operational capability (IOC) dates, or in further reductions to the capability delivered at IOC, the report predicts.

The report released March 24 notes progress in flight sciences testing and in resolving problems with the F-35’s complex helmet-mounted display system and the F-35C carrier variant’s arrester hook. It cites a statement from the JSF Program Office (JSFPO) that the F-35C should be ready for its sea trials in October. However, the report confirms warnings earlier this year from the Pentagon’s director of operational test and evaluation (DOT&E) concerning software development.

By January, the GAO says, the program had verified only half as much of the Block 2B software – the Marine Corps IOC standard – as planned, 13% versus 27%. The GAO endorses the DOT&E’s estimate of a delay as long as 13 months, and recommends a new assessment by the Office of the Secretary of Defense “of the specific capabilities that can be delivered and those that will not likely be delivered” to the services at their different IOC dates. In its response to the GAO report, the DOD agrees to conduct such a risk assessment and to report the outcome to Congress.

The projected cost of the program has been stable since its 2011-12 restructuring, the GAO says, but it sounds an alarm that the total acquisition cost – averaging $12.6 billion per year through 2037, with several years above $15 billion – “does not appear to be achievable in the current fiscal environment,” consuming one-quarter of the Pentagon’s major acquisition funds.

So far, too, no real progress has been made on reducing projected operations and support costs (identified as a major problem in 2011), with average flying hours between failures falling short of projections at this stage. At Aviation Week’s Defense Technology & Requirements conference in Washington earlier this month, JSFPO director Lt. Gen. Chris Bogdan characterized reliability as being “woefully behind the curve” in terms of performance today versus the reliability that was expected at the current cumulative level of flight hours.

Click to expand...

Six Factors Named In Manas KC-135 Crash
By Tony Osborne
Source: Aviation Week & Space Technology

March 24, 2014
Credit: USAF
The loss of a U.S. Air Force Boeing KC-135 Stratotanker over Kyrgyzstan in 2013 has prompted significant changes to flight and emergency training for air force tanker crews.

Three USAF personnel died when the KC-135R, call sign “Shell 77,” crashed just 11 min. after takeoff from Manas International Airport, on May 3, 2013. The aircraft was one of several KC-135s forward-based in the former Soviet republic flying aerial refueling operations for combat aircraft supporting ground troops in Afghanistan.

Accident investigators concluded in their March 6 report that while the primary causal factors were a factor, those problems had been exacerbated by crew inexperience and by subpar organizational training programs, crew composition, and cumbersome procedural guidance.

The problems began shortly after the afternoon takeoff from Manas. As the aircraft got airborne the crew immediately began to experience a flight condition known as rudder hunting, which prompted the aircraft's nose to yaw left and right by 1 deg., an issue caused by a malfunction with the aircraft's series yaw damper (SYD)—part of the KC-135R's flight-control augmentation system (FCAS). The crew identified the SYD as a potential source of the issue but instead of turning the system off, they attempted to correct the yawing motion by using rudder and aileron inputs as well as turning on the autopilot, causing the oscillations to worsen. Some yawing issues had been reported during the aircraft's transit flight to Manas from RAF Mildenhall, U.K.

After the autopilot had been turned on a second time and failed to reduce the effect of the oscillations, the captain assumed control and began to use the rudder in a bid to correct the now-considerable Dutch roll effect—where the aircraft yaws several degrees to the left and right.

The report states that a series of alternating small rudder inputs caused by Dutch roll-induced acceleration forces was in reaction to the pilot's foot pressure on the rudder pedals, which sharply increased the oscillations. These fluctuating rudder movements, coupled with slight right-rudder use while rolling out of the turn, compounded the Dutch roll severity and produced what officials describe as extreme airframe stress.

“The cumulative effects of the malfunctioning SYD, coupled with autopilot use and rudder movements during the unrecognized Dutch roll, generated Dutch roll forces that exceeded the aircraft's design structural limits,” the report states.

The forces resulted in the structural failure and separation of rear fuselage bulkheads 1560 to 1440 with both vertical and horizontal stabilizers breaking away from the rear of the aircraft, immediately sending the KC-135 into an 83-deg. nose-down attitude. As the aircraft broke through the clouds, eyewitnesses on the ground saw the starboard wing separate, which caused the exposed fuel to explode. One of the aircraft's engines landed within 30 ft. of a bystander on the ground.

Much of the wreckage was strewn across a 2.5-mi. area across mountainous terrain near the village of Chaldovar. Some wreckage fell even farther.

Announcing the board of inquiry's findings at Scott AFB, Ill., Brig. Gen. Steve Arquiette, inspector general of the Air Force's Air Mobility Command (AMC), said that analysis of the accident showed that the crew lacked the experience to diagnose the phenomena of Dutch roll, [and] had been hampered in their attempts to recover because of the “cumbersome” nature of the emergency procedures.

“The crew encountered a condition that they had not realistically experienced in training, and when coupled with decisions based on their relatively low recent experience levels, were presented with an unrecognized hazardous and difficult situation to overcome,” said Arquiette.

Emergency manuals for the KC-135R contain no fewer than 21 emergency procedures discussing rudder control difficulties, but they are spread out over 177 pages, the report points out.

Furthermore, “knowledge and experience of Dutch roll is limited in the training program,” the report states. “The proficiency level required for Dutch roll recognition is familiarization, meaning each pilot must only discuss this topic and is not required to perform the maneuver.”

Post-accident, engineers and pilots involved in the probe found they could not recreate in the simulator the conditions experienced in the crash, an issue that is now being addressed. Prototype modifications already have been fitted to simulators at Scott AFB. Other KC-135 simulators around the U.S. will be modified following the award of a contract in February.

The changes to the simulator will improve the way KC-135 sims move, giving them a higher fidelity to such action on actual aircraft. Engineers have developed seven new rudder malfunction scenarios to allow more effective training to overcome the malfunction.

Arquiette says that since the introduction of the KC-135R, the need to familiarize crews with the issue of Dutch roll had virtually disappeared because the “assist systems” introduced to that version—installed to help crews in the event of an engine failure with the more powerful CFM56s—meant that such issues were rarely experienced or reported. Crews flying the older KC-135A had been better trained to deal with the phenomena; even though that version was more unstable in flight, it did not need the assist systems because the asymmetric effect of engine failure on the older model had less effect on the aircraft's flight characteristics.

Since this accident, AMC has carried out checks on the SYD and FCAS across the 431 KC-135-class aircraft within the fleet.

AMC, Boeing and the Air Force's Special Programs Office say they are rewriting the sections of the flight manual regarding rudder-systems operation and malfunction identification that can occur during flight. KC-135 crews are now said to be aware of the issue and are expected to report any rudder anomalies they experience in flight.

According to AMC, since the Shell 77 accident there have been 36 events of aircrew-reported rudder anomalies, of which Flight Data Recorder analysis confirms seven instances of mild rudder oscillations that are said to be similar to those associated with the Shell 77 crash.

Click to expand...

US services to embark on T-6 avionics upgrade
By: JON HEMMERDINGERWASHINGTON DC Source: 10:19 27 Mar 2014
The US military is moving forward with plans to modernise the avionics on its fleet of Beechcraft T-6 trainers in an effort intended to ensure the aircraft meet next-generation US airspace requirements through to 2025.

On 24 March, the US Air Force posted a notice on the federal government’s procurement website announcing it will hold an “industry day” event from 22-24 April to explain its requirements to interested bidders.

Documents show the government wants its T-6s to be upgraded with automatic dependent surveillance – broadcast (ADS-B) “out” systems, which are a key component of the US Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) next-generation air transportation system plan.

ADS-B “out” systems, which transmit altitude, position and other aircraft data to air traffic controllers, will be required on aircraft in most classes of US airspace by January 2020, according to the FAA.

asset image
US Navy
As part of the upgrade effort, the USAF wants its T-6s to also have a host of other new avionics, including replacement altimeters, airspeed and vertical speed indicators, radio management units, electronic instrument displays and engine data managers, solicitation documents show. The work also calls for the modification of 117 simulators.
The US military says it intends to have the upgrades installed on all of the 750 T-6s it eventually expects to operate.

According to Flightglobal’s MiliCAS database, the USAF has 449 T-6As and the US Navy has 207 T-6A/Bs, with the remaining aircraft to be delivered by 2016.

The T-6 upgrade comes as the USAF embarks on its T-X programme – the long-awaited effort to replace its fleet of 430 1960s-era Northrop T-38 Talon trainers.

The service is seeking an aircraft that will better prepare pilots to fly newer fighters like Lockheed Martin’s F-22 and F-35.

Contenders include the Alenia Aermacchi/General Dynamics T-100, BAE Systems/Northrop Grumman Hawk, Korea Aerospace Industries/Lockheed T-50 and a possible new clean-sheet design from Boeing and Saab.

T-X initial operational capability is expected around 2023 under the USAF’s recent budget proposal, which needs Congressional approval.

Click to expand...

Dunford: U.S. will not give Pakistan MRAPs from Afghanistan
Mar. 28, 2014 - 11:28AM |


The U.S. military is disputing media reports that it plans to give Pakistan excess American military equipment that is currently in Afghanistan. (Spc. Gavriel Bar-Tzur/Army)

By Jeff Schogol
Staff writer Army times
FILED UNDER
News
Congress & DOD
The U.S. military is disputing media reports that it plans to give Pakistan excess American military equipment that is currently in Afghanistan.

“Our commitment to the Afghan people and the Afghan National Security Forces is unwavering,” Marine Gen. Joseph Dunford, commander of all U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan, said in a statement Thursday.

The Washington Post first reported in a March 16 web story that the U.S. military was considering giving the Pakistanis $7 billion worth of equipment amid the drawdown in Afghanistan. The Pakistani military has expressed interest in getting Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, which have been proven to be too big and heavy to operate effectively in Afghanistan, which lacks road infrastructure.

The story came shortly after Dunford had testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee that the U.S. military was considering whether to repair damaged MRAPs in Afghanistan in order to give them to someone else.

“We're in the process right now of seeing if there are any of our allies that can use those vehicles,” Dunford said at the March 12 hearing. “The services are also going back to review those requirements. I've put a stop on any destruction of any vehicles except those that are battle-damaged.”

But U.S. Forces-Afghanistan issued a statement on Thursday calling media reports that it was considering sending military equipment to Pakistan “inaccurate.”

“USFOR-A does not provide or intend to provide any such equipment, including MRAPs, from Afghanistan to Pakistan,” the statement says.

When asked about the statement by Military Times, a spokeswoman for the Washington Post said the newspaper stands by its story.

“We reported accurately on March 17 that discussions about a possible equipment transfer to Pakistan had been going on for months and that no final decisions had been made,” the spokeswoman said in an email. “We have taken note of the March 27 statement from U.S. Forces Afghanistan.”

The story caused more strain on the U.S. military’s relationship with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, whose spokesman said Afghanistan would oppose any move to give excess MRAPs to Pakistan.

“Afghan security forces need this type of equipment and as a strategic partner, the U.S. needs to consult with Afghanistan before making such a decision,” Emal Faizi told Voice of America for a March 18 story.

Click to expand...

P.S. whatever that means, I didn't quite get it right, so here is the real deal Air Force Brat-- Official APOLOGY #675.5 cause its only going to be a half axed apology, since I wasn't all wrong.....so the Incident Aircraft was delivered in 1964 I believe, did have a noted tendency to roll to the right??? on the flight to the airfield. This crew was on their first mission in the IA, Shell 77, there was Thunderstorm activity in the area, and there MAY???? have been some wear on one of the rudder locks???? so, what does that mean, the little co-pilot was likely flying the IA as they climbed out, she noted the aircraft was "wallowing around" and was having trouble maintaining the aircraft due to this tendency, a short time later she reported the aircraft was "bent", shortly thereafter the empennage departed the aircraft, killing the pilot, co-pilot, and FE.

As noted the IA had uprated power plants, which if you lost an engine, or had an assymetric thrust condition, would make yaw control more challenging.... the aircraft had a much better yaw damper than previous versions of the KC-135, and dutch roll was NOT a big issue with the updated aircraft, but had been on the earlier KC-135s, hence one of the reasons, dutch roll recovery was not a high priority in the aircraft or simulator training. Now due to a combination of factors Shell 77 was allowed to decay into a very violent dutch roll condition which ultimately "bent" as the Co-pilot stated, and then broke the AI. So the preferred recovery method is a rapid, see-sawing of the yoke back and forth through the roll mode, this will quickly dampen the rolling of the aircraft, breaking the dutch-roll, out of phase oscillation. The autopilot should have been switched OFF, the yaw damper would be left ON, the yaw damper is a "Go, No Go" item on all the Boeings with the exception of the 747, which is much more stable in the Yaw axis. The ailerons are "rapidly", as in as fast as you can, moved back and forth, which breaks the rolling oscillation, leaving the aircraft to dampen the yaw, with its yaw damper as the pilot can exacerbate the out of phase yawing motion. All large swept wing jet air craft have a tendancy to the dutch roll, as the aircraft yaw to the right, the left wing accelerates creating more lift, and rolling to the right, as the aircraft then yaws to the left, the right wing accelerates, creating more lift and rolling to the left, its a viscious out of phase combination of yawing and rolling, with the aircraft becoming more divergent with each cycle...... RIP Schell 77....this has been engaged, it is unlikely to re-occur as all flight crews are Now fully engaged in the concept and recovery.



"actually it does, sorry"
Terran, the loss of Shell 77 has nothing to do with its age, the upgraded power-plants actually exacerbate the KC-135 dutch roll issue, as noted in the article, there is no way to replicate the dutch roll condition in the old flight simulator and all that was required was to indicate a knowledge of the issue and the corrections. An over-reliance on flight sims to maintain basic airmanship is most of the problem, the dutch roll that caused the separation of the empennage, was exacerbated by leaving the yaw dampener engaged, while attempting to correct the condition with control inputs, which caused the aircraft to enter a PIO, as the PIO gained greater and greater amplitude, the structural limits of the airframe where exceeded, ending in a needless tragedy.

The proper recovery, would have required the yaw dampener and auto-pilot to be switched OFF, and to have initiated a manual recovery, allowing the PIO to "damp-out". The pilot leaving the auto-pilot/yaw damper coupled, along with his manual attempts to recover the aircraft, added to the adverse yaw, and dutch-roll, causing the pilot to become more aggressive in his recovery attempts. Very, sad, but the sims have seven new programs to replicate the dutch roll condition, which allows the pilot to practice the recovery in the simulator. I assure you that those aircraft have lots of hours, but have been upgraded and maintained, and this accident has created a "maximum effort" to train and implement the fixes and recovery procedures.

In addition the aircraft was very "heavy", and those excursions outside of the normal flight envelope had lots of mass behind them, the corrections wouldn't have to be to heavy handed to overstress the aircraft. Our own old 172 had a g limit of 4.2 to operate in the Utility category with the two back seats empty and a forward CG on the aircraft, that limit dropped to the NORMAL category when the back seats where fill, gross was increased and the CG moved aft. Same principles apply to the KC-135---very heavy aircraft-at gross weight, and aft CG condition, its easy to break in that condition with dutch- roll. More training and solid recovery procedures will bring this issue under control.

As to the Bill Sweetman article, while the issue with the programs is a serious issue, it will in no way lead to the cancellation of the F-35 program, to imply that is simply dishonest, he knows this aircraft is a must have, and it will be produced and it will perform its mission in a very outstanding way.. The GAO is at times very biased and jaded against the military, particularly against effective high end weapons systems such as F-35s, F-22s, and Aircraft Carriers. They are "bean counting ground pounders" not people who are charged with defending this nation from our many adversaries...Our sister forum, DT Loathes Bill Sweetman, as he has done everything humanly possible to discredit and cause the F-35 to be discontinued, they refer to those people as the "clown club".

Click to expand...