Archive for May, 2009
May 30, 2009, post by Artur Ślesik
| *** ads by SatPRnews *** |
 Since 2003, we provide satellite Internet in Iraq and Afghanistan globally enabling Iraqi and Afghan citizens, businesses and remotely deployed personnel to have broadband Internet access, enterprise connectivity, VoIP and videoconferencing services at affordable costs.
Contact: phone +48 22 630 70 70
www.ts2.pl
|
| *** ads by SatPRnews *** |
One of the defining characteristics of the first three months of the new Obama administration was the decision to conduct a thorough and systematic overhaul of a Pentagon acquisition system, which in the new president’s own words had ‘run amok’.
So it came as no surprise that the submission of May’s $663.8bn defence budget was distinguished by bold programme cuts and the purging of costly acquisition plans, which Obama says offer little to protect the American people.
The proposed core budget, which is yet to be approved by congress, has grown by $20.5bn from the original total provided by congress, an increase of 4%. Besides procurement programmes the budget also includes $130bn in war funding mainly for Iraq and Afghanistan.
The defining characteristics of Obama’s next few months, as far as weapons procurement goes, will be to see that the proposed budget makes its way through congress, if that goes well a settled defence plan will be in place to go under the knife yet again during this year’s quadrennial defence review, where the warfare strategy of a new era will be decided.
Shifting sands – Obama’s vision
“May’s defence budget was distinguished by bold programme cuts and the purging of costly acquisition plans.”In a meeting held in May with president’s Karzai of Afghanistan and Asif Ali Zardari of Pakistan, Obama reiterated the lasting commitment to defeating Al-Qaeda and supporting the democratically elected governments of both countries. He also made the difficulties plainly clear – the terrain is new and dangerous and there will be more violence and setbacks.
As well as the axing of various dead wood programmes, Obama’s budget also highlights his intention of shifting resources as the war in Iraq winds down to focus on unconventional warfare and the growing threat of irregular warfare in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
From a technology perspective the most important element of the new strategy will the move away from traditional big weapons programmes to more focused issues such as counterinsurgency and equipping the 21,000 new troops headed for Afghanistan.
Improved contract oversight is also a huge priority and the administration has announced the creation of close to 200,000 jobs in the Pentagon, which will help revise how the government buys weapons. The Pentagon may also look at greater use of fix-priced development contracts to make cost estimates more accurate and over-runs less frequent.
The key change in Obama’s overall defence vision, however, will be to raise flagging morale of the forces and public by refocusing the US armed services on people, improving the treatment of soldiers over the entire recruitment-to-retirement lifecycle as well as providing better institutional support abroad.
The chopping block
The US Government Accountability Office has reported severe cost overruns on 97 of the largest defence acquisition programmes, which now amount to a collective total of almost $300bn. As well as being drastically over budget the programmes are also an average of 22 months behind schedule.
To rectify this sorry state of affairs the president has wielded a very free-swinging budget axe.
“The proposed core budget has grown by $20.5bn from the original.”One of the first to go was the presidential helicopter programme being developed by Lockheed Martin and AgustaWestland, which threatened to double in cost to over $13bn. The cancellation of $87bn in funding for the ground vehicle portion of the army’s future combat systems (FCS) modernisation programme is also a bold move to end a seemingly fruitless programme, which had drawn many detractors.
Other high-profile changes include removing funding for the alternate engine being developed by General Electric and Rolls-Royce for the F-35 fighter jet, no additional funding for F-22 fighter jets, termination of four of the seven planned DDG-1000 destroyer ships and no funding for new Boeing C-17 transport planes.
A $15bn air force competition for new combat search and rescue helicopters has also gone on the chopping block. As a replacement the air force has proposed spending $90m on two HH-60M Pave Hawk helicopters to replenish the search and rescue fleet.
The much-talked-about missile defence programme has also gone under the knife. The budget calls for cuts of $1.2bn in funding with the ground-based midcourse defence (GMD) system built by Boeing, and the Patriot PAC-3 missile programme run by Raytheon and the kinetic energy interceptor (KEI) boost-phase programme also fell by the wayside.
Instead the administration plans to move away from ‘boost-phase’ intercept programs and onto exploring other interception measures such as the new laser defence systems being built by Northrop Grumman.
Quadrennial defence review
Over the next few months, senior US Department of Defence officials will conduct the congressionally mandated quadrennial defence review (QDR).
This broad examination of the national defence strategy, modernisation, and force structure will establish a defence planning programme and direct the military purchasing plan for the long-term future.
“Obama’s budget also highlights his intention of shifting resources as the war in Iraq winds down.”Speaking at the Air War College at Maxwell Air Force Base in Montgomery, Alabama in April, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said that the Pentagon remains too focused on buying weapons that are so costly and complex they take forever to build, and only then in very limited quantities.
“We have to be prepared for the wars we are most likely to fight, not just the wars we’re best suited to fight, or threats we conjure up from potential adversaries with unlimited time and resources,” said Gates.
This review is the fourth such review conducted since the QDR became law in 1996 and could well turn out to be the most important. The new review will be undertaken by a fresh new administration during a period of shifting international strategic and economic dynamics.
The task ahead, however, remains the most difficult faced by a modern war administration. To achieve lasting change against the shifting insurgencies of Afghanistan and Pakistan, Obama will have to achieve a remarkable turnaround in the way the US military goes about its business and he will have to do so against the background of one of the worst economic crises in history.
To call such a balancing act tough is an understatement, but if by cutting back the fat on procurement programmes Obama can create a leaner more-focused war machine then he will have already, in his first few months, created a powerful legacy for future generations.
May 30, 2009, post by Artur Ślesik
| *** ads by SatPRnews *** |
Since 2003, we provide satellite Internet in Iraq and Afghanistan globally enabling Iraqi and Afghan citizens, businesses and remotely deployed personnel to have broadband Internet access, enterprise connectivity, VoIP and videoconferencing services at affordable costs.
Contact: phone +48 22 630 70 70
www.ts2.pl
|
| *** ads by SatPRnews *** |
Alex Hawkes: The UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) recently ordered 110 of the Supacat-designed weapons-mounted 4×4 patrol vehicles known as Jackal 2. What enhanced capabilities do this latest-generation model offer the army’s operations in Afghanistan?
Sean Limbrick: There are a number of factors that have contributed to the improvement in performance of these vehicles. In terms of how the Jackal 2 is superior to the original design, it has a much stronger platform provided by our latest-generation chassis which offers increased capacity. When the order was first made from the MoD, the vehicle’s capacity was 6.5t but this has since risen to 7.6t, which means they can carry more fuel provisions, ammunitions and armour.
Another significant improvement is to what we call the ‘hamper’ – this is the part of the vehicle the soldiers use to operate weaponry. We have now moved the gun ring to the middle of the Coyote which has allowed for 360° fire. Before, the user was not able to fire forward for fear of the impact on the driver and commander sat in the front of the vehicle.
The vehicle’s main form of protection – be it from ballistic or improvised explosive devices (IED) – lies in its enhanced mobility and firepower.
AH: So the vehicle’s real strength lies in its ability to defend through attack?
SL: Exactly. The role of this vehicle is not to carry troops from A to B, but to engage in combat with the enemy and in order to do that the weaponry needs to be effectively configured.
“The Coyote is very similar to the Jackal 2 but it is configured in a 6×6 drive train.”AH: And how does the design of the Jackal 2 differ to Supacat’s new 6×6 ‘Coyote’ tactical support vehicle (light) (TSV(L)), which the MoD also placed an order for?
SL: In many respects the Coyote is very similar to the Jackal 2 but it is configured in a 6×6 drive train. This means it can carry significantly heavier payloads. So whereas the Jackal 2 has a payload of 7.6t, the Coyote can carry 10.5t.
The first Jackal was originally designed in 2001 for the UK Special Forces. We have been developing that vehicle design for customers worldwide since and many of the developments made in that time have been combined on the Jackal 2.
Most of the latest developments found on the Jackal 2 are also embodied on the Coyote but at the moment the MoD has embargoed us from issuing too much information about the latter model.
AH: Were both the Jackal 2 and Coyote designed specifically with the Afghanistan terrain in mind?
SL: The terrain in Afghanistan has certainly had an impact on the later alterations of the design but neither was originally designed specifically for Afghanistan.
The ability of the vehicle to use terrain off the beaten track is, however, particularly applicable to the situation in Afghanistan. The Taliban know where there is going to be traffic and they can pre-empt military forces passing through a particular place. Obviously if you are able to take the vehicle off-track then you change the rules of engagement. The threat of IEDs or mines is therefore very much mitigated by the ability to travel off-road and at speed.
AH: What are some of the latest armouring solutions incorporated into the design of both vehicles?
SL: The armouring solutions on the Jackal 1 and Jackal 2 are very similar. We have learnt a lot from the experiences of Jackal 1 but that has only led to subtle amendments rather then any full-scale changes to the basic armouring solutions.
“The Coyote vehicle is now capable of
360° fire.”Hard-steel armour blast plates are located throughout the vehicle’s floor and composite ballistic armour is located at the sides. As the vehicle is open in its design, the degree of protection is obviously limited by its operational use. Within that compromise, however, we have installed ballistic protection panels around the vehicle, which reduce the secondary effects of detonations.
AH: What technology has been implemented onboard the vehicles to provide soldiers in battle with updated information?
SL: There is a strong focus on communications onboard the Jackal 2 and Coyote, which unfortunately I am not allowed to talk too extensively about. The MoD has invested heavily in augmenting the vehicles with systems that enable soldiers to be updated with as much information from as many sources as possible.
At the moment they carry radio systems on many different operating levels and depending on the user, may also have other systems onboard that offer rolling maps or strategic battle information.
Supacat has been placed in charge of providing computer entry systems rather then basic data platforms onboard the latest vehicles. The MoD was originally responsible for integrating the systems onboard our vehicles, but on the Jackal 2 we have provided a data platform that ensures all systems work effectively and integrate with the vehicle.
AH: What refuelling capabilities have been incorporated into the design of the vehicles in order for them to operate in remote areas?
SL: These are primarily long-range vehicles designed for patrols. The Jackal 2, for example, carries a main fuel tank, an auxiliary fuel tank and significant space for additional jerry cans to be carried on the hamper. Cross-fuelling systems are provided on the vehicles that integrate all those options.
Depending on what supplies are carried onboard, the vehicles can generally last a full week on patrol. Essentially they can travel 700km-800km on the main tanks and then using the additional jerry cans they could last anything up to 2,000km. They operate using either diesel or jet fuel.
AH: How does Supacat plan to meet the MoD’s £55m order of 110 Jackal 2 and 70 Coyote vehicles on time and on budget?
“The first Jackal was originally designed in 2001 for the UK Special Forces.”SL: Supacat is responsible for the design, development, prototyping, integration and overall programme management. We have a strong alliance with our production partner Babcock, which is responsible for detailed production planning, purchasing and manufacturing at their Devonport dockyard facility. There is also a single project office located at Dunkeswell in Devon which provides overall control and ensures that the vehicles are being produced at the rate required.
Essentially the strength of this programme will be down to our close partnership with Babcock and we are both working towards the same end result – which is to deliver to the vehicles to the MoD in Afghanistan by the end of 2009.
Because of the timescale of this particular project, we have also tried to work around including as many of the latest improvements to the vehicle as possible. We are therefore running a constant development policy with Babcock, whereby the MoD is able to suggest minor or sometimes significant improvements to the vehicle and we will be able to respond accordingly. That level of feedback from the MoD will continue to be a prominent feature of the programme as we go forward.
May 30, 2009, post by Artur Ślesik
The acquisition of new aircraft for Russia’s military transport aviation will begin in 2012, while modernized Il-76, An-22 and An-124 aircraft will remain in service for another 20-30 years, a senior Air Force official said on Friday.
According to various sources, there are up to 300 transport aircraft in service with the Russian Air Force, including An-12 Cub, An-72 Coaler, An-22 Cock, An-124 Condor and Il-76 Candid planes. Most of the aircraft entered service in the 1960s and 1970s and are considered outdated by modern safety and noise pollution standards.
“The current state arms procurement program envisions the acquisition of new aircraft for military transport aviation starting in 2012,” Lt. Gen. Viktor Kachalkin, commander of the 61st Air Army told a news conference in Moscow.
In the light transport category, Russia has opted for the Il-112V plane although the aircraft is still at the design stage.
In the medium-lift category, Russia relies on a joint Russian-Indian project set to be implemented in three to four years. Russia and India signed last year an intergovernmental agreement on the joint development of a multi-role transport aircraft (MTA).
There is also a need for the Russian-Ukrainian An-70 medium-range transport plane, Kachalkin said.
However, he said the procurement of new aircraft would not be enough to satisfy the demand for the high mobility of Russia’s Armed Forces in line with a new military doctrine. Therefore, the current military transport fleet must be thoroughly upgraded and the service life of existing planes should be extended for another 20-30 years, the general said.
“We are planning a deep modernization of the fleet of Il-76 and An-124 in service. Their airframes are still in great shape, and what we really need is to upgrade the avionics and possibly engines,” Kachalkin said.
The Russian Air Force has begun in 2002 to upgrade its Il-76MD transport aircraft, but this has been a slow process. According to the modernization program, 12 Il-76 aircraft are due to be modernized to Il-76MD-90 variant before 2010.
The An-124 and its modernized version, the An-124-100, will remain in service as a strategic heavy airlift transport aircraft. Russia currently deploys an air regiment equipped with these planes.
