OK folks, so I'm headed to the 2009 Annual SHOT Show in Orlando. It's my first time there so I'm pretty psyched, if not a little intimidated by its scope.
I will be updating the blog on cool things I run across and other new gear news and information. I'm taking both still and video camera, so stay tuned for "multi-media" updates.
Also, several of our contributors will be there, including the mad-scientist Dave Woroner, the nut jobs at BreachBangClear and our friend, the editor of SoldierSystems blog. Also, I'll be hanging out with the folks from Tactical-Life.com and my old friend and compadre Robert Brown from Soldier of Fortune magazine. It should be a great collection of rogues and scoundrels.
In the meantime, here's the latest on the FNH-USA submission for the Marine Corps Infantry Automatic Rifle.
Also, feel free to send suggestions on things you'd like me to check out.
-- Christian
More BMD Capabilities
The U.S. Navy's Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) force -- based on Aegis-equipped missile cruisers and destroyers -- is being increased. The Navy currently has 3 cruisers of the Ticonderoga (CG 47) class and 15 destroyers of the Arleigh Burke (DDG 51) class configured for ballistic missile intercept. One of the former, the USS Lake Erie (CG 70), gained world-wide headlines when the ship fired a missile to intercept an errant U.S. intelligence satellite on 20 February 2008, hitting the target at an altitude of approximately 150 miles.
Writing in Defense News, Christopher P. Cavas said that the Pentagon and industry sources confirmed to him on January 7th that three additional Aegis ships will be provided with the BMD capability. Of the existing 18 Aegis-BMD ships, all but two are in the Pacific. Reportedly, the three additional ships will also be based in the Atlantic area. The Atlantic-based ships are intended primarily to provide defense in the eastern Mediterranean area against Iranian-launched ballistic missile.
Navy leaders and officials of the Missile Defense Agency -- the Department of Defense organization that directs the nation's missile-defense efforts -- have at times indicated that all 22 Aegis cruisers and 62 Aegis destroyers may eventually be upgraded to the BMD configuration. Indeed, the current Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Gary Roughead, plans to ask Congress to fund an estimated eight additional Aegis destroyers primarily for their potential BMD capability.
The Aegis BMD capability has been demonstrated in 14 successful missile tests (five other tests failed); one success and one failure were in tests by Japanese destroyers. These are in addition to the Lake Erie intercept of the errant U.S. spy satellite.
The modification of Aegis ships for the BMD role consists primarily of a series of software upgrades and the arming of the ships with modified Standard Missile-2 and the special-purpose Standard Missile-3 missiles. While configured for the BMD role the Aegis cruisers and destroyers retain their full conventional warship capabilities for anti-air, anti-surface, anti-submarine, and (Tomahawk) strike operations.
In addition to the Aegis BMD force, the United States currently has 30 ground-based BMD interceptors in Alaska and California, and more than 600 ground-based PAC-3 missile interceptors. The ship -- based Aegis and Army PAC-3 systems have the advantage of forward deployment, where they can be used for early (boost-phase) intercept of enemy missiles, or can provide terminal defense for allies and overseas U.S. forces. The PAC-3 units, while mobile, cannot be deployed in overseas/forward areas without the commitment of a large number of transport aircraft and the political implications that accompany such a movement and deployment on foreign territory.
Our colleague Greg Grant was also at last week's AUSA Air Warfare Symposium and reported an interesting update on how the Army is picking up the pieces of the cancelled Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter.
The requirements have changed a bit since the ARH's demise, adding 2,000 feet to the "high-hot" hover requirement...a change intended to, and evidently, giving manufacturers fits.
Late last year when the Army issued a “sources sought” notice to industry for a re-competition of the ARH program, after cancelling its contract with Bell-Textron for a militarized version of its civilian 407 helicopter to replace the ageing OH-58D Kiowa Warrior, the service said it was “reassessing the ARH performance requirements.” Specifically: the new helicopter must have the capability to “perform a Hover out of Ground Effect (HOGE) at 6,000 ft/95 degrees Fahrenheit.” At standard temperature, that’s almost equivalent to flying at 14,000 feet, said Larry Plaster, Boeing’s Apache Modernization manager.
The Kiowa Warrior couldn’t meet the 4,000 foot requirement unless almost everything but the seats were pulled off the airframe. For high-hot attack and reconnaissance missions, which means pretty much everywhere in Afghanistan, the Army uses the AH-64 Apache. Plaster said the Block III Apache upgrade will carry composite rotor blades to improve high-hot performance. The powerful, twin-engined CH-47 Chinook cargo hauler has little trouble operating in the rarified air and high temperatures of the Hindu Kush mountain range.
As for existing helicopters that might fit the Army’s new ARH high-hot requirement, “there are aircraft out there that can do it,” said Col. Randolph Rotte, Deputy Director for Aviation in the Army Chief of Staff’s office, speaking at the Army’s Aviation Symposium here in the DC area this week.
“Because of that altitude and temperature that is pushing today’s current technology to the extreme limits. Big [helicopters] works there in those environments well, but to get it smaller to meet the needs of the manned light reconnaissance, that’s a challenge. So only those with some technological edges to it can attain that in the time frames without creating another Comanche program again which we don’t want to do with 10 to 15 years of R and D,” Rotte said.
A fairly active cyber militia within Israel wants you! These cyber activists (Help Israel Win) are actively recruiting pro-Israeli computer users to aide in their cyber attacks against Hamas websites. These efforts appear to date back to the very early days of the latest conflict in Gaza. The militia developed and is distributing a cyber weapon called "Patriot" that once installed turns the volunteer computer to be remotely controlled and used in a Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack against targeted Hamas websites.
As of late last week, the cyber militia said there were about 8,000 downloads of the cyber weapon. This is not just a hack package. The software includes the ability to remotely update the cyber weapon as well as an uninstaller that will remove the program once the conflict has ended.
This is just one aspect of the growing cyber war. The DDoS coupled with a significant propaganda (PSYOPS) offensive has continued to intensify in the Israel/Gaza conflict. PSYOPS is commonly used to induce and/or reinforce attitudes and behaviors favorable to the desired objectives of those launching the psychological operations. There have been reports that the Israeli military is also using the good old phone system in their PSYOPS initiatives. There have been multiple reports that Palestinians have been receiving phone calls from the Israeli army warning them against dealing with or assisting Hamas. Numerous reports of web site defacement have echoed throughout the online world for weeks now. In fact, the Israeli military launched its own PSYOPS and became the first national army to set up an official YouTube channel featuring its own military videos.
This is just the latest indicator of the new hybrid conflict engagement that combines bombs and bullets with bits and bytes. One thing is sure; the cyber war is heating up with multiple other countries getting involved.
A cautionary note. Can someone else use the installed Patriot program? Yes - potentially. That being said, millions of computers have the same issue that are part of BotNets and the owners are totally unaware of that fact. Anyone who grants any type of remote access for maintenance, this type of activism or who knows what are placing themselves at risk.
DT's good friend and SpouseBUZZ founder Andi forwarded an "opportunity" currently posted at DoD Tech Match with the following objective:
"To develop a highly interactive PC or web-based application to allow family members to verbally interact with virtual renditions of deployed Service Members."
The opportunity frames the challenge to killer app designers with the notion that "the stresses of deployment might be softened if spouses and especially children could conduct simple conversations with their loved ones in immediate times of stress or prolonged absence." It goes on to suggest that traditionally "families have derived comfort and support from photographs or mementos, but current technology should allow for more personal interactive messages of support" and that "computer-based applications would resonate with children and capture their interest and imagination."
Cool idea, no doubt. But . . . and maybe this is the novelist in me coming out . . . right away I start thinking about the unintended consequences of this technology. What happens, for instance, during the reintegration process (the period immediately following the servicemember's return from deployment) when the child realizes that the vitual servicemember was a lot nicer that the real deal?
I spent part of the day yesterday at the Association of the US Army's Aviation Symposium here in the DC area and among other interesting things, got my first exposure to an experimental Sikorsky helicopter that could change the paradigm of rotor wing aviation.
I remember way back in the day when Sikorsky purchased Schweitzer helicopter company (the forebears of the MQ-8B Firescout helo-drone) and planned to turn that shop into the rotor wing equivalent of Lockheed's Skunk Works.
Well, it looks like they've turned out a very interesting product in the new X2 Technology Demonstrator.
According to Doug Shidler, VP for Sikorsky's Army Programs office, it was only recently -- and with the help of new technology flight tested on the Army's Rascal (rotorcraft aircrew systems concept airborne laboratory) UH-60 tech demonstrator -- was the company able to incorporate mature systems that didn't make the X2 so unstable it couldn't fly for very long.
"There's a lot of technology that we're applying that we learned on the Comanche program and that we're learning on the [Blackhawk] upgrade program that we're applying right now," Shidler said. "It will demonstrate a lot of different things that we had difficulties with in the '70s and '80s. ... What we've done is apply a lot of the technologies that we've learned developing and embodied in our platforms today and to go ahead and develop this new platform."
The X2 features a set of two counter-rotating blades and a rear-mounted propulsion blade. The goal is to get the aircraft to speeds in the 250 kt range -- which puts it in close competition with the Osprey's specs, but of course the V-22 is operational and can carry a load of troops.
Sikorsky claims this technology can be applied for light attack, light transport, SAR and intermediate commercial applications, and Shidler hinted that it could be used for heavy lift.
Their literature on the X2 claims the configuration will allow for increased payload, improved range, low downwash and cheaper price.
Shidler showed a slide that said Sikorsky had conducted a successful test flight in August.
IDF tanks and soldiers guard the Gaza border. Photo Courtesy of Popular Mechanics
--John Noonan
Peeking into Private Data
Cyber espionage is a relatively new type of intelligence gathering capability with various strategies, tactics and tools.Cyber espionage is defined as the intentional use of computers or digital communications activities in an effort to gain access to sensitive information about an adversary or competitor for the purpose of gaining an advantage or selling the sensitive information for monetary reward. This widely accepted definition was originally crafted by Spy-Ops in their cyber warfare analysis program back in 2004.
Cyber espionage blasted on the scene in the mid 90s and has grown at a steady pace along side the adoption and use of the internet by business, government and industry. Even though cyber espionage is relatively new, countries like China have already invested a lot into building large and well trained cyber-espionage forces. By the first of 2009, Spy-Ops estimates about 140 countries and over 50 terrorist and criminal/extremist groups will be developing cyber weapons and espionage capabilities.
In conventional espionage you rely on deep cover covert operatives to conduct espionage and gain intelligence. In cyber espionage you use computer systems and data coupled with conventional techniques to gain intelligence and sensitive information. Events like the ones at ClearanceJobs and the Oakridge National Labs seem to indicate that the U.S. science and engineering community is being targeted. Let's look at these two incidents a bit closer.
Incident #1 ClearanceJobs.com
ClearanceJobs.com is an online jobs board that specifically addresses the needs of individuals with security clearances and those who hire them. They only focus on active or current security clearances. As such those who apply to job postings on the ClearanceJobs site are ready to work on sensitive /classified projects.
ClearanceJobs.com sent out an email to all those who registered at the web site on Monday, November 19th disclosing a security and systems breach. The hackers did not obtain resume information; however, they did gain access to names, emails and contact information according to the company. The company currently has approximately 3,700 job postings that attract a significant number of candidates seeking a new positions. To illustrate the sensitive nature of many of these posted opportunities, a search on Top Secret SCI resulted in a return of 2,660 listings with that as a requirement. Top Secret is applied to information or materials that the unauthorized disclosure of which would be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security. SCI is the abbreviation for Sensitive Compartmented Information, the term given to a method for handling specific types of classified information that relates to national security topics or programs whose existence is not publicly acknowledged.
Modern warfare -- where the battlefield is a mix of actors, motivations and weapons -- is in part defined by its rapidly changing threat scenarios and multiple layers of high- and low-tech on-the-fly innovations, all of which demand real-time responses.
In Iraq and Afghanistan, this has been especially true of armor protection for ground vehicles, which have been battered by all manner of increasingly powerful pressure plate and remotely controlled improvised explosive devices and explosively formed penetrators; weapons which morph as U.S. armor technology learns how to counter each successive generation of explosive.
This catch-as-catch can approach has produced fleets of hulking Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAPs), intriguing designs for Joint Light Tactical Vehicles (JLTVs) -- currently hung up in industry protests -- and calls for the Multipurpose All-Terrain Vehicle (MATV), or "MRAP Lite" as some are calling it. But what's next for the armor field? Militaries want lighter vehicles, and despite the hulking size of the original MRAPs, successive generations of the vehicle will by necessity be lighter, and more maneuverable.
Damon Walsh, executive vice president of customer operation at armor and vehicle maker Force Protection, says his company, while always working on new armor solutions, is also focusing on ways to defeat and detect the threat before the vehicles encounter it. "One of the things that we're keen on," he says, "is not just passive armor systems to stop threats, but also more sophisticated active protection systems. The idea is "don't just rely on armor, try and defeat the threat earlier before you get hit."
In reflecting on the last several years, it's not surprising that Walsh says that "we've had one of the largest demands that I've ever seen in the industry...for increased protection levels in real time. The threat changed in the past three years so many times that we were in the labs over the weekends trying to create solutions based on intel given by the customer for real-time changes."
Tony Russell, vice president of vehicle armor BAE, which has supplied over 5,000 MRAPs to the U.S. Army and Marine Corps in recent years, sees one of the challenges of the future being the sustainment of the relatively expensive MRAP fleet, now that new orders have waned. But he's also got his eye on the prize that other armor makers like Force Protection are gunning for -- you've got to find "ways to defeat and detect the threat before you even get to it," he says.
This article first appeared in AviationWeek.com.