CV32

Ya know, I voted 'yes' but Akula makes a good point. I'm with him.

For the love of everything sacred, please don't mistake me for Herman.

Too funny not to share From Aviation Week's ARES Blog Politics Enters Tanker Contest, Observers Shocked Posted by Bill Sweetman at 3/12/2008 11:41 AM The Democratic National Committee has now weighed in on the tanker debate. So whereas I was wrong about the outcome of the competition, I was right about the political fallout. The question is to what extent the DNC can make the tanker charge stick against McCain. On purely factual grounds, they don't have much. Some McCain campaign figures have lobbied for EADS - but if I was the DNC I wouldn't start making too much of an issue about who was or is in which company's pockets. Even in DC, it's not hard to guess who would have won the competition if it had been decided according to how many Guccis-on-the-ground the contenders had on Capitol Hill. The DNC goes after the Simpsons vote with fulminations about a "French-based corporation" (not EADS, by the way, which is domiciled in the Netherlands). Ironically, though, the Northrop Grumman/EADS arrangement will make the KC-45A less French than any other Airbus-based product. That's because when Airbus was formed, back in the late 1960s, France insisted that final assembly should happen in Toulouse. To balance the workshare, Airbus adopted a then-unique system in which the major airframe pieces were both built and fitted out by the partner companies. So a big part of workshare in France has always been final assembly-related, and that's what will be in Mobile. Meanwhile, the USAF has issued a terse response to Boeing's protest of the tanker decision. However, Ares has obtained a copy of the first draft of the USAF release, which reads in part: ... and the horse you rode in on, Jimbo. We don't appreciate being publicly portrayed as (at best) incompetents who can't write a clear requirement and (at worst) saboteurs trying to get even for the damage that the Druyun/Sears scandal did for our reputation. Neither do we relish having our ankles gnawed by your buddies on the Hill, who knew (as you did) that "number of US jobs created" was nowhere in the selection criteria and are now acting shocked about the outcome. So push this further and watch what happens to your next five or six program bids, including Next Generation Bomber. If nothing else, Boeing has bet very heavily on a change of Air Force leadership before some future projects come up for competition. It's a bet that the company may come to regret, and they'd better be praying for an Obama or Clinton victory in November.

From Defense Aerospace Joint Strike Fighter: Recent Decisions by DOD Add to Program Risks (edited) (Source: U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO); issued March 11, 2008) The Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program seeks to produce and field three aircraft variants for the Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, and eight international partners. The estimated total investment for JSF now approaches $1 trillion to acquire and maintain 2,458 aircraft. Under congressional mandate, GAO has annually reviewed the JSF program since 2005. GAO's prior reviews have identified a number of issues and recommended actions for reducing risks and improving the program's outcomes. This report, the fourth under the mandate, focuses on the program's progress in meeting cost, schedule, and performance goals; plans and risks in development and test activities; the program's cost-estimating methods; and future challenges facing the program. -- Since last year's report, the JSF program office estimates that total acquisition costs increased by more than $23 billion, primarily because of higher estimated procurement costs. The JSF development cost estimate stayed about the same. Development costs were held constant by reducing requirements, eliminating the alternate engine program, and spending management reserve faster than budgeted. -- Facing a probable contract cost overrun, DOD implemented a Mid-Course Risk Reduction Plan to replenish management reserves from about $400 million to about $1 billion by reducing test resources. -- Progress has been reported in several important areas, including partner agreements, first flights of a JSF prototype and test bed, and a more realistic procurement schedule. -- The midcourse plan carries the risk of design and performance problems not being discovered until late in the operational testing and production phases, when it is significantly more costly to address such problems. The plan also fails to address the production and schedule concerns that depleted management reserves. -- Cost and schedule pressures are mounting. Two-thirds of budgeted funding for JSF development has been spent, but only about one-half of the work has been completed. -- The contractor is on its third, soon to be fourth, manufacturing schedule, but test aircraft in manufacturing are still behind, the continuing impacts of late designs, delayed delivery of parts, and manufacturing inefficiencies. -- We believe that JSF costs will likely be much higher than reported. The estimates do not include all costs, including about $6.8 billion for the alternate engine program. In addition, some assumptions are overly optimistic and not well-documented. Three independent defense offices separately concluded that program cost estimates are understated by as much as $38 billion and that the development schedule is likely to slip from 12 to 27 months. Discrepancies in cost estimates add to program risks and hinder congressional oversight. (Emphasis added—Ed.) Even so, DOD does not plan for another fully documented, independent total program life-cycle cost estimate until 2013. -- As JSF finalizes the three designs, matures manufacturing processes, conducts flight tests, and ramps up production, it faces significant challenges. JSF's goal--to develop and field an affordable, highly common family of strike aircraft--is threatened by rising unit procurement prices and lower commonality than expected. -- The program also makes unprecedented funding demands--an average of $11 billion annually for two decades--and must compete with other defense and non-defense priorities for the shrinking federal discretionary dollar. -- Further, expected cost per flight hour now exceeds that of the F-16 legacy fighter, one of the aircraft it is intended to replace. With almost 90 percent (in terms of dollars) of the acquisition program still ahead, it is important to address these challenges, effectively manage future risks, and move forward with a successful program that meets our and our allies' needs. Click here for the full report on JSF (58 pages in PDF format) on the GAO website. Click here for related testimony before the Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives (22 pages in PDF format) on the GAO website. (ends)

From Marine Corps Times Audit: Buying, flying JSF to cost $1 trillion By Richard Lardner - The Associated Press Posted : Wednesday Mar 12, 2008 14:55:31 EDT WASHINGTON — The cost of buying and operating a new fleet of jet fighters for the U.S. military is nearing $1 trillion, according to a congressional audit that found the program dogged by delays, manufacturing inefficiencies and price increases. Released Tuesday, the report from the Government Accountability Office offers a sobering assessment of the ambitious effort to deliver a modern series of aircraft known as the F-35 Lightning II to the Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps. Tasked by Congress to conduct an annual assessment of the program, the GAO said costs have gone up by $23 billion since last year alone. Close to $300 billion is needed to acquire 2,458 aircraft for the three services and another $650 billion will be needed to operate and maintain the fighters that are expected to be flying well into the 21st century, the report said. Operating costs, projected at $346 billion just a few years ago, have been driven upward by changes in repair plans, revised costs for depot maintenance, higher fuel costs and increased fuel consumption. The GAO’s auditors said they expect development and procurement costs “to increase substantially and schedule pressures to worsen based on performance to date.” Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co. of Fort Worth, Texas, is the prime contractor for the Lightning II, also known as the Joint Strike Fighter. The GAO, the investigative arm of Congress, also sees many of the problems as self-inflicted. “The contractor has extended manufacturing schedules several times, but test aircraft delivery dates continue to slip,” the report said. “The flight test program has barely begun, but faces substantial risks with reduced assets as design and manufacturing problems continue to cause delays that further compress the time available to complete development.” Auditors criticized both the military and the contractor for pressing into the jet’s development’s phase before key technologies were mature, manufacturing test aircraft before designs were stable, and moving to production before flight tests showed the aircraft was ready. “We do not know the basis for the GAO estimates and, until we receive and analyze their data, we will be unable to comment on them,” Lockheed spokesman John Smith said in an e-mailed statement. Smith, however, said the company has been careful stewards of U.S. tax dollars by trimming costs wherever possible. “We continue to apply the same kind of oversight, budget alignment and lean thinking to the program,” he said. Production of the Lightning II has begun and the Defense Department is scheduled to buy the aircraft through 2034. U.S. allies are also buying hundreds of the jets and are contributing $4.8 billion in development costs. The Lightning II is being produced in several different models tailored to the needs of each service. The new jet will replace the Air Forces F-16 Falcon and the A-10 Warthog aircraft. A short takeoff and vertical landing version will replace the Marine Corps F/A-18C/D and AV-8B Harrier aircraft. And the Navy is buying a model designed for taking off and landing on aircraft carriers.

From Aviation Week Boeing Protest Halts USAF Tanker Work Mar 12, 2008 By Amy Butler Boeing's protest of the U.S. Air Force's selection of a Northrop Grumman/EADS North America design for its $35 billion KC-135 replacement was filed March 11 with congressional referees at the Government Accountability Office. The protest procedure requires the Air Force to issue an immediate stop-work order and discontinue communications with the Northrop/EADS team pending either the issuance of an Air Force waiver deeming the work essential to national security or a ruling from the GAO. The GAO has 100 days to decide whether the Air Force followed proper procurement processes leading to its selection of an Airbus A330 design for its future aerial refueling tanker. Boeing officials say they've not requested a specific remedy in their protest. The company's options depend on whether GAO finds procedural problems in the source selection. But two Boeing vice presidents say they simply want to compete with a better upfront understanding of the Air Force's requirements. AF defends choice The selection of an A330 design surprised Boeing, which felt the aircraft was too big. The Air Force, however, defends it choice, saying the competition was transparent and that the excess cargo and passenger carriage options of the A330 design provided more value. The Air Force unfairly altered its assessment of how the Boeing's 767-based model and the Northrop/EADS aircraft would operate in "real world" scenarios, said Mark McGraw, vice president of Boeing's tanker programs. The company's ratings on this evaluation criteria factor, the so-called "Factor 5," were switched multiple times leading up to the final selection of the Northrop design, he told reporters during a March 11 teleconference. In one instance, the Air Force actually amended its computer model for this factor to "accommodate" the larger aircraft. For example, the Air Force allowed the larger A330s to be parked closer together than originally planned, inflated the thickness of runways in the computer model (though not actually doing so in the field), and added some ramp and hangar space (in computer models, not in the field) to allow for the larger footprint of the Northrop/EADS offer. The Air Force "disconnected the whole assessment from the real-world studies" the service had previously created leading up to the KC-X competition. Furthermore, the service didn't take into account the cost of adding the ramp space and beefing up the runways to accommodate the A330 during its evaluation, McGraw says. Factor 5 This Factor 5, which proved integral to the final selection of the A330-based design, was actually added to the request for proposals late in 2006 after the Northrop-led team threatened not to compete for the work unless the Air Force devised metrics to take into account the value of a larger aircraft. In the wake of the defunct and scandalized tanker lease attempt crafted in 2002 with Boeing, a sole-source to the company was deemed politically unpalatable, pushing the Air Force to accommodate Northrop's concerns. The smaller 767 would be more agile, gaining access to more airfields and require fewer modifications to existing runways and hangars already used by the KC-135 fleet, Boeing executives said. And McGraw said the Air Force "promised" to take these issues into consideration during the selection process, but he saw no evidence that that took place. Those factors, he says, were downplayed, "twisting" the original intent of the fleet assessment comparison. 'Misled' Leading up to the announcement of Northrop Grumman's win Feb. 29, Boeing had "no reason to believe that this aircraft was in any way undersized," said Beverly Wyse, 767 vice president. Boeing backers on Capitol Hill also gave ears-full of criticism to Defense Department and Air Force leaders, alleging that they and Boeing were "misled" while calling for a recompetition (see related article). Wyse said that the Air Force did not properly account for commercial practices added into the manufacturing plan for its offer. The team has been criticized for offering too complex an aircraft, with the 767-200 airframe; over-wing exits from the -300; floors, doors and structurally enhanced wings from the -300F; a cockpit, tail section and flaps from the -400ER. However, the Boeing executives said their model of building in as many of these features as possible, limiting the military modification work, was less risky than the Air Force rated. By contrast, they note that with the Northrop development program, including four aircraft, each of those aircraft are being built at different facilities. The company's strategy is to start the work in Europe, moving as much of it stateside as possible through the development and early production program. The Northrop/EADS contract for the KC-45 is worth $1.5 billion for those test aircraft. Options worth $10.6 billion include the buy of 64 aircraft.

Aircraft No.782, nicknamed Senior Shade II, tried the low viz grey colour scheme between July and September 1993. Another jet, No.784, nicknamed Senior Spud, tried a half textured, reflective scheme in July 1993. They tried a grey colour scheme again in December 2003, with aircraft No.835, nicknamed Dragon, for a much longer period and flying in testing in concert with a F-22. I still like the F-19 Ghostrider. The Microprose flight sim was a favorite computer game. Still an excellent candidate for Tony's Fictional DB project. Other interesting factoids: 1. The US contemplated using the F-117 in the Operation El Dorado Canyon raid on Libya in 1986, but scrapped the idea, thinking the risk of revealing its existence at the height of the Cold War was just too great. 2. The first five hand built aircraft were nicknamed 'Scorpion'. Cool name. Other less cool nicknames, cockroach and stinkbug. 3. It was rumored or expected that maybe only half of the 10 F-117s taking part in the initial Baghdad raid in 1991 would survive the mission.

From Flight International DATE: 11/03/08 SOURCE: Flightglobal.com Boeing's P-8I Poseidon close to India deal By Siva Govindasamy Boeing's P-8I Poseidon is close to winning India's competition for eight maritime patrol aircraft, providing further evidence of the country's growing defence ties with the USA. New Delhi has been in price negotiations with Boeing for the $2 billion, eight-aircraft requirement since December, while officials from EADS Casa - which is leading a rival bid based on the Airbus A319 - have not heard from Indian officials. With the bids due to expire on 31 March, sources close to the defence ministry expect a deal with Boeing to be sealed soon. "If necessary, the ministry could ask the candidates to extend the deadline by a few months. - but they want to wrap this up as soon as possible," says one source. This follows India's pending $1 billion order for six Lockheed Martin C-130J tactical transports, plus options on six more - New Delhi's first order for US military aircraft for several decades. A contract award is expected later this year. But observers caution that nothing is confirmed in India until the deal has been officially signed. Last year, for example, Eurocopter was close to clinching a $500 million contract for 197 light utility helicopters until the tender was cancelled at the last minute because of unconfirmed allegations of irregularities in the bid. EADS officials have argued that their MPA bid is almost 20% cheaper than Boeing's, and that the USA could restrict the transfer of technology to foreign buyers of the P-8. But Boeing officials have denied those charges. "We are the only ones negotiating with the Indians - and that says it all," says one. The P-8A will be delivered to the US Navy from 2009, and India's aircraft are likely to be inducted from around 2013 to replace ageing Ilyushin Il-38s. The mission uses developments of sensors already operational in USN Lockheed P-3Cs, but India's P-8I variant would allow the integration of indigenous systems, such as communications, datalink and identification friend-or-foe equipment. A follow-on order is expected from India early next decade.

More noise is already generated with speed. I'm thinking two rules (one for ships, one for subs) might be better, because: (1) Damage to submarines invariably affects their acoustic signature (2) Topside (superstructure) damage (e.g. busted air search radar) might have zero affect on surface ship acoustic signature. Tony and I broached the subject a bit last night, and it would take a lot more work to implement code that would, for example, make active sonobuoys detectable.

From Aviation Week's ARES Blog Good Night Nighthawk Posted by Bill Sweetman at 3/11/2008 8:29 AM Today, March 11, the USAF is holding an official retirement ceremony at Holloman AFB, New Mexico, for the Lockheed Martin F-117A Nighthawk stealth fighter. By the end of next month, all the remaining F-117s will have been retired into secure storage at the Tonopah Test Range base in Nevada, which was the type's first operational base. The F-117 has been on its way to retirement since the early 1990s, when plans for a modernized version were passed over in favor of the Joint Strike Fighter. A Serbian missile battery shot down a Nighthawk in March 1999, raising questions about the jet's vulnerability even at night. (It was never cleared for action in daylight). By the 2000s, the F-117 was dedicated to a small set of missions, including precise attack on very hard targets and strikes where "eyes on target" were essential. The USAF says that the F-117 is being replaced by the F-22, but that's not really correct. Until the F-22 gets its synthetic aperture radar (SAR) mode, which won't happen until 2012, the Raptor is bombing on GPS coordinates alone, which is inherently less accurate than the F-117's laser designator. Also, there's no known hard-target version of the 1,000 lb GBU-32 Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM), the biggest weapon carried by the F-22. The F-117's combination of stealth, laser accuracy and hard-target capability won't be equalled until the JSF enters USAF service. Another milestone: with the retirement of the F-117, there is - as far as anyone knows - only one aircraft in US service that emerged from a black flight-test program... The F-117 dates from the days of disco and stems from a project that started under the Ford administration. (The B-2 does not count: development was always "grey" rather than black, and the bomber's existence was never denied.) The lack of visible results is amazing given the size of the black-project world, which I outline in this month's DTI (page 30). If some operational capabilities have emerged from the last 25 years of black-world projects, we don't know about it yet. If they haven't, and what we see is what we actually got, a lot of money has been spent to no great effect.

Tony and I were discussing this issue on IRC and it seems we may have some wiggle room in the code. Basically, we could probably create a rule in the code to deal with increased acoustic signatures when ships receive cumulative damage. The easiest way to implement such a rule would be to effect an increase in BSL values for every increase in value of the DP damage. For example, +2 BSL points for every 10 percent increase in damage. There might also be a different rule for submarines than for ships. This post is intended to provoke discussion on the topic, so please let us know what you think.

HCDB-080308 Aircraft: E-6A Mercury - USA E-6B Mercury - USA KC-45A - USA Ships: Atago DDG - Japan Atago (BMD) DDG - Japan Bartolomeu (M class) FF - Portugal Berrio (Rover) AOR - Portugal Flyvefisken (C-FLEX) PTM - Denmark Flyvefisken (Lith) PTM - Lithuania Hyuga CVH - Japan Type 143 (Tunisia) PTM - Tunisia Type 143A Gepard (83) PTM - FRG Zumwalt DDG - USA Submarines: Tridente (Type 209PN) SS - Portugal

A new version of the official Harpoon Commander's Edition (HCE) Database (HCDB-080308) is now available. Get it in the Download section. New additions (or overhauls of existing entries) include: Aircraft: E-6A Mercury - USA E-6B Mercury - USA KC-45A - USA Ships: Atago DDG - Japan Atago (BMD) DDG - Japan Bartolomeu (M class) FF - Portugal Berrio (Rover) AOR - Portugal Flyvefisken (C-FLEX) PTM - Denmark Flyvefisken (Lith) PTM - Lithuania Hyuga CVH - Japan Type 143 (Tunisia) PTM - Tunisia Type 143A Gepard (83) PTM - FRG Zumwalt DDG - USA Submarines: Tridente (Type 209PN) SS - Portugal Enjoy.

HCD-Americas-080308 A new version of the HCDA database, the Harpoon Commander's Edition (HCE) 'Americas' Database (HCE), is now available. It is available in the Downloads section of this website. New additions (or overhauls of existing entries) include: Aircraft: A310-200 MRTT - Chile F-16AM/BM MLU - Chile F-16C/D Blk 50M - Chile Ships: Appleleaf AO - UK Argus AGH - UK Atlantic Conveyor MRCH - UK British Esk MRCH - UK British Fern MRCH - UK Canberra MRCH - UK Castle (1982) OPV - UK Contender Bezant MRCH - UK County (Batch 1) DDG - UK County (Batch 2) DDG - UK Diligence AR - UK Engadine AAH - UK Fearless (1982) LPD - UK Fearless (1990) LPD - UK Fort Grange (1982) AFS - UK Hecla AGS - UK Hermes CV - UK Invincible (1982) CVH - UK Norland MRCH - UK Oakleaf AO - UK Plumleaf AO - UK Queen Elizabeth II MRCH - UK Rover AOR - UK St Edmund MRCH - UK Stena Inspector AR - UK Tide AO - UK Tidepool AO - UK Tidespring AO - UK Type 12 Leander B2 (82) - UK Type 12M Rothesay FF - UK Type 21 Amazon (82) FF - UK Type 21 Amazon (86) FF - UK Type 22/1 Broadsword (82) FF - UK Type 22/1 Broadsword (90) FF - UK Uganda AH - UK Enjoy.

I believe it was Brains who mentioned the next gen bomber on IRC the other nite. From Air Force Times Wynne discusses next-gen bomber publicly By Erik Holmes - Staff writer Posted : Friday Mar 7, 2008 12:21:40 EST The Air Force is developing both manned and unmanned versions of its next-generation bomber, the service’s top civilian official said Wednesday. Air Force Secretary Michael W. Wynne’s testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee was one of the first public comments by a top official acknowledging that the new bomber, scheduled to debut in 2018, is well along in development. The program is currently classified, he said, but Air Force leaders think they can meet the 2018 timeline. “We are excited about the prospect for maintaining the funding profile, maintaining the level of competition that we have, and we’ll probably be back here as we can declassify our ongoing pursuit of the next-generation bomber,” Wynne said. “I think the committee’s going to be extremely pleased with the way we’ve integrated technologies … to make this happen.” There has long been speculation that the Air Force is conducting a “black” — or classified — program to develop the bomber, but officials have shied away from public comment. The B-2 Spirit was a classified program for several years before it was publicly unveiled in 1988. Wynne said the Air Force is pursuing an unmanned option because unmanned systems can stay aloft much longer than manned aircraft. “We are actually thinking about having that aircraft be a manned and unmanned variant because we see the man as, in fact, a constraint,” he said. “He can only go for 11, 12, 13 hours as we have in the U-2 ... and the SR-71 program. Absent the individual, we find our Global Hawks can go 24, 27 hours.” Wynne also said the bomber will be “evolutionary” rather than “revolutionary,” meaning it will take advantage of technologies already in existence rather than more quixotic solutions such as hypersonics, which would take years longer to develop. Even though the new aircraft is still a decade away, Wynne said environmental and site studies that are necessary to decide where to base the bomber will begin in 2012 or 2013. According to the Air Force’s system roadmap released in January, possible sites for the bomber are Dyess Air Force Base, Texas; Ellsworth Air Force Base, S.D.; Barksdale Air Force Base, La.; and Minot Air Force Base, N.D.

Ya know, the 1991 Gulf War was sorta of a watershed for CNN, and the ongoing Iraq war/insurgency could be the same for Youtube. Will the next war be known for Google Earth? If you've been living under a rock or are otherwise unfamiliar with the capability of Google Earth in the military context, check out: Chinese SSBN? http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2007/07/new_ch...tic_missile.php Area 51 http://www.jarnot.com/images/google_earth_area51-1.jpg Google Earth Community http://bbs.keyhole.com/entrance.php?Cat=0 IMINT & Analysis, a very informative blog of sorts by a talented fellow named Sean O'Connor http://geimint.blogspot.com/

From Army Times Google Earth teams banned from military bases By Lolita C. Baldor - The Associated Press Posted : Friday Mar 7, 2008 13:24:40 EST WASHINGTON — Citing security risks, the Pentagon banned Google teams from making detailed street-level video maps of U.S. military bases after images of a Texas base ended up on the popular Internet site. A message sent to all Defense Department bases and installations around the country late last week told officials not to allow the mapping Web site to take panoramic views inside the facilities. Google said taking such pictures is against its policy and that the incident was a mistake. Air Force Gen. Gene Renuart, chief of the U.S. Northern Command, said Thursday that that the decision to issue a formal ban was made after at least one Google crew requested and then was permitted access to a base, identified in the message as Fort Sam Houston. He said he was concerned that allowing the 360-degree, street-level view could provide sensitive information to potential adversaries and endanger base personnel. It’s a worry, Renuart said, because such views can show “where all the guards are, it shows how the barriers go up and down, it shows how to get in and out of buildings, and I think that poses a real security risk to our military installations.” Google spokesman Larry Yu said a Google crew mistakenly asked for access to a base. “It is against our policy to request access to military bases for the purpose of capturing imagery in Street View,” he said, adding that when Google was contacted, the imagery was taken off the site within about 24 hours. Street View is a feature on Google Map pages that allows viewers to click on a location and see a panoramic view of that spot. The issue emerged a few days after published reports suggested that protesters used Google Earth to help plot their access to the roof of the Parliament building in London. Renuart stressed that this was not an attack against the Internet giant and that it was more a concern about secondary effects of an otherwise good technology. Military officials talked to representatives at Google, Renuart said. “Google was very appreciative of us letting them know that we had a concern,” he said. “They understand the security implications, and they have given us no indication that they would not be helpful to us if we asked.” According to the message sent by U.S. Northern Command to military installations around the country, Google representatives requested access to Fort Sam Houston and were granted permission. “Once given access, they took panoramic images of the area with roof-mounted recording equipment,” the message said. “These images were placed on the Internet for public access.” The imagery included views of entry gates, barriers, the headquarters and other facilities. The message ordered that military bases prohibit such photography, report any vehicles that may have surveillance capabilities and report any incidents where such access was granted.

I'm not sure pumping more money into JSF is going to push up the schedule much, especially with the problems they're having. Keep in mind, too, that the F-35C carrier version is the last on the development list. In the meantime, the current op tempo is pushing the 'Super Fries' (I kinda like this Russian coined term for the F/A-18E/F, even if it is obviously derogatory) fleet hard.

From Aviation Week Australia Kills Super Seasprite Program Mar 5, 2008 By Joris Janssen Lok Australia's new Labor-led government is terminating the Royal Australian Navy's long-running, problematic SH-2G(A) Super Seasprite naval helicopter program under Kaman Corp., the country's defense minister Joel Fitzgibbon announced March 5. According to various sources, immediate focus will now be given to upgrade the Sikorsky S-70B Seahawk helicopters there, as well as to an investigation toward a replacement for the Seahawk. With Australia's acquisition and in-country assembly of the NH Industries MRH90 land multirole version of Europe's NH90, a buy of naval NFH90s will likely be one of the key options to be considered. One industry source said Sikorsky had been expecting such a move, and is confident that the S-70B will be found to be the best alternative. But the U.S. company understands that the subsequent competition will be tough. "It's going to be a dogfight whether they upgrade and buy new S-70B's, buy MH-60Rs, or opt for the new naval variant of the NH-90, which does not exist yet and is high risk," the source said. According to Fitzgibbon, the Rudd Labor Government initiated a review of Seasprite (known as Project Sea 1411) just after it entered office in late 2007. The new government, following a more conservative one known for its U.S. support, has announced several efforts to put its imprimatur on defense planning and programming, including fighter aircraft and other defense needs. "After careful consideration of all the issues involved, the government has decided that it intends to cancel the project. Discussions will start immediately with the contractor in relation to the legal and financial arrangements to facilitate this," Fitzgibbon said. "The government will announce the details of arrangements with the contractor once mutual agreement on these matters has been reached, subject to any confidentiality issues." The defense minister said the decision was not one taken easily, but the government was "left with little option," he added. "Today's announcement demonstrates our determination to make tough decisions whenever required for the security of the nation and the safety and capability of our defense force," he says. Responding to the Australian announcement, Neal J. Keating, Kaman chairman, president and chief executive officer, said, the company expects to "enter a constructive process with the Commonwealth in order to arrive at a mutually agreeable conclusion to the Seasprite program." "Although we have created a highly capable aircraft for the Royal Australian Navy and continue to fulfill our obligations to the Commonwealth under our contract, we appreciate the thoughtful approach and time invested by the current Government in addressing our program and we will work with them toward arriving at a satisfactory arrangement." Australia ordered 11 Kaman SH-2G(A) Super Seasprite helicopters, to be remanufactured from ex-U.S. Navy SH-2 models, under a 1997 contract worth some $600 million at the time. But by 2000, the naval program was encountering significant development problems centered mainly on the software of, and sensor and weapons integration with, the new Integrated Tactical Avionics System (ITAS) from Litton Integrated Systems, that equips the remanufactured, two-man-crew helos. By June 2006, Kaman reported that ITAS software was entering Formal Qualification Testing (FQT) at Kaman's subcontractor CSC-Australia in Sydney and with support from Northrop Grumman. ITAS was designed to provide a systems and weapons management capability that would enable a crew of two to perform complex missions that would otherwise require a crew of three or four to complete. But it turned out that integrating the complex 1990s-designed system on a 1960s-airframe was a tough nut to crack, leading to continuing operational restrictions to be imposed on the aircraft that were delivered. One problem encountered involved an anomalous flight condition attributed to the aircraft's airspeed sensor that resulted in grounding of the 10 aircraft delivered to the Australian naval air station at Nowra starting in March 2006. Despite ongoing attempts to overcome these and other problems, and significant cost overruns (as of today, the total program cost has reached some A$900 million, $830 million), the SH-2G(A) fleet has yet to achieve its planned operational functionality. Key subsystems installed on the aircraft are from Telephonics (APS-143B inverse synthetic aperture radar), Raytheon (AAQ-27 FLIR) and Elbit Systems/Elisra (AES-210 electronic support measures). Egypt, New Zealand and Poland also operate the Super Seasprite but their fleets do not feature the fully integrated mission avionics system that was at the core of the Australian version. Kaman is presently upgrading the nine Egyption aircraft with a new Digital Automatic Flight Control System (Dafcs) and mission subsystems, avionics and a health and usage monitoring system. Formal qualification flight testing of the Dafcs was completed at the end of last year, Kaman said in December 2007.

From Defense Aerospace Chorus of Protests Greet Pentagon's Airbus Decision (Source: Deutsche Welle German radio; issued March 6, 2008) The Pentagon’s surprise decision to buy refuelling tankers for the US Air Force from European defense contractor EADS instead of the heavily-favored Boeing has set off a storm of protest in the US. The Air Force decision to award an Airbus/Northrup Grumman team a $35 billion (23 billion euro) contract over US rival Boeing is still sending off ripples in the US political establishment. The decision on Friday, Feb. 29, to give the contract for refuelling tankers to Airbus, a subsidiary of the European Aeronautic Defense and Space company (EADS) came as a complete surprise to both US defense contractor Boeing -- which was heavily favored to get the contract -- and US lawmakers alike. With follow-up contracts, the deal could eventually be worth $100 billion. Concern for US jobs But while European political and industry leaders are celebrating the decision, US lawmakers have expressed outrage -- particularly senators from the states of Washington and Kansas. Those are the home states of Boeing plants, and they stand to take the hardest economic hit from the lost deal. Lawmakers from those states wrote to Defense Secretary Robert Gates on Monday demanding an explanation. "The Airbus contract is a European Stimulus Plan subsidized by the American taxpayer," wrote Senator Patty Murray of Washington. "We need to be investing in the American aerospace industry and the high-wage, high-skill jobs it supports." Now, the US Congress has said it would examine the military's decision on the contract, lawmakers said. "The Air Force's decision to award the contract for a much-needed modernization of the nation's aerial tanker fleet to Northrop Grumman and Airbus raises serious questions that Congress must examine thoroughly," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said on Tuesday, March 4. 'Subsidy for the French government' "Given the ramifications of this decision for the United States, the Air Force must explain to Congress how it meets the long-term needs of our military and the American people," she said. Pelosi, who leads the Democratic Party majority in the House of Representatives, said among the questions lawmakers should examine are the implications for US national security of choosing "an aircraft supplied by a foreign firm" and the effect on the country's employment and "technological base." It is unimaginable that an enormous deal like that would go to a foreign concern, concurred Paul Shearon of the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers. "We are talking about well-paid, highly valued American jobs. In this case we are using our tax dollars to buy subsidized products. It is a subsidy for the French government,” he said. Boeing seeks clarification Shearon quantified the number of US jobs endangered by the deal at 40,000. Meanwhile, Boeing on Tuesday said it had asked the Air Force for an "immediate" explanation for its decision to reject Boeing's bid. As of Tuesday, Boeing said it had not yet received a briefing on the decision, and pointed out that the Air Force had said a briefing would occur on or after March 12. It called the delay "inconsistent with well-established procurement practices." "A delay of this length in the formal debriefing is unusual," Mark McGraw, Boeing vice president of the 767 tanker programs, told AFP news service. In addition, the candidates in the ongoing presidential primaries have jumped on the issue. Boeing history may have played role Presidential candidate Barack Obama expressed shock at the deal. Hillary Clinton said she found it incomprehensible that Airbus – a company charged before the World Trade Organization with receiving illegal subsidies – would win the contract. However, some observers say Boeing itself is partly to blame for the loss. In 2003, the company received a leasing contract for refuelling tankers, but it was revealed that the head of Pentagon purchasing at the time had been offered a lucrative job at Boeing. The affair cost then-Boeing CEO Phil Condit his job. What's more, the Airbus refuelling tanker is said to be superior to that of Boeing. Still, no one expected Airbus to get the contract, acknowledged Owen Cote, an international security expert at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). "It was a shock that Airbus got the deal; especially for the politicians, for congressmen and -women in Washington.” Unlikely deal will be reversed He believes it is possible – but not likely -- that the deal could be overturned with enough political pressure. "It is possible that with political pressure, the decision could be reverseed,“ he said. If the Democrats win the presidential election, that scenario would be even more likely, Cote said. "But I think the worst-case scenario for Airbus is that the decision will be put off, maybe by a year. But it probably won't be overturned.”

From DefenseNews U.S. Navy Mulls New F/A-18E/F Buy By philip ewing Published: 5 Mar 16:48 EST (11:48 GMT) The U.S. Navy is considering buying 69 F/A-18E/F Super Hornet fighters to bridge a "strike-fighter gap" that commanders fear could imperil aviation readiness at a time when older jets are wearing out before new aircraft are ready to take their place, top service officials said March 5. Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Gary Roughead, who appeared before a Senate panel with Navy Secretary Donald Winter and Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Conway, mentioned the "fighter gap" in written testimony submitted to the Senate Appropriations Committee defense subcommittee, which convened to review the Department of the Navy's fiscal 2009 budget request. After the hearing, Roughead said Navy planners worried that many of today's Super Hornets would be at the end of their service lives by about 2015, but their scheduled replacement, the F-35 Lighting II, might not be ready to fill the vacancies in carrier air wings. They also worried that the exiting fighters would wear out quicker than planned. Roughead said he doesn't know if the Navy would buy the existing E- or F-variants of the venerable fighter or if planners would be interested in a so-called "4.75 generation Hornet" with improved avionics that manufacturer Boeing has mentioned as an option for some defense clients. "We're still a ways away from all that," Winter said. The Navy is to be just one of many customers for the Lockheed Martin-built F-35, which also will be manufactured in two other versions for the Air Force and Marine Corps, as well as export versions for several countries, including the United Kingdom, Australia and Canada. But it isn't the first future client to consider buying a batch of new Super Hornets as a stop-gap measure in case the F-35 doesn't enter the fleet on schedule: In 2006, Australia's defense ministry said it wanted to buy 24 F/A-18Es or Fs to be sure it had a reliable air defense capability until its first F-35s arrived.

Many thanks (again) to Peter for offering his stab at H4 stats for the Zumwalt (DDG-1000) class: Zumwalt DDG Displacement: 12435 ltshp In Class: 0+2+5 Size Class: B/Medium In Service: 2012 Electrn Cnt: 4th Gen D Acoust Cnt: 2nd Gen T Propulsion: COLGAG Crew: 142+20 Signature: Stealthy/VQuiet Armor Rating: 0 Weapons: ROF F(1)2 155mm/62 AGS w/300 rpg C PA/SA(1)2 Mk110 57mm/70//SPY-3 C F&A(20)4 Mk 57 VLS w/See Remarks//SPY-3 (e20) D PB/SB(3)2 Mk32 324mm TT w/3 Mk54 F Aft Pad(2)1 MH-60R, 3 MQ-8B B Sensors: ESM: 3rd Gen SPY-2 VSR (3D, 125% range SPY-1) J SPY-3 MFR (3D, SS, FC) J Bow sonar (dual MF/HF including mine avoidance) MFTA VDS IRST (Peter says, see p25 of this report for info on the Dual Band Radar: http://fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL32109.pdf) Remarks: Prelim. Stats. Fitted with CEC, RAST, ballast tanks (treat as xxxx on Sea State/Speed table). Can provide 3 Midcourse guidance per fire phase (as DDG 51). Autonomous fire fighting system. Reduced magnetic, IR, radar, acoustic signatures. VSR can provide counterbattery fire against shore artillery. VLS will ship Tomahawk, quad-pack ESSM, SM-2 – estimated as 54 Tomahawk, 24 ESSM, 20 SM-2. Fitted with command facilites, space for 20 SOF. Can carry additional MH-60R vice 3 VTUA Mk 57 half damage due to explosions. Mk 57 layout estimated. DDG-1000 Zumwalt (2012), DDG 1001 (2013) Damage & Speed Breakdown: Dam Pts: 0 84 167 250 301 334 Surf Speed: 30 23 15 8 0 Sinks

From Aviation Week's ARES Blog Australia Cancels SH-2G(A) Super Seasprite Program Posted by Joris Janssen Lok at 3/5/2008 2:48 AM Australia's new Labor-led government is terminating the Royal Australian Navy's long-running, problematic SH-2G(A) Super Seasprite naval helicopter program, the country's defense minister Joel Fitzgibbon announced today. Immediate focus will now be given to upgrade the Sikorsky S-70B Seahawk helicopters in the RAN as well as to start investigating a replacement for the Seahawk. With Australia's acquisition and in-country assembly of the MRH90 land multirole version of Europe's NH90, a buy of naval NFH90s will likely be one of the key options to be considered, sources say. According to Fitzgibbon, the Rudd Labor Government initiated a review of the Seasprite helicopter project just after it entered office in late 2007, in line with promises made prior to the election. "After careful consideration of all the issues involved, the Government has decided that it intends to cancel the project. Discussions will be commenced immediately with the contractor in relation to the legal and financial arrangements to facilitate this," says Fitzgibbon. "The Government will announce the details of arrangements with the contractor once mutual agreement on these matters has been reached, subject to any confidentiality issues." According to Fitzgibbon the decision was not made easily, but the Government was left with little option. "Today's announcement demonstrates our determination to make tough decisions whenever required for the security of the nation and the safety and capability of our Defense Force," he says. Australia ordered 11 Kaman SH-2G(A) Super Seasprite helicopters, to be remanufactured from ex-U.S. Navy SH-2 models, under a $600-million contract in 1997. At one time, Kaman was even considering offering a UH-2G(A) version for armed reconnaissance and tactical lift as well. But by 2000, the naval program had encountered significant development problems centered mainly on the new Integrated Tactical Avionics System (ITAS) from Litton Guidance & Control Systems, that was to equip the remanufactured, two-man-crew helos. By June 2006, Kaman reported that ITAS software was entering Formal Qualification Testing (FQT) at Kaman’s subcontractor CSC-Australia in Sydney and with support from Northrop Grumman. ITAS was designed to provide a systems and weapons management capability that would enable a crew of 2 to perform complex missions that would otherwise require a crew of 3 or 4 to complete. But it turned out that integrating the complex 1990s-designed system on a 1960s-airframe was a tough nut to crack. Severe operational restrictions had to be imposed on the aircraft that were delivered. Another problem involved an anomalous flight condition attributed to the aircraft’s airspeed sensor that resulted in grounding of the aircraft. Despite ongoing attempts to overcome these and other problems, and significant cost overruns, the SH-2G(A) fleet has yet to achieve its planned operational functionality. Key subsystems installed on the aircraft are from Telephonics (APS-143B inverse synthetic aperture radar), Raytheon (AAQ-27 FLIR) and Elbit Systems/Elisra (AES-210 electronic support measures). Responding to the Australian announcement, Neal J. Keating, chairman, president and chief executive officer of Kaman Corp., says, "We have received a communication from the Commonwealth that we are reviewing at this time with the expectation that we will enter a constructive process with the Commonwealth in order to arrive at a mutually agreeable conclusion to the Seasprite program." "Although we have created a highly capable aircraft for the Royal Australian Navy and continue to fulfill our obligations to the Commonwealth under our contract, we appreciate the thoughtful approach and time invested by the current Government in addressing our program and we will work with them toward arriving at a satisfactory arrangement. " Egypt, New Zealand and Poland also operate the Super Seasprite but these do not feature the fully integrated mission avionics systems that was at the core of the Australian version. Kaman is presently upgrading the nine Egyptian aircraft with a new Digital Automatic Flight Control System (Dafcs) and mission subsystems, avionics and a health and usage monitoring system. Formal qualification flight testing of the Dafcs was completed at the end of last year, Kaman communicated on Dec. 21.

From DefenseNews Australia Cancels Seasprite Contract AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE Published: 4 Mar 22:13 EST (17:13 GMT) SYDNEY - Australia on March 5 cancelled a $1 billion (930 million U.S.) contract for U.S.-made Seasprite helicopters following a review of the troubled project. The Australian navy ordered 11 of the anti-submarine and anti-shipping helicopters in 1997 but technical problems meant they were never fully operational and the fleet was indefinitely grounded in 2006. Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon ordered a review of the project after the center-left Labor Party won office last November as part of a wider examination of a series of controversial military acquisitions by the previous government. Fitzgibbon said he had little option but to cancel the project, which had been criticized by experts for trying to install 21st century technology into airframes built in the 1960s. "Today's announcement demonstrates our determination to make tough decisions whenever required for the security of the nation and the safety and capability of our defence force," Fitzgibbon said in a statement. He said discussions would begin immediately with U.S. defense contractor Kama Aerospace on the legal and financial arrangements for canceling the Seasprite contract. Other projects under the spotlight include a $6 billion contract for 24 F/A-18F Super Hornets from the U.S. Navy and a $550 million deal for 59 Abrams battle tanks. "The new government will continue to work through the long list of defense capability nightmares it has inherited from the former government," Fitzgibbon said. "We are determined to ensure that the defense force receives the capability it needs, and Australian taxpayers receive value for their money. The defense review is scheduled for completion by the end of April. [CV32: You just knew this was coming down the pipe. Now, question is, where to from here?]

Welcome to HarpGamer, HeyJoe, and great to hear from you on this topic. Some valid points there, for sure.