Feb 16, 2010, post by awatrobski
Almost nine years after the 9/11 attacks that shocked the nation to its very core and exposed the inadequacies of U.S. defense, it still hasn’t reached acceptable standards. The Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism released a report card assessing the progress that the United States government has made in implementing the recommendations made by the Commission in its report “World at Risk” that was submitted at the end of 2008.
In December 2008 the Commission informed, “Unless the world community acts decisively and with great urgency, it is more likely than not that a weapon of mass destruction will be used in a terrorist attack somewhere in the world by the end of 2013. That weapon is more likely to be biological than nuclear.” This statement though not meant to strike fear in the hearts of Americans, but rather to push for more protective and preventative measures is a cause for worry.
The Swine Flu is a perfect example of how quickly biological agents can travel and a vaccine was developed for it. “H1N1 came with months of warning. But even with time to prepare, the epidemic peaked before Americans had access to vaccine,” wrote the Commission. I don’t want to think of how fast one could travel that had the intention to cause harm. This statement from the Commission should have prompted action by the government. The Commission requested a year from the government to follow-up their recommendations and with the release of this report card, they found many disturbing facts. The government is not giving full attention to the biological threat.
They have improved on the nuclear weapons front but haven’t placed much credence on the biological agents. With all the continuous advancement of technology and scientific discoveries, this is a pressing issue. The U.S. received an “F,” indicating that no attention or action has been taken. The Commission said, “the lack of U.S. capability to rapidly recognize, respond, and recover from a biological attack is the most significant failure identified in this report card.” It says that there has been no plan to coordinate federal, state, and local actions.
Many deficiencies were identified in the report but none were as blatantly disregarded as bioterrorism. After 9/11, strict measures were put into place at airports and other transportation places. Do we need to have a biological attack before we institute preventative and protective plans? We shouldn’t be scrambling after the fact; more time and effort should be made before this happens. It is 2010, and the Commission is predicting that a biological attack will happen by the end of 2013. The government has less than three years to come up with and implement a plan that will prevent the loss of human life.
More attention should be delegated to this issue in order to protect all Americans. It is a serious issue and it should be treated as such.
Feb 16, 2010, post by awatrobski
The Maritime Laser Demonstration (MLD) system being developed by Northrop Grumman Corporation (NYSE:NOC) has passed two milestone reviews by the Office of Naval Research, which point to the real potential of the MLD weapon system design.
Representatives from the U.S. Navy, U.S. Army and the High Energy Laser Joint Technology Office conducted a critical design review and critical safety review of the MLD at the Dahlgren Naval Surface Warfare Center in Dahlgren, Va.
“These reviews indicate that our MLD design should meet the Navy’s objectives in future demonstrations,” informed Steve Hixson, vice president of Advanced Concepts – Space and Directed Energy Systems for Northrop Grumman’s Aerospace Systems sector. “Next we will finalize detailed test plans and move into land-based, live fire tests.”
Northrop Grumman will conduct an at-sea demonstration of this revolutionary capability, according to Dan Wildt, vice president, Directed Energy Systems. “We will prove that the pinpoint accuracy and response capability of our MLD system can protect Navy ships and personnel by keeping threats at a safe distance. We will accomplish this while leveraging technologies with proven scalability that may ultimately enable addressing additional threats of interest to the Navy.”
The company received a contract from the Office of Naval Research in July 2009 to demonstrate an innovative laser weapon system by the end of 2010 suitable for operating in a marine environment and able to defeat small boat threats, and ultimately could be applicable to other self-defense missions. The indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity MLD contract has a ceiling value of up to $98 million and an expected overall completion date of June 2014.
Northrop Grumman Corporation is a leading global security company whose 120,000 employees deliver innovative systems, products, and solutions in aerospace, electronics, information systems, shipbuilding and technical services to government and commercial consumer worldwide.
Feb 04, 2010, post by awatrobski
The Pentagon’s fiscal 2011 budget continues the Obama administration’s drive to get “the most bang for the buck” by terminating seven major weapons programs and shifting resources to focus on emerging threats.
Draft budget documents obtained by Reuters show the Pentagon will again propose halting Boeing Co’s C-17 transport plane and a second engine for Lockheed Martin Corp’s F-35 fighter jet — two programs on its kill list last year that were revived by lawmakers during the budget process.
This year, the Pentagon is also targeting the costly development of a new Navy cruiser and a replacement for the Navy’s aging EP-3 intelligence aircraft. The Pentagon says it will use enhanced Navy destroyers to fill any resulting capability gap from losing the new cruiser.
The Pentagon plan also would scrap work on an advanced infrared missile warning sensor program for which Science Applications International Corp and Raytheon Co have been competing, and end a Pentagon human resources system by Northrop Grumman Corp. One document said $500 million had been spent on the Northrop program over 10 years with “little to show and limited prospects.”
“Our goals include focusing defense resources — dollars, people and leadership attention — where they are most critically needed. We seek the most ‘bang for the buck’ — the best security payoff for every taxpayer dollar invested,” informed one of the documents.
The documents, labeled as “draft” and “pre-decisional,” showed continued strong funding for shipbuilding, fighter and electronic warfare aircraft and other weapons programs. They also pointed to continued effort to beef up intelligence programs, unmanned systems, cyber security, and enhanced efforts to counter biological, chemical and nuclear weapons.
The Pentagon plans to ask Congress for more than $9.6 billion for various rotary wing aircraft. These include $1.2 billion for Boeing CH-47 Chinook helicopters; $3.1 billion for different models of H-60 helicopters built by Sikorsky Aircraft, a unit of United Technologies Corp; and $2.7 billion for V-22 tilt-rotor planes built by Boeing and Bell Helicopter, a Textron Inc unit.
The proposed budget request also includes $10.7 billion to continue development and procure 42 Lockheed F-35 fighters under a restructured program aimed at stabilizing cost and schedule, with a main engine built by Pratt & Whitney, a unit of United Technologies. One additional F-35 is included in the Pentagon’s separate war funding request.
The budget does not include funding for an alternate, interchangeable engine for the F-35. The second engine is being developed by General Electric Co and Britain’s Rolls-Royce. The Pentagon informed it considered discontinuing that work due to cost and management issues.
The draft documents called for additional funding of $203 million in fiscal 2011 and $2.3 billion in fiscal 2012 to add 26 EA-18G electronic attack planes built by Boeing, saying military commanders considered that an urgent need.
In total, the fiscal 2011 budget will pay for procurement of 22 F/A-18E/F fighter jets at a cost of $1.9 billion, as well as 12 E/A-18G electronic attack variants for $1.1 billion.
The budget includes funding for a new aerial refueling fleet at an estimated cost of $35 billion, eyeing a contract award this summer and procurement to begin in fiscal 2013.
Northrop Grumman has said it will not compete against Boeing for the contract unless significant changes are made to the terms of the competition, which are due out soon.
Shipbuilding accounts for $14.1 billion of the 2011 budget request, funding that would pay for nine new ships. Included are two DDG-51 destroyers, two Virginia-class submarines, two Littoral Combat Ships and one amphibious assault ship.
A separate report by the Pentagon’s chief weapons tester raised critical questions about the LCS ships in particular, saying that neither of two competing designs would survive a hostile combat environment.
The Army’s ground modernization program will receive mostly research and development funding, but the budget will back development of a new ground vehicle after cancellation of the Future Combat Systems program last year.
The budget foresees spending about $4 billion over the next five years to maintain the U.S. bomber industrial base, study plans for a possible new bomber, and upgrade existing B-2 and B-52 bombers. Some analysts had predicted that the bomber program could be eliminated completely, but defense companies argued strongly for at least continued research dollars.
In space, another area that has seen major cost overruns in recent years, the Pentagon said it would end its partnership with the Department of Commerce on a polar-orbiting environmental satellite being developed by Northrop, and develop separate satellite systems.
Ballistic missile defense will remain a priority, drawing about $9.9 billion in funding, including $8.4 billion for the Missile Defense Agency, the documents showed.
The Pentagon declined to comment.
“The president will announce the budget on February 1. Until then, it would be inappropriate for us to discuss it,” informed Navy Commander Darryn James, a Pentagon spokesman.
