US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

FORBIN said:

Video: U.S. Marine Amphibious Combat Vehicle Program Overview

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Stinger upgrade to increase service life, capabilities
October 29, 2014

By Kevin Jackson, AMC


Emma Thomason, an explosives operator from the Industrial Operations Division, Ammunition Operations Directorate, gets hands-on training with the disassembly of an FIM-92E Stinger, from Matthew Thomas, an electronic integration system mechanic journeyman in the Precision Munitions Division, Ammunition Operations Directorate at McAlester Army Ammunition Plant, Okla. McAlester will begin upgrading more than 2,000 Stinger missiles this week, and return them to the Defense Department inventory.
Matthew Thomas, an electronic integration system mechanic journeyman in the Precision Munitions Division, works to disassemble an FIM-92E Stinger, while providing some on-the-job training to Emma Thomason, an explosives operator from the Industrial Operations Division, Ammunition Operations Directorate, at McAlester Army Ammunition Plant, Okla. A nearly $11 million project for Cruise Missile Defense Systems from Redstone Arsenal, Ala., calls for McAlester workers to replace aging components that are susceptible to degradation and return the Stingers to the Defense Departments inventory.
Matthew Thomas, an electronic integration system mechanic journeyman in the Precision Munitions Division, Ammunition Operations Directorate, tests an FIM-92E Stinger missile on the Guided Missile Intercept Aerial test equipment, before beginning the disassembly process at McAlester Army Ammunition Plant, Okla. Components that successfully pass the examination will be used in the upgrade to the FIM-92J variant, along with the parts that replace the degraded components.
Matthew Thomas, an electronic integration system mechanic journeyman in the Precision Munitions Division, Ammunition Operations Directorate at McAlester Army Ammunition Plant, Okla., makes some adjustments to an aging FIM-92E Stinger missile on the Guided Missile Intercept Aerial test equipment, to determine which components can be used on the nearly $11 million upgrade project for Cruise Missile Defense Systems from Redstone Arsenal, Ala.
Related Links
More Army News
McAlester Army Ammunition Plant
McAlester Army Ammunition Plant Facebook
McALESTER, Okla. (Oct. 29, 2014) -- Work to extend the service life of Stinger Block I missiles and expand its capabilities on the battlefield began at McAlester Army Ammunition Plant, Monday, said officials here.

The nearly $11 million project for Cruise Missile Defense Systems from Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, calls for workers to replace aging components that are susceptible to degradation, said Tommy Hendrix, industrial specialist, Precision Munitions Division, Ammunition Operations Directorate at McAlester Army Ammunition Plant, or MCAAP.

Billed as the Stinger Service Life Extension Program, the work will extend the service life for 2,005 missiles in the Defense Department inventory, for another 10 years. MCAAP will upgrade 850 Stingers for the Army, and 1,155 for the Marine Corps.

In addition to replacing components to extend the service life, MCAAP will also install a warhead section equipped with a Target Detection Device, commonly known as a proximity fuze. The Target Detection Device provides increased effectiveness against unmanned aerial system threats.

Work is expected to continue through 2016, Hendrix said.

During the preparatory stage, MCAAP worked with the Cruise Missile Defense Systems to refine the scope of work, design the production layout to maximize the workflow, determine workforce requirements, ensure subcontracts are in place with vendors who will provide critical components and develop the necessary classification to transport the munitions.

The project calls for MCAAP to disassemble the aging FIM-92E Stinger and install a new flight motor, proximity fuze warhead section, gas generator cartridge, o-rings and desiccant cartridge.

The upgraded Stinger -- also a Block I -- will be redesignated as the FIM-92J.

As part of the project, MCAAP workers are required to examine each Stinger missile on the Guided Missile Intercept Aerial (GMIA) test equipment before disassembly. Components that successfully pass the examination -- such as the guidance section, launch motor, tail fin, launch tube and container -- will be used in the upgrade along with the new parts.

"We worked to incorporate Lean practices into the project before work began," said Kurtis Lund, management analyst, Continuous Improvement Division at MCAAP. "The intent was to error-proof the work by taking steps to produce an efficient production flow."

MCAAP will demilitarize the components not used in the upgrade or will be retained for future use.

Once the assembly is complete, each missile will undergo final Guided Missile Intercept Aerial inspection, continuity and leak testing before being repackaged for delivery to the customer.

The Stinger Reprogrammable Microprocessor, or RMP, entered production in 1985, and was delivered in 1989. The Stinger RMP Block I is an upgrade to the original Stinger RMP, and was delivered between 1996 and 2005.

The Stinger is a short range fire-and-forget infrared/ultraviolet missile system that is both shoulder fired and mounted on a variety of air- and ground-based platforms. It can be used against a variety of low-flying unmanned aerial systems, cruise missiles, rotary wing or fixed wing threats.

Stinger missile testing and stockpile reliability work transferred to MCAAP in 2010, from the Red River Munitions Center, in Texarkana, Texas, which was shuttered by the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure Act.

"Our precision munitions capabilities are becoming well-known to our customers and potential customers," Hendrix said. "We receive requests for estimates weekly -- whether it's for maintenance or demilitarization. We believe this aspect of our business will continue to grow."

-----

McAlester Army Ammunition Plant is the Department of Defense's premier bomb- and warhead-loading facility. It is one of 14 installations of the Joint Munitions Command, and one of 23 organic industrial bases under the U.S. Army Materiel Command, which include arsenals, depots and ammunition plants. MCAAP is vital to ammunition stockpile management and delivery to the joint warfighter for training and combat operations.

Click to expand...

Soldiers of the future will generate their own power
November 17, 2014

By Jeff Sisto, NSRDEC Public Affairs



A Soldier conducts dismounted maneuvers wearing Lightning Pack's Rucksack Harvester, Bionic Power's Knee Harvester and MC-10's photovoltaic Solar Panel Harvester, during an energy-harvesting technology demonstration held at Fort Devens, Mass., by the Natick Soldier Research Development and Engineering Center.
A Soldier wears Bionic Power's Knee Harvester during an energy-harvesting technology demonstration held at Fort Devens, Mass., by the Natick Soldier Research Development and Engineering Center.
A helmet cover equipped with MC-10's photovoltaic Solar Panel Harvester material was used at an energy-harvesting technology demonstration held at Fort Devens, Mass., by the Natick Soldier Research Development and Engineering Center.
A helmet cover equipped with MC-10's photovoltaic Solar Panel Harvester material was used at an energy-harvesting technology demonstration held at Fort Devens, Mass., by the Natick Soldier Research Development and Engineering Center.
A Soldier conducts dismounted maneuvers wearing Lightning Pack's Rucksack Harvester, Bionic Power's Knee Harvester and MC-10's photovoltaic Solar Panel Harvester during an energy-harvesting technology demonstration held at Fort Devens, Mass., by the Natick Soldier Research Development and Engineering Center.
The November/December 2014 Army Technology Magazine discusses robotics and autonomous vehicle research. View or download the issue by following the link in Related Files.
Related Files
Army Technology Magazine (PDF)
November/December 2014 Focus: Robotics
Related Links
Army.mil: Science and Technology News
U.S. Army Materiel Command
U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command
Natick Soldier Research, Development and Engineering Center
Army Technology Live
NATICK, Mass. (Nov. 17, 2014) -- Wearable technologies may provide U.S. Soldiers with on-the-move, portable energy and reduce the weight of gear they carry into combat.

Researchers at the Natick Soldier Research, Development and Engineering Center, or NSRDEC, here, are developing Soldier-borne energy-harvesting technologies.

During the Maneuver Fires Integration Experiment, or MFIX, a combined, multi-phase joint training exercise held in September 2014, at Fort Benning, Georgia, researchers tested prototype energy-harvesting technology solutions.

"My initial impression is that they fulfill a need for instant power generation on long-range missions when displaced from traditional resupply methods," said Sgt. 1st Class Arthur H. Jones, an infantryman with the Maneuver Center of Excellence who participated in the demonstration.

A sharp rise in Soldier-worn power capabilities has resulted in a dramatic increase in the number, variety and weight of batteries carried by warfighters in the field.

This weight prompted NSRDEC researchers to begin developing and evaluating small, lightweight, efficient, on-the-move, portable energy-harvesting and distribution systems that eliminate the need to carry extra batteries.

Energy harvesting works by capturing small amounts of energy that would otherwise be lost as heat, light, sound, vibration or movement. It uses that energy to recharge batteries and provide power for electronic devices such as a Soldier's communication equipment, sensors, or battlefield situational displays.

Researchers first demonstrated the concept to Army and government representatives at Fort Devens, Massachusetts, in April 2014. The demonstration consisted of experienced Soldiers wearing three energy-harvesting devices while traversing a four-mile course that included hard surfaced roads, lightly wooded areas, open fields and hilly terrain.

The technologies, which included wearable solar panels, backpack and knee kinetic energy-harvesting devices, are now being tested at MFIX as ways to reduce the weight and number of batteries Soldiers must carry to power electronic devices.

Lightning Pack's Rucksack Harvester relies on the weight of the backpack to produce kinetic energy when the backpack oscillates vertically in response to the Soldier's walking or running stride. As the backpack is displaced vertically, a rack attached to the frame spins a pinion that, in turn, is attached to a miniature power generator. It is capable of producing 16 to 22 watts while walking, and 22 to 40 watts while running.

Bionic Power's Knee Harvester collects kinetic energy by recovering the power generated when walking. The articulating device is attached to both the upper and lower part of each leg and extracts energy when the knee is flexed. Through software control, the knee harvester analyzes the wearer's gait and harvests energy during the phase of the stride when negative work is being performed. This attests that the Soldier is exhibiting less metabolic activity descending when compared with descending without wearing the device.

MC-10's photovoltaic, or PV, Solar Panel Harvester operates by converting sunlight into electrical energy. The panels, which cover a Soldier's backpack and helmet, are constructed from thin gallium arsenide crystals that provide flexibility to the panel's material and allow it to conform to a Soldier's gear. Under bright sunlight conditions, with the PV panel facing the sun, the backpack panel is capable of delivering 10 watts while the helmet cover panels provides seven watts of electrical power.

At MFIX, NSRDEC researchers collected power-management data and assessed user feedback from the Soldiers wearing the technologies. Once the energy-harvesting technologies themselves are validated, the next step will be to sync with the Integrated Soldier Power Data System as a way to distribute the energy to a Soldier's electronic devices.

Additionally, "MFIX is looking at new concepts with energy-harvesting devices and how they fit in a tactical environment," said Noel Soto, project engineer, Power and Data Management Team of the NSRDEC Warfighter Directorate.

"MFIX is an important opportunity that allows us to quantify the energy-harvesting technologies that generate Soldier power on the move," said Henry Girolamo, lead, Emerging Concepts and Technologies, Warfighter Directorate, who has been involved with the effort since 2011. "The MFIX Data collected in the experiment will inform us of the power harvester efficiency by comparing energy harvester equipped Soldiers and non-energy harvester equipped Soldiers and states of charge from the energy harvesters versus discharge from non-energy harvester equipped Soldiers."

----

This article appears in the November/December 2014 issue of Army Technology Magazine, which focuses on robotics. The magazine is available as an electronic download, or print publication. The magazine is an authorized, unofficial publication published under Army Regulation 360-1, for all members of the Department of Defense and the general public.

The Natick Soldier Research, Development and Engineering Center is part of the U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command, which has the mission to develop technology and engineering solutions for America's Soldiers.

RDECOM is a major subordinate command of the U.S. Army Materiel Command. AMC is the Army's premier provider of materiel readiness--technology, acquisition support, materiel development, logistics power projection and sustainment--to the total force, across the spectrum of joint military operations. If a Soldier shoots it, drives it, flies it, wears it, eats it or communicates with it, AMC provides it.

Click to expand...

Brumby said:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

USNI said:

NORFOLK, VA — Early design work on the Navy’s next generation amphibious warship — based on the San Antonio-class (LPD-17) hull — has begun ahead of a planned 2020 procurement, Navy officials said on Wednesday.

The design work for the LX(R) after a longer-than-usual back and forth on the analysis of alternatives (AOA) discussion for the future class of 11-ships with a request for proposal to industry due out in 2017, said Capt. Erik Ross with Office of the Chief of Naval Operations amphibious warfare division (OPNAV N95).

The Navy’s effort to replace the aging Whidbey Island and Harpers Ferry 16,000-ton landing ship docks (LSD-41/49) is focused on driving cost out of the new class at the direction of the Navy’s chief shipbuilder, Sean Stackley, Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development & Acquisition (RDA), Ross said.

“The whole reason the AoA was paused was for us to get smarter on cost estimates earlier,” Ross told reporters during NDIA’s Expeditionary Warfare Conference.

“Historically ship building programs they go along and they cost more and the [Chief of Naval Operations] and Mr. Stackley said, [no].”

The lead ship of a San Antonio derived LX(R) would cost about $1.64 billion with follow-ons costing about $1.4 billion for a total of 11 ships, according to information from the service.

Last month the service decided to use the LPD-17 hull as the basis for LX(R), according to a memo signed by Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus. That decision was largely based on the trend of the three ships that comprise the Navy and Marine Amphibious Ready Group/Marine Expeditionary Unit (ARG/MEU) operating more independently as disaggregated forces, Ross said.

“One of the reasons that CNO leadership elected to go forward with a LX(R) that’s a LPD-17 derivative is the capacity, capability and flexibility and the ability go off with that aviation capability and command and control,” Ross said during a conference briefing.

“It’s incredibly important when you don’t have as many assets that you can distribute worldwide but the ones that you do have more capability for independent operations.”

The capabilities to assist in more independent operations include a permanent hangar for aviation maintenance and better command and control systems than the current LSDs.

“We want that capability [for LX(R)]. We don’t want the LSD capability — that was really just a truck to always be married up with ARG and never go away from it,” Marine Maj. Gen. Robert S. Walsh, Director Expeditionary Warfare Division (N95), told USNI News on Wednesday.

Now the San Antonio hull has been selected as a template for the design, the service is now working to squeezing cost out of the LX(R) ship-class.

“How can you get a lot of the great things you have in that LPD-17 hull form but at less cost,” Walsh said.
“We really tried to look hard at driving cost out as low as we could get and see what capabilities we can buy back in. We’re continuing to work this.”

Part of the effort will examine what level of military specification (MILSPEC) equipment will be included in the design, Ross said.

“There’s a trade in terms of reliability, survivability and cost and then more efficiently buying things that are less expensive that can be placed in the right part of the ship in terms of design,” Ross said.

“Do you need all the pumps and valves and motors on the entire ship to be MILSPEC? Or can you target them in the areas that need to be more survivable? There’s a trade and a tension there. If all of the backup systems, prime movers and associated machinery — whether it’s sea water cooling power and everything else that directly supports main propulsion — are all hardened ruggedized and high end systems, that’s good. Do you need to do that throughout the entire ship? Maybe not.”

As part of the effort, the Navy has been in consultation with the two shipyards most likely to compete for the LX(R) business — General Dynamics NASSCO and LPD-17 builder Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII), Walsh told USNI News.

“Both HII and NASSCO were helping with ideas on how to drive cost down,” Walsh said.

“When I say competition, we’d look at anyone who could compete and plan it, but those would certainly be two shipyards that would have the ability to compete in this environment.”

The service will now undertake the preliminary design review (PDR) and critical design review (CDR) for about the next two years, Walsh said.

“We’re so far ahead of the game normally in where we’d be in a ship like this with all of the hard work really on the acquisition side,” he said.

Click to expand...

FORBIN said:

Huntington Ingalls Industries new design for LX(R).

Click to expand...