2014_11_17 defense news intl

Vol. 2 No. 24 $7.50PERIODICALS-NEWSPAPER HANDLING

DefenseNewsw w w. d e f e n s e n e w s . c o m

November 17, 2014

INTERNATIONAL

ZHUHAI, China — When China’sstealthy, twin-engine J-31 took to

the skies over Airshow China inZhuhai last week, the skies werecloudy, but the message the coun-

try wanted to send was clear.Beijing not only plans to sell a

new fighter — it also wants to sell

itself on the world stage.“I think the public unveiling of

J-31 certainly shows the Chinese

military is now more confident andtransparent,” said Wang Dong, di-rector of the School of Interna-

tional Studies, Center forNortheast Asian Strategic Studies,

Peking University. Beijing’s lack of transparency

has created suspicion and specula-

tion in the Pentagon and amongChina watchers in Washington.

“This is a message of reassur-

ance to the region,” Wang said. Be-coming more transparent andrevealing your top military tech-

nologies serves as a message of de-terrence to potential rivals.“China’s increase in confidence

and transparency should be ap-plauded.”

China plans to export the J-31;the customer lineup appears to beIran and Pakistan. The J-31 will be

the first stealth fighter available onthe global market for those whoface US export restrictions or can-

not afford the Lockheed MartinF-35.

The J-31 export revelation oc-

curred in the AVIC Exhibition Hallafter personnel unwrapped its 1:2

model of the aircraft during thepreshow media tour. The placardfor the model said “FC-31.” Chi-

nese fighters are designated with a“J” for fighter and “FC” for export.This was the first time the J-31 has

been referred to as the FC-31.Larry Wortzel, a commissioner

See CHINA-J-31, Page 6

With J-31 Flight, China Sends MessageBy WENDELL MINNICK

JOHANNES EISELE/AFP/GETTY IMAGES

Export Ambitions: A Chinese J-31 stealth fighter performs at the Airshow China 2014 in

Zhuhai on Nov. 11.

VICTORIA, British Columbia — A

leaked US document has raisednew questions about Canada’s in-volvement in the F-35 program and

given critics of the fighter jet aswell as opposition members of Par-liament new ammunition to ac-

cuse the Canadian government ofmisleading the public about theproposed acquisition.

An Oct. 27 briefing by US AirForce Lt. Gen. Chris Bogdan, F-35Program Executive Office direc-

tor, outlined how Canada intendsto initially purchase four F-35s.

That flies in the face of continuedCanadian government assurancesthat no decision had been made

about whether the country wouldbuy the aircraft.

Defense News has seen a copy of

the document.Canada’s Conservative Party

government originally committed

in 2010 to purchasing 65 F-35s, butthe acquisition soon became a ma-jor political albatross around the

neck of Prime Minister StephenHarper.

Opposition Parliament members

alleged his government misled Ca-nadians about the F-35’s price andperformance.

In April 2012, Auditor GeneralMichael Ferguson found that De-partment of National Defence offi-

cials withheld key informationfrom Parliament about the jet,

underestimated costs and didn’t

follow proper procurement rules.The government, under continu-

ing fire about the increasing cost of

the F-35s, announced in December

Leaked Document

Riles Critics of

Canada’s Planned

F-35 PurchaseBy DAVID PUGLIESE

See CANADA F-35, Page 8

WASHINGTON — As the White

House and Pentagon pass drafts ofthe fiscal 2016 defense budget backand forth before submitting it to

Congress early next year, the basebudget request possibly could ex-ceed congressionally mandated

spending caps by as much as $60

billion, according to a former de-fense official with knowledge of

the discussions.

Administration and defense offi-

cials have said for months that the2011 Budget Control Act (BCA),which limits how much the Penta-

gon can spend, wouldn’t fully con-strain the 2016 request. But a

source with knowledge of a meet-

ing between President Barack Oba-ma and the Joint Chiefs of Staffsaid the chiefs have pushed for an

increase of $60 billion over the$535 billion cap for defense, withanother $10 billion for Department

of Energy programs.While the number might appear

high, Pentagon and administration

plans to push past the cap are nosurprise.

On Nov. 6, Alan Estevez, princi-

pal deputy undersecretary of de-fense for acquisition, technologyand logistics, told an audience at a

procurement conference in Wash-ington that “we’re going to proposea budget next January and it’s going

to be above sequestration levels.” Deputy Defense Secretary Bob

Work recently estimated that the

Pentagon would fall short about$70 billion in next year’s budget ifCongress didn’t allow it to shift

money around the way the building

sees fit.“If you add up all of the things

that Congress told us no, after we

See 2016 BUDGET, Page 8

2016 US Defense Budget CouldBe $60B Over Spending Caps

By PAUL McLEARY

EUROPE

Rekindled RelationsA common policy toward Syriahas brought Turkey, France clos-er politically, industrially. 0

12 Croatia: NATO debates capabilities.

NORTH AMERICA

Inventory ChallengeReport says US Army has failedto report $419 million of missing

equipment in Afghanistan. Page 15

ASIA & PACIFIC RIM

Talking Again?By lifting its ban on Israel Mil-itary Industries, India opens thedoor to new arms talks. Page 18

MIDDLE EAST

Mideast MROAAR gains key work in UAE’snew maintenance facility, one of

the world’s largest. Page 16

INTERVIEW

Lt. Gen.StevenKwastThe commanderand president of

the US Air Force’s Air Universitydiscusses plans to better connectwith outside experts, how it can

help shape strategy and the im-portance of providing leaders

rapid solutions. Page 22

ISRAEL HONES

PATRIOT BATTERIES

FOR UAV DEFENSE 4

NEW WORLD STANDARDTANDARD

�THE ALL MODE IFF INTERROGATOR� FLEXIBLE, COST-SAVING INTERFACE

WITH OUTSTANDING PERFORMANCE

AN/UPX-44

www.telephonics.com

www.defensenews.com November 17, 2014 DefenseNewsINTERNATIONAL 3

Subscriptions: Call 1-703-750-7400, e-mail [email protected], or write to Defense News International, Subscriber Service, Springfield, VA22159-0400 USA. For change of address, attach address label from a recent issue. All content within this publication is copyrighted and requires proper authorization for reuse. Photocopies: To request photocopies, order online from the Copyright Clearance Center at www.copyright.com, specifying ISSN 2325-6125. Thefee is $3.50 per photocopy per article, limited to 500 copies. Reprints & Permissions: To reprint or license content including text, images, graphics and logos please submit your request atwww.gannettreprints.com or contact PARS International via email: [email protected] or by phone: 212-221-9595, x431.

DefenseNewsINTERNATIONAL (ISSN 2325-6125) © Gannett Government Media

Defense News International is published by Gannett Government Media, 6883 Commercial Drive, Springfield, VA 22159-0400. Annual subscription rates: $130 Canada; $150 other countries; $99 digital only. Defense News International is not a publication of the Department ofDefense. Periodicals postage is paid at Springfield, Va., and at additional mailing offices. Postmaster: Send all address corrections to Defense News International, 6883 Commercial Drive, Springfield, VA 22159-0400. Telephone numbers: Editorial: 1-703-642-7330; Circulation: 1-703-750-7400; Fax: 1-703-658-8314; Advertising: 1-703-642-7330; Fax: 1-703-642-7386.

InBrief

SEOUL and WASHINGTON — South

Korean officials are expected toapprove a plan this week pavingthe way for Lockheed Martin to

take over its F-16 upgrade pro-gram.

A Defense Acquisition Program

Administration (DAPA) spokes-man said his agency is scheduling atop decision-making council Nov.

19 to approve a plan to change theKF-16 partner company, following

cancellation of a $1.7 billion BAESystems contract to give 134 KF-16fighters new avionics and radar

systems.“We believe the KF-16 upgrade

project can’t go forward further

under the existing contract,” hesaid. “That’s why we’re seeking tosign a fresh deal with a new part-

ner.”While unnamed, the partner is

assured to be Lockheed, the origi-

nal producer of the jets, which hasbeen lobbying behind the scenes

since the issues between DAPA

and BAE first surfaced in October. A pair of KF-16 C/D Block 52 jets

has already been sent to a BAE fac-

tory in Fort Worth, Texas, to beequipped with an up-to-date mis-sion computer, cockpit-display

and other avionics systems. Phase2 of the upgrades would have in-volved the integration of the

Raytheon active electronicallyscanned array (AESA) radars,ALR-69A all-digital radar warning

receiver and weapon systemsintegration.

A new Lockheed contract wouldlikely fill similar needs, but mayswap out Raytheon’s AESA for

Northrop Grumman’s model.Lockheed selected Northrop toprovide radars on its contract to

upgrade Taiwan’s F-16 fleet. The news comes as BAE filed a

lawsuit against DAPA to block

what the company calls an unfairattempt by South Korea to claim$43 million in punitive costs.

Military officials in South Koreahave claimed the US government

added about US $470 million and

BAE about $280 million in coststhat were not part of the originalagreement. South Korea’s DAPA is

holding BAE responsible for thosecosts; BAE, in turn, argues that ithad no say in those cost increases,

instead putting the blame at thefeet of the US government.

A BAE spokesman said the com-pany “asked a US federal court torule that it does not owe any mon-

ies in connection with the F-16 up-grade program,” adding, “we areunable to comment further.” The

Pentagon declined to comment. “Lockheed Martin has been con-

tacted by the USG and we look for-

ward to discussing the programwith the USG and ROKAF officialsat the appropriate time,” said

Lockheed spokesman Mark John-son. “Lockheed Martin values its

relationships with its F-16 custom-

ers and stands ready to supporttheir current and future needs.”

The DAPA spokesman also de-

clined to comment on BAE’s law-suit, but did note that furthersanctions against the company are

in play.If DAPA concludes that the re-

quest for additional funds repre-sents a breach of contract, it couldconfiscate the company’s bid bond

and designate it an “undesiredfirm,” which would limit BAE’sability to do defense deals in South

Korea.The Board of Audit and Inspec-

tion, the country’s watchdog agen-

cy, is scheduled to inspect theissues regarding the KF-16 con-tract with BAE in January. N

Email: [email protected].

S. Korea Moving CloserTo Lockheed F-16 Deal

By JUNG SUNG-KI

and AARON MEHTASRA TAYLOR CURRY/US AIR FORCE

Contractor Switch: South Korea is taking steps to bring in Lockheed Martin to upgrade

its KF-16 fleet.

No DoD Work for Deptula GroupThe US Air Force has barred a re-

tired top general from businessdealings with the Pentagon

through Feb. 1, 2016, following aninvestigation by the General Coun-

sel’s office over ties to a failed air-

ship contract. The decision todebar the Deptula Group, led by re-tired Lt. Gen. David Deptula, came

after a three-year review by serviceinvestigators.

Deptula, who helped plan the US

air strategy for the invasions of Af-ghanistan and Iraq, is an outspo-ken, popular figure who appears

regularly in media outfits such as

Defense News to opine on mattersof air power and military reform.

He leads the Air Force Associa-

tion’s Mitchell Institute, and couldbe a potential successor to AFA

President Craig McKinley, who has

announced he is stepping down.The issue is whether Deptula vio-

lated post-government employ-ment restrictions on lobbying forindustry. After his retirement from

the Air Force on Oct. 1, 2010, Dep-tula started the Deptula Group as aconsulting firm.

One of his clients, MAV 6, waspushing an airship for intelligence,surveillance and reconnaissance

(ISR). As the former point person

in the service for ISR, Deptula hadworked on the project, known as

Blue Devil Block 2. Governmentregulations bar officials for lifefrom weighing in or lobbying on

programs they directly dealt withwhile in the service.

In a statement, Deptula pledged

to fight the findings.

Russia Warns Paris Over MistralRussia has warned France of “se-

rious” consequences unless Parisdelivers by the end of this month a

Mistral-class assault ship whose

handover has been delayed by con-cerns over Moscow’s role in the

Ukraine crisis, a report said, ac-cording to Agence France-Presse.

“We are preparing for different

scenarios. We are waiting until theend of the month, then we willlodge serious claims,” the state

news agency RIA Novosti quotedan anonymous high-ranking Mos-

cow source as saying.

ULA Head Touts ReorganizationThe new head of the United

Launch Alliance (ULA) is promis-ing a company transformation toreduce costs for commercial and

government customers.Tory Bruno, ULA’s president,

told an audience at the Atlantic

Council that his vision will slash

launch costs in half.Bruno also promised to reduce

by half launch preparation time to

give more agility to customers.Bruno is proposing a total reor-

ganization of how the company

does business by offering a basicproduct line and services that will

accommodate unique needs andgive the customer more controlover the product.

Pakistan Nears Mi-35 Helo BuyPakistan’s attempts to acquire

new helicopter gunships appear tobe nearing success with news thata deal for Mi-35 Hind helicopters

has been approved.Speaking to Radio Pakistan on

Nov. 12, Russia’s ambassador to

Pakistan, Alexy Dedov, said the

deal had been approved but politi-cal and commercial negotiations

continued.

Pakistan has sought new heli-copter gunships for the better part

of a decade to replace AH-1FCobras, which have been fastwearing out due to the pace of op-

erations against the Pakistani Tali-ban and its allies in and around theTribal Areas bordering Afghani-

stan. N

FOR THE RECORD

SIGN UP ONLINE

iPad Apps:

defensenews.com/ipad

defensenews.com/

printapp

Early Bird Brief:

defensenews.com/ebb

Arabic e-newsletter:

defensenews.com/arabic

Training & Simulation Report:

defensenews.com/training

n Brig. Gen. Dave Bassett, US Army

program executive officer for Land Combat

Systems, discusses the future fighting

vehicle.

n Alan Pellegrini, CEO, Thales North

America, reviews plans to grow in the US.

n Richard Whittle, the author of

“Predator,” talks about America’s unmanned

aircraft programs.

TV.DefenseNews.com

MOST POPULAR

On the WebChina Airshow Will Unveil J-31

A Chinese airshow official has confirmed

that China will unveil its stealthy J-31 fighter

aircraft at China’s biggest commercial and

defense airshow in Zhuhai.

DefenseNews.com

On the BlogWe Now Know Why the F-117 is

Still Flying

Mystery solved!

Intercepts can now reveal what the F-117

is doing post-retirement: Being retired.

DefenseNews.Com/Intercepts

On TwitterArgentina Buying Gripens? Brits

Say ‘No Way’

Follow our reporters on Twitter at@AaronMehta @paulmcleary @BennettJohnT @reporterjoe @CavasShips @OpallRome @awadz

ON DEFENSENEWS.COM

4 DefenseNewsINTERNATIONAL November 17, 2014 www.defensenews.com

WorldNews

TEL AVIV — With newly war-testedbatteries of drone-killing Patriots,

air defenders of Israel Air Force(IAF) Wing 168 are earning equalfooting with F-16s in guarding the

skies against new and growing un-manned threats.

The Wing’s Patriot force forms

the ground-based node of Israel’sextensively integrated air defensenetwork — historically junior part-

ner to IAF fighters in their joint intercept mission against air-

breathing threats. But as traditional threats from

fast-flying fighters and other

manned aircraft give way to a surg-ing new spectrum of slow, poten-tially combat-equipped UAVs,

Wing 168 and its US-built force isproving a prime time option forfrontline defense.

Three times in the past fourmonths, US-built Patriot batteriesof Wing 168 made history here and

for users worldwide by blastingUAVs out of the skies that had pen-etrated Israel’s northern and

southern borders. The first intercept came on July

14 against a Gaza-launched drone.

Israeli Patriots scored again onJuly 17 against the second and lastof the unmanned aircraft attempt-

ing to penetrate from Gaza duringthe 50-day war.

The third unmanned target came

from the north and was quickly de-stroyed in an Aug. 31intercept nearthe Syrian border.

Prior to last summer’s Gaza war,Israel-operated Patriots shared thesame track record as all other anti-

air variants built by Raytheon for

the US Army and at least 10 othercountries: Zero intercepts of ene-

my aircraft.

They came close in October2012, maintaining full target track-

ing of a Lebanon-launched UAV asit flew over two-thirds of the coun-try. “Our Patriots were ready for in-

tercept orders,” recalled Brig. Gen.Doron Gavish, IAF air defensecommander at the time.

The mission ultimately went toF-16s, which downed the targetjust north of Israel’s nuclear facil-

ity in the southern Negev desert.Nearly a decade earlier, US Patri-

ot batteries forward deployed in

Iraq came tragically too close, mis-

takenly intercepting a British Tor-

nado and an F/A-18.Three allied airmen were killed

by friendly Patriot fire in March

and April of 2003 in attacks mark-ing an all-time low in the 30-yearoperational track record of the US

anti-air system.But from that all-time low, offi-

cers and experts say inherent UAV-

killing capabilities recently vali-dated by Wing 168 will eventuallybenefit other nations that rely on

Patriot anti-air batteries to defendagainst growing unmanned

threats. A senior IAF commander noted

that just a decade ago, the threat

from UAVs was rare. “Today, it’s ahuge problem. We bear the bruntof it today, but soon many others

will face similar threats.”He was interviewed Nov. 11, a

day before Iran’s state-run Press

TV released footage of what Teh-ran claims is the maiden flight ofan the unmanned system reverse-

engineered from a US RQ-170 Sen-tinel captured in late 2011.

At the time, the Pentagon con-

firmed Iranian’s claims that the re-connaissance UAV took off fromAfghanistan. It has not commented

on Tehran’s parallel claim that itscyber forces hacked into the air-craft’s control system, forcing it to

land in Iran.Herzl Bodinger, a retired major

general and former IAF command-

er, said enemy states and non-stateterror organizations are expandingtheir arsenals of UAVs as a cheap

and more effective way to attackIsrael by air.

“Enemy states have learned not

to challenge our airspace and lose

their prize assets,” he said. Far overshadowing the UAV

threat from Gaza that debuted in

last summer’s war with Hamas isthe increasingly capable un-

manned force amassed by Hezbol-lah since Israel’s 2006 Lebanonwar.

Maj. Gen. Yair Golan, a formercommander of Israel’s NorthernCommand, estimated that Leba-

non-based Hezbollah holds “an un-limited number” of UAVs initiallysupplied by Iran and since supple-

mented by a range of other sys-tems.

Also in Syria, experts here cite an

uptick in UAV use by forces loyal

to President Bashar al-Assad,

some of which may have fallen intohands of insurgents fighting to top-ple the Damascus regime.

As the officer who took com-mand of the IAF a year after Patri-ots were first deployed here during

the 1991 war in Iraq, Bodinger saidthe system that initially disap-pointed Israel as an anti-missile in-

terceptor has provided significantadded value in its anti-air role.

“For our purposes, the Patriot is

excellent against aircraft; a criticalpart of our continuously upgraded

system of integrated air defenses.” Raytheon spokeswoman Bailey

Sargent deferred to the Israeli gov-

ernment and the IAF when con-tacted for comment. “Patriot is theair and missile defense system of

choice for 13 countries around theworld,” was all she had to say.

Healthy CompetitionIsraeli officers roundly acknowl-

edge that the first UAV to breach

sovereign airspace — an Iranian

Mirsad launched from Lebanon inlate 2004 — came by surprise.

When pressed, most also ac-

knowledge that the second un-manned infiltration from Lebanon,in April 2005, was a mistake. Isra-

el’s integrated air defenses werenot yet fully honed against the

small, stealthy unmanned threat.“It’s like finding a needle in a hay-

stack,” retired Maj. Gen. Eliezer

Shkedy, then commander of theIAF, told Defense News at the time.

By the time war broke out in

Lebanon in June 2006, the IAF’sfortified target detection and clas-sification network helped F-16s

score their first intercept against aHezbollah Ababil.

At least five unmanned planes

have penetrated Israeli airspace

since then, three of them de-stroyed in recent months by Wing168.

“Today, we’re finding many nee-dles in the haystack,” Col. ChemiBar-El, 168 Wing commander, said.

Bar-El acknowledged “a healthycompetition” between ground- and

air-based nodes of the net, whichprovide multiple options for eachtarget.

With such limited airspace andso many threats, Bar-El said Israeliair defenders don’t have the luxury

of finding out in real time the inten-tions of unauthorized penetra-tions.

“We have a very clear policy: If itflies it dies,” Bar-El said. N


JACK GUEZ/AFP/GETTY IMAGES

Drone Killers: A Patriot surface-to-air missile battery is positioned in the Mediterranean

coastal city of Haifa north of Israel in August 2013.

Israel Air Force Hones PatriotBatteries for UAV Defense

By BARBARA OPALL-ROME

TEL AVIV — Israel has a generation-

al commitment to its Patriot force,cemented by growing interopera-bility with sister systems from US

European Command and signifi-

cant support elements for US bat-teries stocked here and available

to Israel in time of need.US Patriot air defense brigades

provide the backbone of a joint

task force tested in biennial Juni-per Cobra drills and honed by rou-

tine year-round cooperation.

“We work jointly during our rou-tine so that in times of war, we will

be able to do our job as best we

can,” said US Air Force Lt. Gen.Darryl Roberson, in his first visithere this month as commander of

the joint force designated to sup-

port Israel with manpower andweaponry if asked.

But at some $2 million per shot,defense and industry leaders areeyeing Iron Dome as a cheap alter-

native to Patriot in niche missions

against unmanned threats.Unit costs for the Iron Dome’s

Tamir missile are classified. But

based on interviews at the start ofthe program, sources estimate ahigh-end price tag of $100,000.

Similarly, neither Raytheon norIsrael’s Defense Ministry agreed to

provide unit costs for the Patriot

Advanced Capability-2 Guided En-hanced Munition missiles com-

prising most of Israel’s interceptor

inventory. Unofficially, one MoDsource cited $2 million to $3 mil-lion as his “conservative estimate.”

Based on the notional high-endcost of Tamir and the low-end esti-mate for the Raytheon-built inter-

ceptor, Israel could save 95percent — roughly $1.9 million —each time it launches the Iron

Dome instead of Patriot.Yosi Druker, general manager of

the Air Superiority Systems Divi-

sion at Rafael, developers of theIron Dome, said Patriot providesfar broader coverage. But in many

operational scenarios against un-

manned threats, Tamir would beequally effective to the much larg-er and costlier Patriot, he said.

He said no material upgrades areneeded to optimize Iron Dome fordrone-killing missions. “We’ve

publicized this role from the begin-ning,” Druker said.

A Defense Ministry official said

serious studies must be done to de-termine how Iron Dome could beintegrated into the Air Force’s air

defense net, or whether other op-tions could prevent mistaken Iron

Dome fire on friendly UAVs.

A senior Air Force officer saidWing 168 has not yet been asked to

participate in initial studies regard-

ing drone-killing Iron Dome de-fenses. But he said he has heard“talk” about a prospective lower-

tier supplement to Patriot anti-airforces and “totally agrees with theissue of cost-effectiveness.”

As for concerns about mistakentargeting of friendly UAVs operat-ing in the same condensed air-

space, the officer speculated thatIron Dome should be able to re-ceive the same “air picture” sup-

porting Patriot interceptors and airdefense fighters. N


UAV-Killing Iron DomeEyed as Cheaper Option

By BARBARA OPALL-ROME


WORLD NEWS

of the US congressionally appointed US-Chi-na Economic and Security Review Commis-sion, said the first public demonstration

flight of the J-31 and the unveiling of theFC-31 coincides with the Asia-Pacific Eco-nomic Cooperation meeting in Beijing and

the visit of US President Obama. It reminded Wortzel of the same greeting

that former US Defense Secretary Robert

Gates got with the surprise first flight of theCAC-built J-20 stealth fighter during his visitto China in January 2011. The incident was

interpreted by many in Washington as a po-litical signal to the US delegation, thoughChinese officials denied there was a connec-

tion. Regarding the coincidence of Obama’svisit to China and the appearance of the J-31at Zhuhai, Wortzel said, “at least this time

there is some advance notice.” The presence of the aircraft at Zhuhai in-

dicates China is looking at the export arena,

said Douglas Barrie, a senior fellow for mil-itary aerospace at the International Institutefor Strategic Studies, London.

“This, however, raises numerous ques-tions, not least of all, just which of China’s

present export customers is in the marketfor or has the capacity to absorb and fieldwhat is at least notionally a fifth-generation

combat aircraft,” he said. Barrie noted thatin terms of a successor to the Chengdu J-7fighter family in the export arena, develop-

ments of the CAC-built J-10 or the JF-17/FC-1are far more credible in the near term.

China seems to be aiming at an odd market

niche, said Roger Cliff, nonresident seniorfellow for the Asia Security Initiative at theAtlantic Council. “Countries that don’t want

to pay for an F-35, but want something bet-ter, than, say, a MiG-29 or F-16,” such as Iranand Pakistan, might be interested in the

FC-31. However, there does not seem to beenough of an export market to justify the de-velopment costs, Cliff said. “Not that every-

thing AVIC does is driven by economiclogic.”

Cliff suspects that if the Chinese Air Force

is planning to buy the J-31, “it will be the ‘low’part of a high-low mix with the more-capa-ble system, the J-20 [stealth fighter], con-

spicuously absent at Zhuhai, even though itis presumably further along in its develop-ment.”

Cliff said that if the point was to show offChina’s capabilities, it would bring a J-20 toZhuhai. “For China to offer for export the

less-capable of two similar systems, howev-

er, would be consistent with past practice,”

such as the JF-17/FC-1 and J-10 fighters and

the KS-1 and HQ-9 surface-to-air missilesystems.

The one item the Chinese have trouble du-

plicating is advanced fighter engine designs.The Russian-built Saturn AL-31 engine is be-lieved to be the power source for the J-31

prototype. This does not necessarily meanthe fighter will have export problems due tolicensing. Cliff said there is precedent for the

Russian’s allowing re-export of the RD-93engine on the FC-1/JF-17, “so I don’t see whyit wouldn’t be allowed in this case.”

China is trying to develop the indigenousWS-13 engine to take the RD-93’s place onthe FC-1 and, presumably, the J-31. “If they

succeed, then Russian engines won’t be anissue.”

Chinese officials have not explained the

J-31’s striking resemblance to the F-35, butespionage is the most likely explanation.

“I have argued you always get a double

bounce from [Chinese] espionage — theyget the system for the [military] and also sellit,” said Edward Timperlake, former Penta-

gon director of technology assessment, in-ternational technology security. “The badnews/ good news is if the collectors [aka

spies] were successful in getting the F-35,hopefully they did it mid-software design, so

they really do not have the logic of the soft-ware as the US constantly improves the cod-ing — much like successfully stealing a

calculus midterm without being present inclass — being proud of an A and then failingto steal the final.”

Evidence does exist that suggests China isstill trying to get access to that final test pa-per. In June, the US Federal Bureau of

Investigation alleged that a Chinese busi-nessman living in Canada, Su Bin, accessedboth F-22 Raptor and F-35 secrets from US

defense industry computers. Su is alleged tohave obtained F-35 test plans and “blue-prints” that would “allow us [China] to catch

up rapidly with US levels … [and] stand easi-ly on the giant’s shoulders,” according toSu’s e-mails made public by the US Depart-

ment of Justice.Wortzel, who wrote the book, “The Dragon

Extends its Reach: Chinese Military Power

Goes Global,” said it is still unknown howmuch reverse engineering and technologytheft influenced the aircraft design.

“It is a significant development that showshow the parallel development process is go-ing inside AVIC” for the J-31 and J-20. “The

commission’s annual report project [initialoperating capability] for both the J-20 andthe J-31 is in the 2016-2017 time frame.”

But how stealthy and fifth-generation is

the J-31 compared to its near mirror image,

the F-35? Fifth-generation means more than

just stealth, Cliff said. “It also includes super-cruise, thrust vec-

toring, AESA [active electronically scanned

array] radar, and high-bandwidth, low-prob-ability-of-intercept data links,” he said.

Admittedly, by those standards even the

F-22 and F-35 are not completely fifth-gener-ation, Cliff said, “but since, like the F-35, theJ-31 doesn’t look like it will have super-

cruise or thrust-vectoring, whether it is

more than just a stealthy fourth-generation

fighter will depend on whether it comes withan AESA radar and/or high-bandwidth, low-

probability-of-intercept data links, whichthe F-35 does have.”

The physical resemblance between the

J-31 and the F-35 — despite the difference inrelative size — indicates an effort by Chinato reproduce the F-35s stealthy external de-

sign, Timperlake said. “If it is a success in being physically

stealthy and they build a lot it could be a

problem” for our allies in the region, he said.

However, stealth is simply a survivability

feature and analysts must learn more aboutthe internal systems. The real combat en-gagement operational and tactical question

is the F-35 fusion cockpit and whether theChinese actually have anything close to it,Timperlake said.

“Fusion will make all the difference inlooking at the J-31 as a real competitor orjust a linear generational development air-

craft with perhaps enhanced survivabilitythat will still need a hub spoke battle man-agement [concept of operations] — [air-

borne warning and control system] or[ground-controlled interception] being es-

sential for them,” he said. N


JOHANNES EISELE/AFP/GETTY IMAGES

Making a Statement: Spectators watch a flight demonstration during Airshow China 2014 in Zhuhai last week.

CHINA-J-31From Page 1

“Becoming more transparentand revealing your top militarytechnologies serves as amessage of deterrence topotential rivals. China’sincrease in confidence andtransparency should beapplauded.”Wang DongPeking University

WASHINGTON — After languishing

more than a year in political purga-tory, the name of Jo Ann Rooney

has been quietly withdrawn fromnomination to become undersec-

retary of the US Navy.

The White House made the an-

nouncement Nov. 12. Rooney’sname was among two withdrawals

in a list of 17 presidential nominees

for various positions.The move brings to a close a

strange saga that began with her

nomination on Sept. 11, 2013, forthe Navy’s No. 2 position, previous-

ly held by Bob Work, who steppeddown in March 2013.

Rooney’s Senate confirmation

hearing on Oct. 10, 2013, went poor-

ly, particularly under questioningfrom Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz.,

and Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y.

After Rooney was unable to an-

swer a question about the Navy’s

ability to perform a financial audit,McCain — who is expected to be-come chairman of the Senate

Armed Services Committee when

the Republican majority is seatedin January — dismissively told

Rooney, “I will not be supportingyour nomination.”

Gillibrand placed a hold on the

nomination, but withdrew it after a

few months, and the nomination

was sent to the full Senate on Jan.

9. There it was effectively pigeon-holed, and was never brought tothe floor for a vote.

Numerous attempts to contactRooney have proved fruitless, andit’s not even clear where she is. In-

ternet searches show she is a di-rector of The Bostonian Group, aninsurance agency, and is a manag-

ing director of the Huron Consult-ing Group in Chicago. N


White House Withdraws US Navy NomineeBy CHRISTOPHER P. CAVAS

US DEFENSE DEPARTMENT

Jo Ann Rooney


WORLD NEWS

2012 it would put the procurement on a tem-porary hold and examine other aircraft. Thatprocess is ongoing, government ministers

said.But Bogdan’s briefing to US Air Force Sec-

retary Deborah Lee James undercuts those

claims. Bogdan pointed out that Canadawants to “swap” four aircraft destined forthe US Air Force and receive those as early

as 2015.The aircraft would be replaced at a later

date by Canada.

Bogdan noted in the 14-page briefing deckthat the US Air Force agrees with the plan aslong as the F-35 initial operating capability

date of 2016 remains on schedule and no oth-er allies make similar requests.

For the swap to happen, Canada needs to

deliver a letter of intent to the F-35 projectengineering office this month, the briefingpoints out. Congress would also have to be

notified.Kyra Hawn, spokeswoman for the F-35

Joint Program Office, said the “briefing was

for official use only. It was to inform futuredecisions regarding Canada’s F-35 acquisi-

tion. We will not be commenting any furtheron the content of the slides.”

Lockheed Martin spokesman Mike Barton

referred questions to Canada’s Public WorksDepartment “as these would be govern-ment-to-government type discussions and

nothing we would be privy to.”

Marcel Poulin, press secretary for PublicWorks Minister Diane Finley, said, “No deci-sion has been made on the replacement of

Canada’s CF-18 fleet.”He did not explain why Bogdan was in-

forming James about Canada’s decision to

proceed with the F-35 if the Canadian gov-ernment still had not made a decision onpurchasing the aircraft.

But analysts and opposition MPs arepointing to Bogdan’s briefing as a smokinggun that proves the Conservative Party gov-

ernment has been misleading Parliamentand the Canadian public.

“Getting into the production line this fiscal

year is clearly an intention to go ahead andbuy those planes,” said Jack Harris, defensecritic with the official opposition New Dem-

ocratic Party.He noted that the Bogdan briefing proves

the Canadian government is “going behind

the backs of Canadians” and that it plans tomove ahead with the acquisition despitecontinuing concerns about the F-35 and its

costs.“[The public is] just being deceived by this

government taking action without the kind

of transparency that’s required, without theproper debate, without notifying Canadians,

without notifying Parliament,” Harris added.Alan Williams, the former Canadian de-

fense procurement chief, said the informa-

tion contained in Bogdan’s briefing raisesquestions about the government’s claims itis examining other aircraft besides the F-35

to replace the CF-18s. “The government claims about a fair and

transparent process are called into ques-tion,” Williams said.

Some Canadian aerospace industry repre-

sentatives and political analysts, such as Mi-chael Byers of the University of BritishColumbia, see the move as

designed to quickly lock the country into anF-35 purchase before any competition couldbe considered.

Industry representatives said the movewas clumsy, destined to fail and will only

provide further ammunition for F-35 critics. Canada is still an official partner in the

F-35 program and has not informed the US

government or Lockheed Martin of anyplans to change that. Canada operates 78CF-18 fighter aircraft. It was originally plan-

ning to replace those with the conventionaltake-off and landing version of the F-35.

In the meantime, the Canadian govern-ment has ordered a modernization programfor the CF-18s to keep them flying until 2025.

Johanna Quinney, spokeswoman for De-fence Minister Rob Nicholson, said the mod-ernization project is expected to start in 2016

and be completed in 2019.The program will include replacement of

some flight controls, as well as structural

and avionics upgrades. Core CF-18 avionicssystems will also need to be augmented to

provide secure communications betweenthe CF-18 and allied units, Quinney said. Theaircraft’s software will also be modernized

and simulators will be upgraded. N


LOCKHEED MARTIN

New Ammunition: A leaked US document has put the Canadian government under fire over the proposed F-35

purchase.

CANADA F-35From Page 1

submitted our budget, it’s $31 bil-

lion in noes,” Work said on Sept.30. “No, you can’t get rid of the

A-10. No, you can’t get rid of theU-2. No, you can’t get rid of thosecruisers. No, no, no, no, no, no, no.

And then, no, you can’t do the com-pensation reform.”

Add to this the billions that Pen-

tagon officials now say will beneeded to modernize the nuclearweapons programs, and the se-

quester caps give less and lessroom for issues like real compen-sation reform and starting expen-

sive new programs, such as a

long-range bomber.Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel

told reporters that billions of dol-lars in new investments are neededto fund critical nuclear upgrades in

the coming years. Hagel said the new investments

would total “several” billion a year

in the coming years, and that thePentagon aims to spend at least 10

percent more each year for the

next five years than it does on thenuclear upgrades and moderniza-tion programs.

The 2016 budget has long been

looked at as something of a milemarker in Washington’s struggle to

turn the page on more than a dec-ade of inflated wartime budgetsand massive supplemental re-

quests that filled in the blanks in

procurement and readiness ac-

counts. Still, there is tension.“It’s clear that the Pentagon lead-

ership is prepping the battlefield

now with Congress for anothercap-busting budget request that islikely higher than even last year,”

said Mackenzie Eaglen, an analystat the American Enterprise Insti-tute.

But “the best the Pentagon is go-ing to get is another Ryan-Murraydeal” that offers short-term fixes to

sequestration, she said, since thereis likely little political appetite toactually do away with the law or of-

fer a more permanent fix.“It’s not a surprise if the base

budget comes in at least $50 billion

above the caps” set out in the BCA,Eaglen said.

Politics and legacy-building like-

ly also play a role.“You have the president putting

out the last request that he will also

execute the full year of, so that isan argument for seeing more mon-ey,” said Ryan Crotty, deputy direc-

tor for defense budget analysis at

the Center for Strategic and Inter-national Studies.

“But part of the politics of it is

keeping the request at a levelwhere it’s not going to be rejected

out of hand” by a new Republican-controlled Congress in no mood todo the White House any favors,

even if it supports a strong defense,

and with its eye on dismantling bigdomestic programs like Obama-

care. That same Congress will also

be hostile to new taxes to makeroom for a rising defense budget.

Still, the amount of money the

Hill will ultimately allow the Penta-gon to keep will have to remain

within limits. Even the Congressional Budget

Office, in a Nov. 6 report, estimated

that given the modernization and

compensation needs the Pentagonhas laid out for upcoming years,

the base budget requests between2015 and 2019 will likely be $47 bil-lion higher per year than the levels

designated by the BCA.

But not everyone is convincedthat these numbers will end up see-

ing the light of day.

“We’re not going to roll back se-questration entirely; we may get re-

lief at the margin, but DoD is going

to be living with lower budget re-source levels than its plan of last

year,” said Byron Callan, directorat Capital Alpha Partners. N


2016 BUDGETFrom Page 1

MCSN EVERETT ALLEN/ US NAVY

Paying for Operations: Top military leaders are pressing for a fiscal 2016 base budget that is $60 billion over spending caps. Here, a

US sailor drives a boat past the aircraft carrier George Washington in the South China Sea.


EUROPE

ANKARA — In the early 2000s, French manu-

facturers, once big players on the Turkishmarket, were “red-listed” by Ankara in re-taliation for a French parliamentary resolu-

tion recognizing the Armenian genocide of1915-1919.

French industry unsuccessfully sought

deals when the Turkish boycott disap-peared after a decade, but now they may bein position to make a comeback as Ankara

and Paris have rediscovered their politicalalliance.

Officials and analysts said the crisis in Syr-

ia has brought together French and Turkishinterests and inaugurated successful coop-eration over Turkey’s civil war-torn neigh-

bor. “This is the best times in bilateral rela-

tions in decades,” a senior Turkish diplomat

said. “France is one of our best allies overthe Syrian crisis.”

A French diplomat in Ankara said French

and Turkish interests over Syria’s futureconverge almost entirely.

“We have common goals and common pol-icies to end the bloodshed in Syria,” he said.“Presidents [Recep Tayyip] Erdogan and

[François] Hollande have an excellent chan-nel of dialogue over Syria.”

In recent months, when the radical Islam-

ic State group captured large swaths of landin Syria and Iraq, Turkey has been accusedby its Western allies for being an unreliable

coalition partner in the fight against thejihadists.

But the French government has taken a

softer approach and said it understood An-kara’s delicate position and expressed sym-pathy. Also, while a US-led group of Western

allies said the priority in Syria should be tofinish off the Islamic State, Turkey and

France argued that the real enemy is SyrianPresident Bashar al-Assad.

In France, the change of government two

years ago removed the pursuit by then-President Nicolas Sarkozy to enact a lawwidely seen as anti-Turkey. Sarkozy, who

pushed hard for a law that would have madea denial of genocide of Armenians a crimi-nal offense, was seen as seeking the vote of

50,000 Armenians in France ahead of a gen-eral election. He also opposed Turkey join-ing the European Union.

Hollande ushered in a fresh foreign policywith Ankara.

Hollande’s state visit to Turkey last Janu-

ary, the first French presidential visit to An-kara in 22 years, saw top-level political anddefense talks with an emphasis on a contro-

versial Turkish contract in which a French-European bidder finished second.

Hollande and Erdogan met in Paris on

Oct. 31 to discuss the Syrian crisis, but Turk-ish sources said they also discussed poten-tial defense cooperation in general, and the

multibillion dollar Turkish program for thecountry’s first long-range air and anti-mis-

sile defense system in particular. Foreignministers from both countries had alreadymet in Paris on Oct. 10 and drafted a two-

year road map of bilateral ties.Although Turkey since September 2013

has been in negotiations with a Chinese

contender for the contract, Erdogan said inAugust that parallel talks had opened withthe French manufacturer.

Turkey selected China Precision Machin-ery Import-Export Corp. (CPMIEC) for theprogram for $3.4 billion and announced that

the French-led European group Eurosam,maker of the SAMP/T Aster 30, came in sec-ond.

Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, withtheir Patriot-based system, finished third.

Eurosam’s shareholders include MBDA —jointly owned by British BAE Systems, Ita-

ly’s Finmeccanica and Airbus — andFrance’s Thales.

The way for a French comeback had been

paved during Hollande’s January visit toTurkey, according to officials and analysts.

During that visit, the French delegationconsisted of 90 representatives from 60 de-fense companies and five trade associa-

tions specializing in aerospace and defense(GIFAS), naval defense (GICAN), land ar-maments (GICAT), the National Aerospace

Research Center (ONERA) and the Aero-space Valley cluster.

Turkey’s defense procurement office,

SSM, and its French counterpart, DGA, or-ganized a Turkish-French Industry Day inAnkara. SaSaD, an umbrella organization

for Turkish defense industry, and GIFASsigned a memorandum of understanding forbilateral cooperation.

Also in January, Turkey and Francevowed to increase their bilateral trade to

€20 billion (US $24.9 billion) annually.France is one of the top foreign direct in-vestors in Turkey, and the two countries

have been working together on the Turkishsatellite (Gokturk).

“That breakthrough [Hollande’s January

visit] was significantly augmented afterErdogan found his best political ally overSyria. This will obviously have repercus-

sions on procurement decisions,” a seniorTurkish official said.

Erdogan, who has declared the downfall

of Assad as one of his top policy goals in the

Middle East, is widely believed to have in-fluence over major procurement decisions.

“It is not a secret that the Turkish govern-ment cannot select partners in large-scaleprograms without Erdogan’s consent. He

runs an almost one-man show in procure-ment,” one senior company executive said.

An Ankara-based analyst said that “Hol-

lande was on his way to becoming Erdo-gan’s new Berlusconi,” a reference to theextremely friendly relations between Erdo-

gan and former Italian Prime Minister SilvioBerlusconi in the early and mid-2000s,

when Italian arms makers won almost ev-ery major Turkish contract.

The newfound alliance between Ankara

and Paris, and friendship between Erdoganand Hollande, will affect Turkey’s final deci-sion on the missile defense program and po-

tentially on other procurement decisions,the analyst said.

“As long as France remains a staunch

Turkish ally, especially over Turkey’s priori-ty policy goals like the downfall of Assad,French companies will have a political ad-

vantage over their rivals in Turkish con-tests, most notably in aerospace and navalprograms,” he said. N

Pierre Tran contributed to this report.

Politics Pushing French Comeback to Turkish MarketBy BURAK EGE BEKDIL

ALAIN JOCARD/AFP

Growing Ties: French President François Hollande,

right, shakes hands with his Turkish counterpart,

Recep Tayyip Erdogan, following a joint statement at

the Elysee Palace on Oct. 31.

ROME — A group of European par-

liamentarians and officials areworking on a novel way to cutthrough red tape and allow Euro-

pean Union forces to be more easi-ly, and more quickly, deployed.

The move follows criticism of the

European Union’s battle group

concept, which has seen 1,500-strong units provided by European

nations undertaking six-month du-

ty rotations since 2007.The concept was meant to offer a

quickly deployable EU force, buthas never been used.

In a scathing attack last month,

Nick Witney, the former head of the

European Defence Agency, saidthe “vaunted battle group rapid re-

action forces are terminally dis-

credited after the latest failures to

deploy them in the Mali and Cen-tral African Republic crises.”

In both of those cases, France in-tervened alone.

“If the EU is not going to do any-

thing with the CSDP [the EuropeanUnion’s Common Security and De-

fence Policy], then stop pretending

and give the UN some of the sup-port it needs as it is struggling to

sustain operations across the

world,” Witney said.However, a growing number of

EU officials are now arguing that

an article in the EU’s Lisbon Treaty

could speed up EU-flagged opera-tions. Instead of relying on the EU’s

unwieldy planning structure, theEU could apply Article 44.

This provision, which has never

been used for military deploy-

ments, states that the EuropeanCouncil may hand an undefined

“task” to a small group of memberstates, “which are willing and havethe necessary capability for such a

task.” The “task” would need the

unanimous approval of the Euro-pean Council, but could be run by

the group of members signing up tocarry it out.

“The idea would be to have an

operation under an EU flag, on

behalf of the EU, using EU fundingmechanisms, but outside the EU

planning structure, which wouldmake it faster,” said Thierry Tardy,a senior analyst with the European

Union Institute for SecurityStudies.

“All multinational planning struc-

tures are slow and in this case too

slow for the evacuation of nation-als from an African country in 72

hours, for example,” he said. UnderArticle 44, the operation could be-gin immediately, he said, and if it

lasted a couple months, could thenbecome a regular EU operation.

In a paper published last month,

Tardy argued that France’s inter-vention in Mali last year could have

become an EU mission if Article 44

had been used, given that the Euro-pean Council had supported theoperation.

This month, politicians at an in-

ter-European meeting of parlia-mentarians in Rome were planning

how Article 44 could galvanize thebattle group concept.

“The idea is to revive the battle

EU Plan Offered To SimplifyBattle Group Deployment

By TOM KINGTON

See EU PLAN, Page 11

JASON BALLARD/ROYAL NAVY

Battle Group Training: Latvian forces participate in exercises in 2012 in the UK, which

had assumed lead nation responsibility for the European battle group.

www.defensenews.com November 17, 2014 DefenseNewsINTERNATIONAL 11EUROPE

groups, which risk failing,” said Massimo Ar-tini, a member of the Italian parliament’s de-

fense commission. “We are spending half abillion euros on the groups a year. We need touse them or lose them,” he added. “We have

battle groups but we don’t have the instru-ments to use them.”

“Article 44 is possibly our last chance,” Ar-

tini said.A document approved by the meeting

called Article 44 “a very useful tool for the

EU to intervene in crisis scenarios with more

speed and flexibility and encourages its use.”The document called on a follow up meet-

ing of EU politicians in Riga, Latvia, next

spring to develop the plan. Italy, France andthe Netherlands have formed a working

group to draw up a proposal for the Riga

meeting, said Artini, adding that Germany,Poland and Spain were set to join the group.

Tardy said no new regulation was needed

to invoke Article 44, since it was already inthe Lisbon Treaty. “All it would take is at least

two nations to invoke it,” he said.

Tardy was skeptical, however, that the arti-cle could be applied to a battle group deploy-ment, arguing it was better suited to a regular

deployment of troops by the countries sign-

ing up to the mission.

“Article 44 actually contrasts with the bat-tle groups concept because it depends on the

countries launching the mission, not on the

country which happens to be on battle groupstand-by at the time,” he said. “On the other

hand, if the stand-by country wants to de-ploy, they could invoke Article 44 itself.”

A second defense expert said action is

needed to rescue the battle groups from fail-ure. “They seemed to be a silver bullet, theyseemed workable and affordable,” said Ales-

sandro Politi, the director of the NATO de-fense college foundation in Rome.

“They didn’t involve grandiose ideas of

moving thousands of soldiers around, and

contributions by countries were clear. Theproblem, however, was costs,” he said.

“Additionally, there was the angst on the

part of countries like the UK that the battlegroups would weaken NATO, as well as theproblem of consensus among Europeans.”

The EU’s battle groups have not been theonly rapid reaction force to fade after a

bright start. NATO’s own rapid reaction

force, launched in 2002 after urging fromthen-US Defense Secretary Donald Rums-feld, managed no more than a mission to Pa-

kistan to offer assistance to earthquakevictims. N


EU PLANFrom Page 10

ABOARD HDMS NILS JUEL IN THECHESAPEAKE BAY — It is strikinghow the now-familiar smooth, an-

gled architecture of today’s war-ships, intended to reduce visual,heat and other signatures, is also

somehow inherently Danish-mod-ern. And the first thing one noticesafter boarding this ship is how

clean and spotless everything is —almost relentlessly clean.

“We clean the ship every day,”

said Lt. Cmdr. Kenneth Jensen, theship’s operations officer. “It’s easi-er to keep a clean ship clean than

to clean a dirty ship.”The Nils Juel is the Danish

Navy’s newest warship, handed

over only in August. It’s the thirdand last of the Iver Huitfeldt classof large frigates which, along with

two similar Absalon-class combatsupport ships, will make up Den-

mark’s primary naval force for thenext three decades.

They could also be the last sig-

nificant naval ships built in Den-mark, as the Odense Shipyard thatbuilt them closed with the delivery

of Nils Juel. But the team that de-signed the ship — a combination ofMaersk Shipping, Odense and the

Danish Navy — has established it-self as Odense Maritime Technol-ogy (OMT), marketing its exper-

tise in producing spacious, logical,efficient designs that can bebought for a fraction of the cost of

similar warships built elsewhere.The Danes claim Nils Juel and its

sister ships were built for US $325

million apiece — an impressive ac-complishment for a ship displac-ing more than 6,600 tons, fitted

with a sophisticated combat andcommunications suite, armed withStandard, Evolved Sea Sparrow

and Harpoon missiles, 76mm and35mm guns, torpedoes and a heli-copter, able to cut the waters at 30

knots and travel more than 9,000nautical miles without refueling.

The price tag is often compared

with the $440 million per-unit cost

of the smaller US Navy littoralcombat ship, which rises to well

over $600 million apiece when theaverage cost of the LCS missionmodules is factored in. And, propo-

nents point out, the Danish shipscarry a far heavier permanently in-stalled armament.

But the Danish approach is quitedifferent from that of the US Navy.To start with, most of the ship’s

lower decks were designed byMaersk, one of the world’s largestshipping companies, with a focus

on efficient, robust designs thatare easy to maintain.

“The basic design is a Maersk de-

sign, with a hull similar to a con-tainer ship,” said Cmdr. ChristianHorsted, the ship’s executive offi-

cer. “Things are very orderly, verywell-arranged. It looks like thepeople who designed the ships

have designed a lot of ships.”Horsted pointed to the bridge

and machinery room arrange-ments, which leave room to addimprovements. “Things are really

set up right,” he said, looking up athalf-filled overhead wire ways.“The cabling runs leave lots of

room for extra wiring for moresensors whenever they’re added.”

As an economy measure, the

ship also features a number ofused items. The 76mm guns, andlaunchers for Evolved Sea Spar-

row and Harpoon missiles, for ex-ample, are refurbished fittingsfrom decommissioned ships.

The sophisticated combat suite,however, is all-new, featuringThales Smart-L and APAR radars,

other sensors and fire-controlequipment nearly identical toDutch De Zeven Provincien-class

and German Sachsen-classfrigates.

Yet while Nils Juel is operational

— this reporter’s visit took placejust after the ship completed sever-al weeks taking part in a major ex-

ercise with the US Navy along theeastern seaboard — the ship re-mains, in some ways, incomplete.

The two 76mm guns, for exam-

ple, are essentially temporary fit-tings. The forward mounting is

sized to take a US Mark 45 5-inchgun, but no funds have been allo-cated to purchase the $50 million

weapons. The second gun positionalso is intended to mount anotherclose-in weapon system, yet to be

purchased.Amidships, the 32-cell Mark 41

vertical launch system is unused,

awaiting not just operational certi-fication, but also the purchase ofadditional components and Stan-

dard surface-to-air missiles.Aft, atop the hangar, what ap-

peared to be a 35mm Oerlikon

Contraves Millenium gun was ac-

tually a dummy. The weapon is stillbeing certified but, to keep the

flight deck’s air worthiness certifi-

cations, a fake gun was installed tomaintain wind current features.

The ship also is hiring more crewmembers. The original crew size of100 was found to be “too lean,” Jen-

sen said, and 17 more slots haveopened, about half in the engineer-ing department. But even with 117

crew members, the Danes willhave a crew smaller than similarwarships.

“We try to do the same things theDutch and Germans do, but withfewer people,” Jensen said, ex-

plaining that the ship features ahigh degree of automation, as wellas 50 cameras placed throughout

to monitor spaces such as the en-gine rooms, hangar and missiledecks.

The three frigates are manned

with two and a half crews, allow-

ing for one ship to be training, an-other to be deployed, with the

half-manned ship undergoingmaintenance. About half the crewaboard Nils Juel, including Jensen,

returned this year from a deploy-ment aboard the Iver Huitfeldt,and joined this ship a few months

before the cruise to the US.The ships also are being brought

up to higher war-fighting stan-

dards, Horsted said, and are beingcertified by the British RoyalNavy’s Flag Officer Sea Training or-

ganization. Among other things,that means improving damagecontrol fittings and adding some

internal features.Improvements also need to be in-

stalled in the engineering control

center, said Lt. Christian Jens, theship’s electro officer. “We still needa secondary steering control in-

stallation and navigational equip-ment,” he said.

Nils Juel left Denmark in mid-Oc-

tober to take part in Exercise BoldAlligator, which ended in early No-vember. The frigate will head

home after visits to Baltimore andHalifax, Nova Scotia. N


Aboard Danish Frigate, Clean Lines and Room To GrowBy CHRISTOPHER P. CAVAS

CHRISTOPHER P. CAVAS/STAFF

Everything Shipshape: The Nils Juel,

above, cruises Chesapeake Bay after

taking part in exercises with the US Navy.

The ship was handed over to the Danish

Navy in August. The frigate’s spacious

bridge, left, spans almost the full width of

the ship.

CHRISTOPHER P. CAVAS/STAFF

12 DefenseNewsINTERNATIONAL November 17, 2014 R1 www.defensenews.com

Visit Us Online: defensenews.com/i/itsec2014

Visit Us at the Show – Booth #441LIVE on December 1

DIGITAL SHOW DAILY BRINGS I/ITSEC TO YOU!

We Scout the Show,Blog the Newsand Take Your Comments.• Breaking news from the show• Photos and videos

Real-Time News,Videos & Highlights

Sponsored by:

WBlan•• B••• PPP

14_531 DFN

EUROPE

PARIS — During last week’s NATO

Industry Forum, a sharp contrastemerged between a wish for sim-ple allied access to command-and-

control (C2) information, and thehigh-tech capabilities in the pipe-line for US forces.

The Nov. 13 forum — hosted byFrench Air Force Gen. Jean-PaulPalomeros, head of NATO’s Allied

Command Transformation, andPatrick Auroy, NATO assistant sec-retary general in charge of defense

investment — aimed to increasecooperation with industry to im-prove alliance readiness and capa-

bilities.“I am a strong believer that in-

dustry can also contribute for a

great part to the answer [of readi-ness],” Palomeros told the audi-ence. “Indeed, you are experts in

achieving readiness as it is a daily

business for you. Your DNA, if Imay use this expression, compelsyou to constantly adapt, prepare,

posture for emerging or changingmarkets and to keep a sufficientleading edge against competitors.”

During remarks at the forum,held in Split, Croatia, a Europeanadmiral clearly stated the difficul-

ties of the small allied nations suchas Portugal to get C2 informationin the 28-strong alliance.

“We know inside NATO we havebig countries with big industriesbehind them,” said Vice Adm. Fer-

nando Pires da Cunha, joint opera-tional commander for Portugal.

Separately, NATO has completed

system testing of the Air Commandand Control System (ACCS),showing the capability to run a net-

work with bases in France, Bel-gium, Germany and Italy,ThalesRaytheonSystems said in a

statement. The tests showed ACCS“is ready to provide NATO with es-sential interoperability,” said the

prime contractor, a joint venturebetween Thales and Raytheon.

The ACCS is NATO’s large-scaleattempt to boost allied interopera-bility in C2 in the skies over

Europe.Interoperability is a “ground

rule” among the small nations on

the various national command-and-control systems, Pires da Cu-nha said. The lack of interoperabil-

ity is compounded by the variousnational and NATO secrecy classi-fications that limit access, he said.

“If you have a guy working withone computer, most of these sys-tems, they are not compatible, you

cannot have them working togeth-er,” he said. “And to get a commonpicture is very hard.”

A key allied objective is to arriveat a “compatible and affordable”solution that merges the informa-

tion, he said. There is no need for a cyber at-

tack, he said. “We jam ourselves

with all these incompatible sys-tems. Cooperation is neededamong the 28 to deliver a common

picture and common information.”Common training would miti-

gate the lack of compatibility, and

the Supreme Allied Command forTransformation is pushing to move

a training school to Portugal, he

said.

High-Tech VisionPires da Cunha’s remarks con-

trasted with the soaring ambitionsof a senior US officer’s presenta-

tion, devoted to high technology.

The US sees growth in un-manned systems in all domains,

and demand for cyber security anddirected-energy weapons, said USAdm. Mark Ferguson, commander

of Allied Joint Force Command at

Naples, Italy.Electricity generation for lasers

would replace powder and ammu-

NATO Industry Forum Highlights Capability Divide By PIERRE TRAN

www.defensenews.com R2 November 17, 2014 DefenseNewsINTERNATIONAL 13EUROPE

nition, and force commanders

must consider the importance ofintelligence from data mining, ashybrid warfare uses social media

to attack governments and society,Ferguson said.

There will be greater demand for

“information operation,” with con-flicts fought through the media andonline, he said.

On the ground, investmentshould be made in infrastructuresuch as railway stations, airports

and seaports, needed to transportpersonnel, he said.

The Trident Juncture exercise is

intended to show a high level of“connectedness” between bases inFrance, Poland, Spain, the Nether-

lands and Germany for commandand control of air, sea and landforces, he said.

That showed the importance ofC2 in the high end of warfare, and areliance on the electromagnetic

spectrum, cyber, satellite commu-nications and high data links, hesaid.

Better CommunicationWhat the military needs and

what industry can offer sparkeddebate along the lines of which

came first: the chicken or the egg?An executive attendee at the

conference said much of the morn-

ing session focused on operationalaspects while missing the industryissues. Companies need dialogue

to know available funding and re-quirements so they can decide ontechnology, skills and target coun-

tries over five, 10 or 20 years, theexecutive said.

It is difficult to predict 20 years

ahead, said Brig. Gen. Manuel Gi-meno, logistic division chief onSpain’s Joint Defense Staff.

NATO is entering a new cycle, in-vesting in the planning process,and is seeking reform, Palomeros

said. The alliance is working on aminimum military requirement,which will go to the high level mil-

itary committee and set a plan forthe next five years. That will opendoors for the future, he said.

Defining the main strategicneeds would be the best tool for in-

dustry, Palomeros said. Industry

has research and development(R&D), which could interest the

services.

Ferguson spoke of Apple R&Dengineers talking in the mid-1980sof a live tactile screen, voice con-

trol and other technology featuresthat are now available.

“Your best minds and our young

operators” could get together andthat could “change the way we op-erate,” he said.

FMS Restrictions?The issue of US sale of equip-

ment into the European Unionthrough the foreign military sales(FMS) system was a topic of dis-

cussion, with the EU’s executive

commission said to be working on

draft legislation against the FMSregime.

Auroy said there is no single

NATO market, as each of the mem-ber nations and the EuropeanUnion handles regulatory control.

The absence of a single defensemarket makes it hard for industryto invest, as there are three mar-

kets — EU, NATO and national —

said Christina Balis from consul-tancy Avascent.

One of the panel speakers, Dom-

ingo Ureña Raso, head of militaryaircraft at Airbus Defence andSpace, said the US has a good ex-

port tool, namely InternationalTraffic in Arms Regulations, whichis wielded as a “hammer” against

the competition.

The US and Europe are fiercecompetitors, but in defense “wehave common rather than diver-

gent issues,” notably a common setof regulations on export, procure-ment and requirements. On his

wish list is an “open border” ap-proach in which European firmscould offer equipment in the US, as

the US sells in Europe, Ureña Raso

said. An EU directive on defense mar-

kets went into effect in 2011, aimed

at boosting competition, with theexclusion of government-to-gov-ernment deals, a French executive

said. N



www.defensenews.com(703) 750-8367

ADVERTISINGDIRECTOR, SALES

Catherine FoleyEmail: [email protected]

(703) 750-8164

FRANCE, ITALY, SPAINEmmanuel Archambeaud

Email:[email protected]

Tel: +33 1 4730 7180

AUSTRIA, GERMANY, SWITZERLANDAudrey Meyre

Email:[email protected]

Tel: +33 6 72 80 72 83

NORTHERN & CENTRAL EUROPE, TURKEY, MIDDLE EAST & ASIA PACIFIC

Diana ScognaEmail: [email protected]

Tel: +336 62 52 25 47

US WESTRenee Wheeler

Email:[email protected](703) 642-7366

VIRGINIA & WASHINGTON, DCLeslie Hunter

Email: [email protected](703) 642-7388

US NORTHEAST & MID-ATLANTICJerry Foley


US MIDWEST & SOUTHEASTKathleen Kenney


DIGITAL SALES MANAGERAdam VerCammen


DIRECTOR, MARKETINGRichard Sandza


ADVERTISING MATERIALS TO:Mary Poston

Production Manager6883 Commercial DriveSpringfield, Va. 22159

[email protected]

SUBSCRIBER SERVICEPhone: Toll free in U.S.

1-800-368-5718Outside North America

01-703-750-7400Fax: (703) 658-8314

Email: [email protected]

ASIA & PACIFIC RIM

ZHUHAI, China — The 10th biennialAirshow China surprised manyveteran aviation and defense cor-

respondents who have coveredthis unique event over the years.

Though many of the new weapon

systems and aircraft were knownto exist, their presence at the airshow this year demonstrated Chi-

na’s growing confidence in pro-ducing reliable and economicalproducts for the international

arms market.

Many of the products can’t com-pare to the quality and complexity

of US and European weapons andaircraft, yet this show demonstrat-ed China’s dedication to climbing

up to Western standards. No insti-tution demonstrates this more

than the Aviation Industry Corp. ofChina (AVIC), whose exhibitionhall served as a testament to Chi-

na’s ability to continue to surpriseniche journalists in this field.

The air show, which ran Nov. 11-

16, has become the biggest com-mercial and defense air show inAsia with more than 700 compa-

nies exhibiting.

First Public FlightThe first surprise was the inau-

gural public flight demonstrationof the twin-engine J-31 stealth

fighter during the preshow tour forjournalists.

As the media began departing

the grounds at the end of the day, asecond surprise came when jour-nalists passing through the AVIC

exhibition hall discovered that theJ-31 model had finally been un-draped. The placard for the 1:2

model stated the display was anexport variant of the stealth fight-er, now dubbed the FC-31. China’s

friends, such as Iran and Pakistan,

might find a reliable, inexpensivestealth fighter enticing.

The attendance of the Y-20 “Kun-peng” heavy cargo transport at theshow was expected, but a demon-

stration flight was not. The air show flight program was

ambiguous, listing the J-31 as an

“undisclosed fighter” and the Y-20as an “undisclosed transport air-

craft.”

Powered by four turbofan en-gines, the Y-20 has similarities tothe Boeing C-17 Globemaster and

Airbus A400 Atlas transport air-

craft. AVIC’s Xi’an Aircraft Indus-trial Corp. (XAC) has produced at

least two aircraft for testing.The Y-20 was not the only air

transport surprise. AVIC also

displayed a model of a new air

transport aircraft roughly the size and configuration of the Lock-heed C-130.

The aircraft’s designation is notgiven, but the aircraft model hasother markings. The serial number

is 8316, the letters “RS” are on thetail fin and there are Air Forcemarkings indicating the customer

is most likely the military. Poweredby four turboprop engines, eachwith six blades, the medium-lift

transport has a speed of 600 kilo-

meters per hour and a range of3,000 kilometers with an endur-

ance of 12 hours.

AVIC Guizhou’s FTC-2000G(MiG-21) advanced multipurpose

fighter-trainer has been approvedfor export. Based on the FTC-2000trainer, the “G” variant can carry a

greater payload, with speed in-creased to Mach 1.5. The aircraftappears to carry more weapons in

its undercarriages.

Sub-Launched MissileThe new CM-708 UNA subma-

rine-launched cruise missile madeits debut at the air show. The 128-

kilometer-range missile is the

product of the China AerospaceScience and Industry Corp. (CAS-IC), which also makes unmanned

aerial vehicles and land-attack/an-ti-ship cruise missiles.

A CASIC official at the display

said the missile is in production.The CM-708 UNA is launched by

torpedo tube and is applicable for

various submarines to target medi-um-to-large ships and inshore tar-gets. The missile uses a

strap-down inertial navigation sys-

tem plus satellite navigation, ahigh-precision radar seeker and

digital control. The missile is pow-

ered by a turbo engine and solidrocket booster.

CASIC also unveiled a new WJ-series UAV. The multipurpose, sub-sonic, WJ-500’s angular stealthy

design gives it a low radar signa-ture allowing for “great defensepenetration” and provides for a va-

riety of missions, including simu-lating the characteristics of cruisemissiles and aircraft.

The drone can handle a variety ofpayloads, including photoelectric,reconnaissance and synthetic ap-

erture packages. Missions include

reconnaissance, targeting anddamage assessment.

One other missile program that

caught the attention of many avia-tion and defense journalists wasthe CX-1 supersonic cruise missile

being built by the China Academyof Launch Vehicle Technology. The

CX-1 is reminiscent of the India’s

BrahMos long-range missile. Bothmissiles have an air intake directlyon the nose of the missile. A trailer

truck transports the CX-1.Concerns over the South China

Sea have no doubt forced AVIC,

CASIC and others to step up to thechallenge. This year’s abundanceof sea planes made this clear.

AVIC is working on the AG600

and the H660 fixed-wing aircraft.The H660 has a range of 6,000 kilo-

meters and cruising speed of 280

kilometers per hour. It can handle50 passengers. The AG600’s plac-

ard had no information on range,but provided data on maximumspeed: 560 kilometers per hour.

The CX-1 can destroy a target at

ranges of 280 kilometers. N


Essay: Chinese Air Show Full of SurprisesBy WENDELL MINNICK

REPORTER’S NOTEBOOK

WENDELL MINNICK/STAFF

UnexpectedSights, Flights:Attendees expected

to see the Y-20

“Kunpeng” aircraft,

above, at Zhuhai,

but a flight

demonstration by

the heavy cargo

transport was one

of several show

surprises. The

CM-708 UNA

submarine-

launched missile,

left, on display.

WENDELL MINNICK/STAFF

www.defensenews.com November 17, 2014 DefenseNewsINTERNATIONAL 15MIDDLE EAST

WASHINGTON — As the Defense Departmentretrogrades mountains of equipment fromAfghanistan, the US Army has failed to

effectively report $419.5 million worth ofequipment that may have gone missing, ac-

cording to a recent DoD Inspector General’s

(DODIG’s) audit.Some 15,600 pieces of equipment lost from

the Bagram and Kandahar property redistri-

bution yards were not reported in a timelymanner by the unit responsible for trackingit, the 401st Army Field Support Brigade, ac-

cording to the Oct. 30 audit. Once the inspectors made their initial re-

port, the units involved took immediate cor-

rective actions which have since been

“inculcated [and] applied in Army-wide ac-tions,” said Michael Cervone, chief of the

supply directorate in the Army’s Office of

the Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics.While it is unlikely the equipment is all tru-

ly missing — most is likely in US handssomewhere in Afghanistan — the reporthighlights the Pentagon’s decades-long

problem managing inventory, said William

Greenwalt, a visiting fellow at the MarilynWare Center for Security Studies at the

American Enterprise Institute.

“Doing what Wal-Mart and UPS can do, ob-viously the Army hasn’t gotten that far,”

Greenwalt said. “They should have world-class inventory tracking and management,even in the war zone, with scanners, with

commercial technology. You scratch yourhead and ask, ‘Why hasn’t the US military

adopted these long-standing practices you

see at every retailer in America?’ ”Officials with the 401st did not document

the property as lost because they believed it

would be found as forward operating basesclosed for the drawdown of forces, the auditsays. However, since 2010, 309 forward oper-

ating bases have closed and only 23 percentof the equipment has been recovered.

“Once the equipment was identified as

lost, the 401st AFSB did not always correctly

calculate and report the total loss to the USgovernment,” an audit summary states.

Army policy recommends property losses

be investigated within 75 days, but the 10probes DODIG reviewed averaged 318 days.

The brigade’s commander, Col. MatthewFerguson, said investigators searching formissing items tended to delay investiga-

tions. The unit has since created a group of

five lieutenant colonels trained to conductinvestigations within the 30-day standard.

In a response to the audit, Ferguson attrib-

uted some of the problems to inadequatestaffing and training, and said property ac-

countability suffered as combat intensified. “In order to re-establish property account-

ability, 401st AFSB had to go back to the ba-

sic concepts of property accountability,”Ferguson said. “The Property Accountable

Processes and property management struc-

ture were revamped to improve property ac-countability. Unfortunately, the results ofthese changes would not be able to be real-

ized until the 2013-2014 time frame.”This is not the first time the DODIG has

rapped the Army over lost gear. The Army

lost $586.8 million in equipment over 12months ending in May 2013, which spurredthe Army to form a task force to account for

its equipment as it leaves Afghanistan.

Nor is this the first time a watchdog agen-cy has faulted DoD’s handling of equipment

in the war zone. In 2013, DoD supply chain

management made the Government Ac-countability Office’s “high risk list” for high-

lighting programs most vulnerable to fraud,waste, abuse and mismanagement.

In the past year, the Special Inspector Gen-

eral for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SI-

GAR) found that while the CombinedSecurity Transition Command purchased

about $370 million in spare parts for the Af-

ghan Army’s vehicles between 2004 and2013, the command “could not account forabout $230 million worth of spare parts and

had ordered $138 million of additional partswithout sufficient accountability.”

The US and Afghan governments have

bungled record-keeping for more than747,000 AK-47 rifles, machine guns, grenadelaunchers and other weapons for Afghan

forces since 2004, worth about $626 million.There is “real potential for these weapons to

fall into the hands of insurgents,” says a SI-

GAR report published in July.The US was flooding Afghanistan with

small arms, some 112,000 more than Afghan

forces needed, said the report. Record-keep-ing suffered from incompatible databases,missing serial numbers and poor inventory

processes. The Government AccountabilityOffice also found that the Army and MarineCorps may have wasted more than $100 mil-

lion in one year by returning vehicles from

Afghanistan they didn’t need. The question is whether fiscal hawks in

the new Congress will track the issue.

Greenwalt said lawmakers should focus onwhether the problems are systemic and

whether DoD has a plan to fix them.“This is another one of these gotcha re-

ports, and we know this is a problem,” he

said, “but how do you solve it? So Congress

will be asking, ‘What is the solution?’ ” N


US Army Struggles With War-Zone InventoryBy JOE GOULD

TEL AVIV and NEW DELHI — Israeli

and Indian navies are poised toequip their warships with ad-vanced Barak-8 anti-missile and

air defense systems following lastweek’s long-awaited test, cappingnearly eight years of cooperative

development.Led by state-owned Israel Aero-

space Industries (IAI), the vertical-

ly launched intercepting systemhas a 70-kilometer range and pro-vides persistent 360-degree cover-

age against saturation attacks bysea-skimming missiles and a spec-trum of air-breathing threats.

IAI executives said sea-basedversions are now ready for full-rate

production for both navies, whichare expected to declare initial op-erational capability in a number of

months.In parallel, an IAI-led team is

readying a ground-based version

for the Indian Air Force, with pro-jected deployment to begin nextyear and extend through 2017.

Defense officials and Navy offi-cers from both countries hailed thesuccessful Nov. 10 intercept test as

validation of all system elements

and a testament to their strategicties.

An Indian Navy official noted

that the program had run nearlyfour years behind schedule, pri-marily due to problems with the

DRDO-developed rocket motor“which affected the range and op-erational capability to engage son-

ic targets.”The Barak-8 system had been

slated for delivery by 2011 under a

2006 government-to-governmentcontract, Indian officials said.

Boaz Levy, executive vice presi-

dent and general manager of IAI’sSystems, Missiles and SpaceGroup, told Israel-based reporters

that engine-related problems havebeen resolved and that all ele-

ments of sea- and ground-basedvariants are validated and readyfor serial production.

“It was a perfect interception.Just beautiful,” Levy said of theNov. 10 test against an air-breath-

ing target simulating advanced ma-neuvering capabilities of fighterbombers.

Alluding to developmental chal-lenges and schedule glitches, RearAdm. Ophir Shoham, director of Is-

rael’s Defense Research and Devel-

opment Directorate (DR&DD),said the Barak-8 project show-cased “constructive cooperation

between the Indian DRDO [De-fence Research and DevelopmentOrganization] and the Israeli

DR&DD and the armed forces ofboth nations.

“Together, they have pushed for-

ward this important program,overcoming technological chal-lenges and earning achievements

along the way,” he said.Similarly, Avinash Chander,

DRDO chief and scientific adviser

to India’s minister of defense,hailed the test as “an importantmilestone” in bilateral coopera-

tion.Chander led a delegation of De-

fence Ministry officials, scientistsand Navy officers participatingwith Israeli counterparts in the

milestone test. Last week’s suc-cess transitions the program intoanother series of operational tests

as flagship partners equip and fieldsea-based defenses.

Sources in New Delhi said the In-

dian Navy plans to begin equippingthe Barak-8 long-range surface-to-air missile defense system on its

stealth warships, under construc-tion at state-owned Mazagon

Docks.An Indian DRDO official said last

week’s test validated the system’s

ability to perform maneuvers. Hesaid the intercepting system willbe tested in India before the pro-

ject is completed.In Israel, the Navy plans to equip

its three Sa’ar-5 corvettes with the

system. One of the Sa’ar-5s has al-ready been outfitted with the ac-tive electronically scanned array

radar system developed by IAI’s

Elta Systems subsidiary for the Ba-rak-8 program. The radar consistsof four large panels positioned at

both ends of the ship for persis-tent, all-weather, 360-degree cover-age.

Under Israel’s operational con-cept, individual ships are capableof operating independently or as a

battle group, where smaller ves-sels are slaved to the Barak-8-equipped command ship.

“The C4I system is unprecedent-ed in its sophistication,” Levy said.“All ships in the group see the en-

tire picture.”

IAI data released shortly afterlast week’s test said the system

uses an advanced broadband com-munication network to coordinatebetween the missile and batteries.

“The system deals with short-,medium- and long-range threats,where its interconnectivity among

the various ships in the naval taskforce enables it to be a multilayerair and missile defense system of

systems,” according to IAI.An Indian DRDO official said

dozens of DRDO scientists havebeen stationed in Israel for the du-ration of the project.

An IAI executive said IAI and itsteam of subcontractors are alreadysupplying the system “to a number

of customers” whom he declinedto identify beyond flagship users inTel Aviv and New Delhi. N

Email: [email protected];

[email protected].

Israel, India Start To Equip SeaForces With Barak-8 Defenses

By BARBARA OPALL-ROME and VIVEK RAGHUVANSHI

ISRAEL AEROSPACE INDUSTRIES

Passing Grade: An interceptor of the

Barak-8 air and missile defense system

launches for its final development test in

Israel.

ASIA & PACIFIC RIM


TechWatchApp Shows Water Needs

Clean, potable water is very

valuable to soldiers. But as mis-sion planners know, water plan-ning can be a nightmare.

To help solve this problem, re-searchers from the US Army Re-search Institute of Environmen-

tal Medicine and MIT’s LincolnLaboratory have developed anapp that will help unit leaders

accurately predict water needswith the goal of minimizing theburden of water transport and

sustaining hydration.Called the Soldier Water Esti-

mation Tool, or SWET, this An-

droid-based smartphone app isa decision aid that translates acomplicated biophysical and

physiological sweat predictionmodel into simple user inputsregarding the anticipated inten-

sity of activity (low, medium,high, including example activ-ities), and three category

choices of military clothing en-semble and weather conditions(air temperature, relative hu-

midity and cloud cover).

Testing Bee-inspired Robot US Army Research Laborato-

ry researchers hope to test a

bee-inspired prototype roboticplatform at the manned and un-manned teaming exercise at the

Maneuver Center of Excel-lence, Fort Benning, Georgia.

The recently developed pro-

totype is capable of wide-fieldvision and high update rate,hallmarks of insect vision. This

project will offer a chance toimplement methods of percep-tion such as 3-D mapping and

motion estimation on a roboticsplatform, said Joseph Conroy,an electronics engineer at the

Army’s Research, Developmentand Engineering Command.

The Maneuver Center of Ex-

cellence exercise will testwhether ARL’s platform is ontrack with the Army’s vision to

team a robot with a soldier. Thetests will help inform research-ers about how soldiers might

use information that such plat-forms can provide while at-

tempting to clear a building

from a safe distance in an urbanenvironment, Conroy said. N

Compiled by Michele Savage.

design, outfitting and integration

of areas of the Advanced MilitaryMaintenance Repair and Overhaul

Center (AMMROC), a new state-of-the-art facility south of Abu Dhabiin Al Ain, UAE.

“This is our biggest deal in the re-gion and we are looking forward tostarting it,” Storch said.

The new facility will be one ofthe largest dedicated military MROcenters in the world, and will be an

anchor tenant at Nibras al-AinAerospace Park, a free-zone pro-ject jointly developed by Mubadala

and Abu Dhabi Airports Co. to sup-port the establishment of a sustain-able aerospace hub in Abu Dhabi.

AMMROC is a joint ventureamong Mubadala DevelopmentCo., Sikorsky and Lockheed Mar-

tin and serves as the MRO contrac-tor for the UAE military.

“We chose AAR to support us as

we develop this world-class facil-ity because of their experience and

expertise in this area,” said Fahed

al-Shamesi, CEO of AMMROC. “We are excited to start work on

this military aviation MRO that will

allow us to reduce maintenancecosts, increase fleet readiness lev-

ABU DHABI — Global aerospace

and defense contractor AAR islooking to expand its business inthe Middle East after securing a

deal with a subsidiary of UnitedArab Emirates giant Mubadala.

The maintenance, repair and

overhaul (MRO) company is ex-ploring markets in Saudi Arabiaand Qatar as well as the wider Mid-

dle East, said Chairman and CEODavid Storch.

“We try to expand our current ca-

pability to work in countries wherethere are fleets that are growing

and we are focusing mainly in theMiddle East and you will see moreAAR presence as time goes,” he

told Defense News.With AAR being the largest MRO

contractor in North America, the

company has developed uniqueprocesses and technology to main-tain US civilian and military air-

craft. However, within the Middle

East, Storch said he is confident in

dealing with its mix of European,Russian and American inventory.

All of it poses a challenge, he

said, but also an opportunity.“One of our strengths is the

close-to-the-customer business

model where we do things basedon the individual customer. We donot dictate the aircraft they select,

but once they do, we assist them inthe after-market support, so thefact they utilize European and

American aircraft we view as a

positive,” he said. “But we don’tknow much about Russian models

and are working on it.”

In the UAE, AAR will support the

els for our valued customers and

provide high-tech employment op-portunities for UAE nationals.”

AMMROC also services othermilitary providers across SouthAsia, the Middle East and North Af-

rica. “We are helping them build out

their shop and their capabilities to

help them work in an organic ba-sis,” Storch said. “There are manyMROs in the world that rely on ven-

dors like us to ship materials to us,but there is a huge difference incost based on transportation, so

the UAE has a design and will do alot of work in-house in the countryand we will assist them to do that.”

The approximately 1.2 million-square-foot facility will supportmore than 40 different types of mil-

itary aircraft. This is unsurpassedby any other similar facility in theSouth Asia, Middle East and North

Africa region, representativessaid.

AAR will design support areas in-

cluding hangars, work areas and

machine and special processesshops for the center, the company

said in a statement.

The project will take 18 months

to two years to complete, accord-

ing to AAR. “It really depends onhow fast as our partners in theUAE desire it to go,” Storch said.

AAR will transfer technologyand know-how to the UAE in addi-tion to training the staff as neces-

sary. “It will be their own staffrunning it, they are looking to hirea lot of folks and we are assisting

them to get them ready to do thework,” he said.

“This deal allows the UAE gov-

ernment to retain control overmaintenance of their military air-craft while leveraging AAR’s indus-

try experience and best practices,”

Storch said in an earlier statement.“While AAR has provided custom-

ers with counsel and training in thepast, this deal brings our work to

the next level, and will hopefully

lead to additional opportunitiesonce the facility begins opera-

tions.” N


AAR

Major Maintenance: An artist’s renderingof the new facility in the United ArabEmirates.

AAR Looks To Expand in the MideastMajor NewMRO Center To Open in UAE

By AWAD MUSTAFA

LOGISTICS

18 DefenseNewsINTERNATIONAL November 17, 2014 R1 www.defensenews.com

BizWatch

Lisa Atherton has beennamed vice president for

global military business de-velopment at Bell Helicopter,the Fort Worth, Texas-based

Textron company said. She

was the company’s programmanager for the V-22 Ospreytiltrotor aircraft.

US-based Northrop Grum-

man announced the appoint-

ment of Todd Leavitt as vicepresident of its MaritimeSystems business unit. He

was director, Maritime Sen-

sors and Shipboard Integra-tion.

Systems Planning and Analy-

sis said that Arthur “Trip” Bar-

ber has joined the

Alexandria, Virginia-basedcompany. He is a retireddeputy director for the US

Navy’s Navy Assessments

Division for the Office of theChief of Naval Operationsand was the Navy’s chief

analyst. N

Compiled by Michele Savage.

ON THE MOVE

NEW DELHI — India has quietly lifted a

ban on Israeli Military Industries (IMI),paving the way for negotiating new de-fense projects with the Israeli compa-

ny, a Defence Ministry source said. The MoD has not publicly announced

the lifting of the ban, imposed in 2009,

but communicated its decision to IMIin September, the source said.

No Indian MoD official would con-

firm the lifting of the ban, nor wouldany diplomat of the Israeli Embassycomment. IMI officials in Israel de-

clined to comment on the report. The former Indian United Progres-

sive Alliance government imposed theban after alleged corruption charges,but India’s anti-fraud agency, the Cen-

tral Bureau of Investigation (CBI),could not prove the charges againstIMI, the source added.

IMI was accused of bribing officialsfrom the government-owned Ord-nance Factory Board (OFB) to win a

deal for producing 155mm ammunitionat OFB’s Nalanda factory.

With the ban removed, the MoD in-

tends to explore new defense projectswith the Israeli company, the MoDsource said. These could include part-

nership in the design and developmentof the proposed homemade futuremain battle tank and setting up a facil-

ity to jointly manufacture a variety ofammunition, especially for 155mmguns, the MoD source said.

IMI had been a frontrunner in thetank design project.

Amid charges of alleged corruption,

MoD canceled the $350 million tenderIMI had won to manufacture a bi-mod-

ular charge system for 155mm guns to

be built by the OFB.However, the blacklisting of IMI led

to a shortage of ammunition for the

155mm guns. Retired Gen. V.K. Singh,former Indian Army chief and now

minister of state for external affairs inthe Narendra Modi government, in-formed former Defence Minister A.K.

Antony in a letter of “critical shortages”of a variety of ammunition.

The OFB is not able to meet all the

Army’s ammunition requirements, andIndia is dependent on Russia to supply

many kinds of ammunition.

In addition to IMI, in 2009 Indiablacklisted Singapore Technologies,

Rheinmetall Air Defense and Corpora-

tion Defence of Russia on charges ofcorruption.

In August, the Modi government lift-

ed a ban on Denel after India’s CBIfailed to prove charges of corruption

against the South African company,nine years after the ban was imposed in2005. Denel was accused of paying

kickbacks to secure a deal with the In-dian Army in 2002 to supply 1,000 anti-material rifles and ammunition.

The blacklisting of Denel stalled sev-eral Army projects, including the pur-

chase of 155mm/52-caliber artillery

guns as Denel was the front runner inthe program, which was canceled

immediately after the blacklisting in

2005. N


India Removes IMI From Blacklist

RAVEENDRAN/AFP

Ban Overturned:India’s blacklisting of

IMI, which has been

lifted, led to a

shortage of

ammunition for

155mm guns. Here,

Indian soldiers stand

on a 155mm artillery

gun during an

exercise.

May InitiateNew Arms Talks

By VIVEK RAGHUVANSHI Sustaining Global HawkThe US Department of De-

fense has awarded Northrop

Grumman a $306 millioncontract to continue logis-tics and sustainment ser-

vices on the US Air Force’shigh-altitude, long-endur-ance RQ-4 Global Hawk re-

motely piloted autonomousunmanned aircraft intelli-

gence, surveillance and re-connaissance system,US-based Northrop said.

The new agreement con-tinues an existing contractfor Global Hawk mainte-

nance, inventory manage-ment, parts procurementand other tasks necessary to

ensure the availability of theunmanned aircraft system,including the aircraft, mis-

sion control elements andforward operating locationsupport.

Troop-Protecting BarriersThe Pentagon’s Defense

Logistics Agency has award-ed Williamsport, Maryland-based Maccaferri a contract

for the supply of their Defen-Cell MAC gabion barriers tomeet the DLA Expedition-

ary Barrier System require-ment, said the company,which is part of the Italy-

based Maccaferri IndustrialGroup. The contract has apotential maximum value of

$500 million.

DefenCell MAC is a rapid-to-deploy barrier system en-

gineered from geotextile-

lined welded mesh gabions.

Filled on site with locallyavailable material, unitsform defensive structures

and barriers to protect per-sonnel and infrastructureagainst a range of ballistic

threats and hostile vehiclesas well as floods and storms.

Maccaferri and military

materials supplier J & SFranklin, a UK-based com-pany, are in partnership to

jointly supply the DefenCellMAC range of force protec-

tion barrier systems to mil-itary and security forces.

Paveway AwardThe US Air Force has

awarded Lockheed Martin a

$40.3 million contract forfollow-on production of Pa-veway II Plus Laser Guided

Bomb (LGB) kits, the UScompany said.

The contract represents

the majority share of fiscalyear 2014 funding and theeighth award under the five-

year indefinite delivery, in-definite quantity contract.Deliveries will begin in June

2015 and will include com-puter control groups and air-foil groups for GBU-10 and

GBU-12 bombs. The Pave-way II Plus LGB kits incor-porate an upgraded laser

guidance package, signifi-cantly improving overallsystem performance and

precision.

Powering C-130JsThe US Air Force has

awarded a contract worthmore than $100 million to

UK-based Rolls-Royce to

NORTHROP GRUMMAN

Northrop Grumman will continue to provide logistics and sustainmentservices for US Air Force RQ-4 Global Hawk UAVs under a $306million contract.

RANDOM NOTES

MACCAFERRI

DefenCell MAC protective welded mesh metal gabions are suppliedpre-assembled in a range of standard sizes, folded for shipping andare easy to deploy by pulling open, positioning and filling.

Send personnel news to

[email protected].

www.defensenews.com R1 November 17, 2014 DefenseNewsINTERNATIONAL 19

CalendarTO PLACE AN EVENT LISTING,CALL (703) 658-8365 OR EMAIL [email protected]

DECEMBER 2014

JANUARY 2015

FEBRUARY 2015

FEBRUARY 2015

December 10-12, 2014

6th INTERNATIONAL MARITIMEEXPO (INMEN) Guangzhou, China

DefenseNewswww.defensenews.com

EventCalendar

Is yourevent wellattended?

Get theword out.

You want yourevent to beattended bythe highest-

levels of military,government andindustry in theglobal defense

community.

Combine the powerand reach ofDefense News

and DefenseNews.comfor a successful

event.List your event today!

ContactJuanita Clark

at(703) 658-8365 or

[email protected]

December 9, 2014

NDIA GLOBAL SUPPLY CHAINSUMMITRockville, MDwww.ndia.org/meetings/5040

Presentations and discussions related to defeating emerging supply chain threats toproduct integrity and mission assurance.

January 28-29, 2015

HOW WASHINGTON WORKS -NAVIGATING THE DoDReston, VAwww.ndia.org/meetings/543B

January 26-28, 2015

26th ANNUAL SO/LIC SYMPOSIUM& EXHIBITIONWashington, D.C.www.ndia.org/meetings/5880

Explore requirements, policies and tech-nology solutions to support persistent SOF operations across the globe. InvitedKeynote Speakers include: ASD SO/LIC,USSOCOM Commander and NATO SpecialOperations HQ Commander.

February 5, 2015

COMBATING TERRORISM TECHNICALSUPPORT OFFICE (CTTSO) APBIWashington, DCwww.ndia.org/meetings/5090

CTTSO identifies and develops technology-based capabilities to combat terrorism andirregular adversaries and to deliver these capabilities to DoD components and inter-agency partners. This APBI will forecasts therequirements anticipated for funding in Fiscal Year 2016.

February 10-11, 2015

2015 HUMAN SYSTEMS CONFERENCEAlexandria, VA www.ndia.org/meetings/5350

Focusing on the theme "Human Systems:Maintaining Our Physical Edge, EnablingOur Cognitive Edge" the conference willfeature brief, high-impact presentations oftechnical accomplishments and researchbased recommendations in 90-minuteblocks across the five Human Systems COITopic Areas.

December 16-18, 2014

DoD COMMERCIAL SATCOMUSERS' WORKSHOPOrganized by SIACrystal Gateway MarriottArlington, VAwww.dodsatcom.com

Wed. Keynote Speaker:Lt. Gen. John W. Raymond,Commander JFCC-Space

Join Military and Government decision-makers & satellite industry professionals as they meet together all under one roof.

purchase spare engines andparts for its C-130J fleet and

to support foreign militarysales customers.

Rolls-Royce AE 2100 en-

gines power all C-130J air-craft in the US military andglobal fleets, while legacy

C-130 aircraft are poweredby Rolls-Royce T56 engines.

USAF Orders GriffinsThe US Air Force has

awarded Raytheon a con-

tract for Griffin missiles andsupport. The first incrementof the deal, which is not to

exceed $85.5 million, wasfunded at $32.5 million. Or-ders are expected for mis-

siles and engineeringservices over the life of thecontract, US-based Raythe-

on said.Raytheon will deliver Grif-

fin A and B Block II/III mis-

siles as well as test and

support equipment. Workwill be performed in Tucson,Arizona, and is expected to

be completed by Oct. 30,2017. This award is the resultof a sole-source acquisition.

HUD Logistics SupportThe US Air Force has

awarded Elbit Systems ofAmerica, a subsidiary of Is-rael’s Elbit Systems, a five-

year, firm-fixed price con-tract valued at approxi-mately $29 million for

logistics support of F-16head-up display (HUD) elec-

tric module assemblies. The

contract will be performedby subsidiary International

Enterprises Industries in

Talladega, Alabama.Elbit will upgrade the

HUD electronic system but

retain the optical lens mech-anism.

Sub Rescue CapabilitiesJames Fisher Defence

(JFD), part of UK-based

James Fisher & Sons, willcontinue providing subma-rine escape and rescue capa-

bility to the Royal AustralianNavy for the next five years,with options through 2024,

under a recent contract

awarded by the Australiangovernment, the company

said.Building upon existing op-

erations, the new contract

will incorporate pressurizedsubmarine escape trainingby JFD’s instructors at

HMAS Stirling in WesternAustralia. Additional im-provements will include the

design and manufacture ofan integrated hyperbaric ca-pability, together with a

comprehensive training andexercise program.

Missile SubsystemsSaab has signed a contract

comprising missile subsys-

tems amounting to approxi-mately 250 million Swedishkrona (US $33.75 million).

The Swedish companywould not disclose the iden-tity of the customer, but said

deliveries will take place2015-22.

Ranged Generation Next The US Air Force has

awarded the Launch andTest Range Integrated Ser-vice Contract (LISC) to

Ranged Generation Next(RGNext), the service an-nounced. The total contract

value, including all potentialoptions and award fees,could reach $2billion.

LISC will provide the USgovernment with a singleprime contractor responsi-

ble and accountable for op-erations, organizational-and depot-level mainte-

nance, as well as sustain-ment at Cape Canaveral AirForce Station in Florida and

Vandenberg Air Force Basein California.

The RGNext team is led by

Raytheon Technical Ser-vices, Reston, Virginia, andincludes General Dynamics,

Falls Church, Virginia;ASRC Aerospace, Green-belt, Maryland; ARES, Burl-

ingame, California; Schafer,Arlington, Virginia; and Pri-mus Solutions, Greenbelt.

Automation SystemTrust Automation an-

nounced its fourth low-rateinitial production contractfor the rugged and high-tech

vehicle automation systemfor the AN/TPQ-53 (Q-53)produced by Lockheed Mar-

tin. AN/TPQ-53 is a counter-fire target acquisition radar

that provides soldiers with

enhanced 360-degree pro-tection from indirect fire. N

RAYTHEON

Raytheon will deliver Griffin Aand B Block II/III missiles andtest and support equipment tothe US Air Force.

Send product information and financial news to

[email protected].


Commentary

DefenseNewswww.defensenews.com

Vago Muradian

[email protected]

Managing Editor

David [email protected]

Managing Editor for Product

Development

Bradley [email protected]

Deputy Managing Editor

Greg [email protected]

European Editor

Andrew [email protected]

WASHINGTON STAFF WRITERS

Congress

John T. [email protected]

Naval Warfare

Christopher P. [email protected]

Land & Information Warfare

Joe [email protected]

Industrial Base & Policy

Paul [email protected]

Air Warfare

Aaron [email protected]

BUREAUS

Asia

Wendell MinnickTel: [email protected]

France

Pierre TranTel: [email protected]

India

Vivek RaghuvanshiTel: 91-11-225-8507Fax: [email protected]

Israel

Barbara Opall-RomeTel: 972-9-951-8258Fax: [email protected]

United Arab Emirates

Awad [email protected]

United Kingdom

Andrew ChuterTel: [email protected]

CORRESPONDENTS

Australia

Nigel [email protected]

Belgium/EU/NATO

Julian [email protected]

Canada

David PuglieseTel: [email protected]

Germany

Deanne [email protected]

Italy

Tom KingtonTel: [email protected]

Japan

Paul [email protected]

New Zealand

Nick [email protected]

Pakistan

Usman [email protected]

Poland

Jaroslaw [email protected]

Scandinavia

Gerard O’DwyerTel: [email protected]

South America

José [email protected]

South Korea

Jung [email protected]

Southern Africa

Oscar [email protected]

Turkey

Burak Ege BekdilTel: [email protected]

VISUALS, INTERACTIVE

& COPY EDITING

Creative DirectorAngy Peterson

Senior Web Designer

Amy Ng

Artists John Bretschneider, John Harman

Design Editor Rachel Barth

Designer Betsy Moore

Multimedia Journalist

Lars Schwetje

Senior Photo Editor Alan [email protected]

Photo Editor Jennifer Milbrett

Senior Photographer Rob Curtis

Photographer Mike Morones

Interactive [email protected]

Web Desk Chief Philip Creed

Web Editors Ken Chamberlain, Sam Votsis, Steve Weigand

Assistant Managing Editor/Copy

Editing Jenn Rafael

Copy Chiefs Michele Savage, Lindsey Wray

Deputy Copy Chief Kevin Kaley

Copy Editors Emily Cole, KrissiHumbard, Charlsy Panzino

Mark Flinn

President

G.E. Howard

Chief Executive Officer

Katie Taplett

Vice President & GeneralManager

Editorial Headquarters:

6883 Commercial DriveSpringfield, VA 22159USA

Telephone:

703-642-7300

Fax:

703-658-8412

Email:

[email protected]

INTERNATIONAL

Troubling WordsI feel obligated to respond to

the opinion article from Maj. Gen.Michael McGuire [“The States

Need Their Apaches,” Sept. 29].He could have made his point forthe Army National Guard needing

Apache helicopters without in-cluding potentially troublesomestatements. Did he mean that if

federalized, he would refuse if hethought the federal governmentwas wrong?

The paragraph that is mosttroubling is: “This division ofpower meant that power was

checked; it helped limit the blun-ders of a large centralized govern-ment by dispersing power to

citizens through their state gov-ernments.” What does he mean bythat statement? Are Apache at-

tack helicopters needed to limitthe blunders of a large centralizedgovernment?

Presidents Eisenhower and

Kennedy used the National Guardto enforce school integration, and

the National Guard membersobeyed their orders. What wouldMaj. Gen. McGuire do in that

situation? It is not necessary to provoke a

constitutional crisis over military

hardware. This issue was re-solved in 1864 with the end of theCivil War. The citizens of Arizona

would be better served duringnatural disasters by utility heli-copters and C-130s. The attack

helicopters and aircraft could beplaced in the Army and Air ForceReserves to supplement the ac-

tive force.

MICHAEL T. O'HALLORAN

Colonel, USAFR (retired)Colorado Springs, Colo.

LETTER

W ith NATO nations short on money and

facing a major task of modernizing thealliance, leaders want to improve their

relationship with the companies that can make it

happen. To drive that message home and get ideas, the

Allied Command Transformation organization

teamed with NATO’s defense investment division inSplit, Croatia, last week.

It is a right and noble goal, and there was no short-

age of good ideas.The chief of Portugal’s joint capabilities, Vice Adm.

Fernando Pires da Cunha, called on major contrac-

tors to adopt common standards to ensure that gearfrom different companies works together.

The head of Airbus Military Aircraft, Domingo

Ureña Raso, urged governments to invest in pro-grams as companies couldn’t justify investment ontheir own without the prospect of return. He warned

industry to avoid “fratricide,” calling on greaterindustry-wide cooperation on universal cyber chal-

lenges and even to come together with bitter rivalsto develop future aircraft.

Industry — represented by the NATO Industrial

Advisory Group (NIAG) composed of reps from all28 member nations — sought more clarity and stabil-ity from leaders in their long-range plans to allow

companies to invest and team properly. The NIAGisn’t a lobbying group, but a key body that studiescomplex problems and proposes concrete and work-

able solutions to common challenges.Harmonizing the export control regimes of leading

nations also would simplify cross-border coopera-

tion. The problem is, the European Union continuesto undermine NATO’s efforts to improve capabilities.

A proposed EU directive that would effectively

prohibit nations from buying new weapons throughforeign military sales is giving member nationspause. Part of a broader initiative to keep defense

deals in Europe, the move targets the world’s leading

defense supplier, the United States, that does most

of its business through government-to-governmentdeals. That’s riled up not only Washington and Amer-ican contractors, but also nations that depend on US

systems.The issue came to a head recently when one East-

ern European country told American officials they

are considering the possible implications of thedirective on their future deals. Britain, Poland andother nations strongly oppose the measure, arguing

for free trade to allow member nations to make theirown armament decisions.

Some say the issue is a tempest in a teacup as EU

nations can invoke Article 346 exempting vital na-tional security interests from EU regulations.

The United States on Nov. 12 raised the issue at the

North Atlantic Council, the alliance’s top decision-making body. If adopted, the ban could have seriousimplications for NATO, given the United States is a

top weapon supplier to alliance nations.All efforts to improve alliance capabilities should

be lauded. Gen. Jean-Paul Palomeros, the supremeallied commander transformation, deserves partic-ular credit for driving NATO members to think in-

novatively to improve readiness. Patrick Auroy, theassistant secretary-general for defense investment,is working hard to drive change.

But the EU did nothing to support the Nov. 14NATO Industry Forum, scheduling a conference ofchiefs of defense the same day. Efforts to improve

NATO capabilities are doomed if the EU underminesthat very goal. The US is the biggest contributor toNATO and continues to invest heavily in systems

vital to all alliance members.At a time when the alliance faces major challenges,

it’s time for NATO leaders and those who depend on

cooperation to field military capability to addressthis issue at the highest level with their EU counter-parts. Protectionism rarely works and always im-

pedes cooperation. N

EDITORIAL

FMS AND EUROPE

Avoid Protectionism

n Email letters to [email protected]. Please includephone number. Letters may be edited. Submissions to Defense Newsmay be published or distributed inprint, electronic or other forms.

WORD FOR WORD

“Even Coach K — Duke’s basketballcoach — told an Army conferencelast month that declaring we won’tuse ground forces is like telling youropponent you’re not going to playyour best players.”

HASC Chairman Buck McKeon, R-Calif.Using West Point graduate Mike Krzyzewski’s words, to criticize President Barak Obama’sIslamic State strategy.

“We have a very clear policy: If it flies, it dies.”Col. Chemi Bar-ElCommander, Israel Air Force’s 168 Wing

www.defensenews.com November 17, 2014 DefenseNewsINTERNATIONAL 21

A s soon as the intelligencecommunities and civilian

contractors attached them-selves to the military-industrialcomplex, America was tied to a

cycle of war. A view of the post-Vietnam era

is instructive to explain how we

have reached our present megamilitary. If you remember Viet-nam, you’ll remember the draft

and the riots, a time when Amer-ica merely hada military-

industrialcomplex.

The military

leaders com-ing out ofVietnam who

had sufferedthrough theforeign and

domesticchaos didtheir best to

assure thatAmerica andits military

would never have to sufferthrough that kind of turmoil

again. They attempted to organizea military that would go to war atthe behest of the people, not the

whim of politicians. The thoughtwas that if all the people were a

part of the debate to go to war,

they would not leave those whowere fighting it flapping in thebreeze.

The Total Force, as the nameimplies, was an attempt to spreadthe war’s affect across many. With

the military wanting to slow therush to war, politicians and bu-reaucrats wanted the ability to go

to war based on their best guess-es.

As the draft was a sticking point

in Vietnam, it became the showpony for moving from the TotalForce to the All Volunteer Force.

With all the talk about a volunteerforce being more highly trained,no mention was made that the

switch was a blank check, essen-tially unleashing politicians to usethe military as they saw fit.

The people who were con-cerned with the business of war

learned the lessons of Vietnam.They saw how the intelligenceapparatus grew and how parts of

the war were pursued off thebooks. The intelligence communi-

ty could do things the military

was prohibited from doing. When the intelligence communi-

ty was prohibited from acting

against US law, it went a stepfurther and farmed out dirty jobsto contractors who reported to no

one. Having contractors operate in a

nether world where their activ-

ities were classified worked sowell for the intelligence communi-ty that it grew the program, not to

the disinterest of other govern-ment departments. All wantedcivilian contractors who could

work without the hindrance ofreporting through governmentchannels.

While outsourcing problematictasks, the thought process re-quired in the formulation of de-

fense policy was farmed out tothink tanks. Contractors essen-

tially conceive the rationale forAmerica’s wars and pass it to themilitary and its subcontractors

who implement it.As good entrepreneurs do,

contractors looked at the entire

war-fighting apparatus and decid-ed what pieces they wanted tochip away and with the help of

politicians, they created a newindustry.

The 9/11 attack blew the lid off

restraint. Much like the Californiagold rush, contractors raced toget a piece of the action and came

away with whole pies. Opened-ended contracts without costconstraints papered Washington.

It was a boom time and the hum-ble military-industrial complex,so feared by President Dwight

Eisenhower, grew exponentiallyto include most of government.

Vietnam, with its upheaval,

brought tremendous socialchange to America, but unnoticedwere the far-reaching military

changes. We now have the abilityto fight wars with a military that

does not represent the public as awhole. That is not the way it issupposed to work in a democracy.

One percent of the population,mostly poor kids, people who

don’t have a voice in the halls ofpower, are carrying the load for

a multitrillion-dollar military-industrial-intelligence-contractor(MIIC) complex.

Discarding the cautious ap-

proach to war, we have a militarythat can be used without much of

a public debate. The debate thatshould have taken place prior toour most recent wars has been

supplanted by postwar efforts tosupport our troops.

Our approach to war is back-

ward. The soul-searching shouldbe done prior. That would bemore beneficial to the young men

and women who carry the bur-dens of the MIIC complex, puttingtheir lives in great risk, rather

than waving flags at them whenthey come home.

By ignoring the lessons that

should have been learned andchanging our way of war, Americanow can get to the fight quickly

and stay as long as it wants. Wehave proof of that.

Throughout history, money has

been made in wars and 18-, 19-and 20-year olds have taken the

hits. But today they have to stayat war, risking their lives becausethey have entire corporations and

a lot of high-paying jobs depend-ing on them. N

Post-Vietnam Path to WarUS Changed, but Ignored Important Lessons

By retired USMarine Corps Maj.Gen. John Cronin,author of “AnInconvenient War.”

T hroughout the Cold War, theUS relied on the strength of

its nuclear offensive capa-bilities to deter Soviet attacks.President Ronald Reagan initiated

the Strategic Defense Initiative in1983 to avoid the need for launch-

ing an immediate reprisal upondetection of an incoming missile.

The research program Reaganinitiated enhanced deterrence bycombining the threat of over-

whelming retaliation with theability to intercept incomingmissiles with our anti-ballistic

missile defenses. Despite theimportance of this dual approach,commentators still produce arti-

cles extolling or criticizing one orother component of our deterrentposture, without acknowledging

the importance of the combina-

tion.For example, during the first

week of November, four differentpieces in Defense News and theWashington Times dealt with

aspects of nuclear deterrenceand missile defense withouthighlighting the importance of

linkage between these topics. Keith Payne, in a Washington

Times commentary, pointed out

the dangers inherent in the emo-tional policy of nuclear disarma-ment. He made a strong case why

deterrence through conventionalforces alone has proved to beinadequate in the past.

Tom Collins and Kingston Reif,

in a Defense News commentary,concluded that “plans to rebuild

the US nuclear arsenal pose

financial and opportunity coststhat cannot be justified in the

current economic and securityclimate.”

Stephen Blank’s Defense Newscommentary noted that “Russia,China, North Korea and Iran are

all building up their militarycapabilities and we must answerthis threat by keeping our missile

defenses progressing.” He did notfavor a projected program todesign a new exo-atmospheric

kill vehicle (EKV) but suggestedlower cost enhancements to theexisting interceptor.

A Defense News article by Joe

Gould dealt in more depth withthe EKV improvements being

pursued by the Missile DefenseAgency (MDA) and indicated thatimprovements to the existing

EKV, as suggested by StephenBlank, could be deployed by2020. A redesigned common EKV

capable of incorporation intodifferent interceptor missilescould be ready for deployment by

2025.All the pieces were concerned

with the question of national

security, but none mentioned theessential element necessary tohave confidence in our systems.

Because deterrence is not an

exact science, it is heavily depen-dent on each side’s perception of

their opponent’s capabilities and

their willingness to use them ifpushed to the limit.

As noted, our security used torely on the surety of an over-

whelming nuclear response if anopponent attacked us or ourallies. The latter still shelter

under the umbrella of extendednuclear deterrence, a longstand-ing agreement that was instituted

to limit nuclear proliferation.Such a policy remains effectiveprovided the US and its oppo-

nents believe US nuclear war-heads will operate as designedand that the nation has the will to

initiate a nuclear response.

The US used to demonstrate itscapabilities by regular under-

ground weapon tests, but al-though it never ratified theComprehensive Nuclear Test Ban

Treaty, it abides by it and nolonger conducts nuclear tests. Asa result, facilities have aged and

so much experienced staff hasleft or retired that it would takeseveral years and considerable

expenditure to design and pro-duce a new nuclear warhead.

While Collins and Reif may be

correct that we do not need 1,500warheads to maintain a deterrentposture, we should have high

confidence in those we do retain.

Without investing in a compre-hensive life assurance program

coupled with efforts to design a

more modern warhead, we are indanger of failing to convince

hostile opponents — and ourallies —that we have a real deter-

rent.The other piece of the deter-

rence puzzle is convincing poten-

tial opponents that our defensesystems can protect against mis-sile attacks. Three decades have

elapsed since Reagan initiatedthe missile defense program, butwe still lack a proven system to

defend against intercontinentalsystems.

The naval systems deployed on

Aegis ships have a proven record

and can provide theater defenseagainst limited raids, but the

national missile defense locatedin Alaska and Vandenberg AirForce Base, California, lacks an

equivalent successful test flightrecord.

The EKV deployed in the mis-

siles in Alaska and the WestCoast is effectively a develop-mental design that was incorpo-

rated when a system was initiallydeployed in 2004-05 following ourwithdrawal from the Anti Ballis-

tic Missile Treaty. So Blank has agood case in calling for an im-proved product, but the timetable

suggested by MDA of 2020 seems

unduly long to wait. As missile and warhead prolif-

eration continues, we need to

maintain and enhance our dualapproach to deterrence. We must

be able to convince potentialenemies, including terrorist

groups that would have no fearof a reprisal attack, that we canwithstand a missile attack on our

territory. We have to improve ourconfidence in the systems uponwhich we rely. N

Deterrence Requires Balanced Offense-Defense Response

By Eugene Fox, left, vice president, andStanley Orman, chief executive of OrmanAssociates, a defense and internationalconsultancy, Rockville, Maryland.

n Send your opinion pieces [email protected] must be roughly 800words long and are subject to editingfor space and clarity.


Interview

Q. What is your vision for where the AirUniversity [AU] needs to go over thenext five years?A. The vision is really a broadervision from the chief and secre-

tary. We are sitting at this nexuswhere we have a more dangerousworld out there, and our nation is

asking us to do things that keepus busier now than we ever havebeen before. Yet we have fewer

people than we had when we firststarted this Air Force.

Those demographic realities

mean that we have got to startthinking differently about howour resources are applied to the

foundation of thinking. That theonly way we are going to make itis if we adapt and transform our

educational process so that wecan educate more airmen moredeeply at more affordable price

points than we have before. Thegood news is there are technol-ogies and techniques and there is

evidence and research out therethat really give us facts as to howwe can do this better and refine it

into something that allows us toachieve that.

Q. What about connecting AU to theoutside world?A. The second part is connecting

all of those thinkers [to] industry,in the commercial sector, in aca-demia, in think tanks, in sim-

ulation centers, in modelingcenters, the laboratories, ourscientists and our engineers. Our

network of thinkers here are

networked with other folks indifferent ways that we knit to-

gether that provides evidence and

advice to the chief and secretary.The question is how we allow

more workload to be picked up,by maybe some students here andthere, that help build that body of

evidence that then is put together

by our faculty and our staff inways that really are meaningful

and relevant.

We are going to build a [bud-get], OK? What do we need to

build in order to connect thetechnology to the grand strategy,and what does it mean? Who has

been thinking about the moralcomponent of this? Who has beenthinking about the social compo-

nent of this? Who has been think-ing about the art of war in regardto this? Who has been thinking

about the affordability? Where isthe research needed? It is reallyabout taking a reinvented educa-

tional construct that can educatemore people more deeply andthen making it congruent and

chasing the strategic problems ofthe day.

Q. Are geopolitical factors increasingthe need for AU’s research and educa-tion?A. The world is a more dangerousplace, and we have fewer re-sources, [meaning] we may need

to increase the degree to whichwe are doing this, the ratio if youwill, the return on investment

where students more broadly arechasing the problems of the day,so that those problems of the day

are informed by analytical rigor,

discipline, thought and staring thefacts straight in the eye. It is

really easy for our system to beseduced by a clever idea that maynever actually pan out, where the

physics of it just doesn’t work. Ifyou more fully lean on the think-

ers of your enterprise to give you

evidence, you actually moveforward in a way that buys down

the risk on an uncertain future

more completely.It’s like a good investor. A good

investor buys down risk because

the future is unknown, you just

don’t know which stock is goingto do well, is not going to do well.

If you try to guess, you generallyfail over the long run. But thosethat diversify, those that actually

invest in many different things

that are potential game changers,

are the ones that, when the futuredoes unfold in a way that is un-expected and unpredicted, have

got enough intellectual pots sim-mering of ideas, of new technol-ogies and concepts connected

with the grand strategy that youcan pick up the ball and run withsomething relevant and useful to

the president when that crisiscomes. And that is really thejourney we are on — to amp up

what we are already doing inways that more fully [intertwine]

students into the problems of theday.

Q. Do you envision AU becoming afeeder for future budget discussions?A. Probably the best way to put it

is, [Welsh] would like this placeevery year to have certain pro-jects that are connected to the

most urgent strategic problems.And the evidence that builds overtime on those strategic problems

influences the guidance to build-ing the POM [program objectivememorandum]. It influences the

strategic choices that are part ofthe POM and corporate process.And it influences the adaptation

and shaping of the strategy, eachand every year. We can be a placethat is one of the voices into the

headquarters and into the strate-gy.

Q. What unique capabilities does AUbring to those discussions?A. We have something here that

does not exist anywhere else inthe world — airmen of every rankand every skill set, and we have

the best and the brightest. No-where else do you have a placewhere you can really think across

business lines. You have it here

because I knit together a cyberexpert and a space expert and an

air superiority expert and a spe-

cial forces expert, and I say, “OK,here is our problem. If we com-

bine this approach that I haveover here [with] your technologyover there, we actually can do

one thing that solves both of ourproblems and applies to thisproblem better.”

You can see how innovationactually is on steroids when youknit together subject matter ex-

perts from different silos, differ-ent areas of expertise, and whenyou teach them to think critically

and strategically you find that

innovation is amped up. That’swhat we’re looking for here, to

take advantage of this uniqueenvironment that doesn’t exist

anywhere else in the Air Force.

Q. Are you bringing any experiences orideas from your time as QDR head tothis new challenge?A. What I am bringing is the rela-

tionships that I built. So the AirForce is already doing [the re-search]. It is just a matter of

connecting some of these dotsand unleashing the brilliance thatis happening in the Air Force

right now. If I can take you on atrip to every scientist, engineer,every laboratory in the Air Force,

your jaw would drop at what theyare doing. It is just a matter ofconnecting those dots. In a big

bureaucracy, that is sometimeshard to do, especially when youare so busy with so much work

and so few people. So what weare looking for is that collab-orative technology, those collab-

orative tools that allow us to seewhat is going on and to talk withanother one. And then to marshal

up all of these brilliant ideas andconnect them with the chief andsecretary in the context of strate-

gy and the geopolitical environ-ment. That is really it in a

nutshell.

Q. Does that require more ties withindustry?A. It does. Not just industry, but

academia and what we have inthe River Region here with Au-

burn University, Alabama State

University, Troy University, Uni-versity of Alabama and then

industry. It is connecting with theNavy and the Army think tanksand laboratories and research

centers. It is knitting together thesea of brilliance out there not inthe way that tries to control it,

but in the way that tries to con-nect the islands of brilliance withbridges that allow us to innovate

more rapidly.

Q. How important is it to be able torapidly produce solutions?A. If I had to say one sentencethat describes the quintessential

coin of the realm right now, it isthe nation that can deliver to thepresident solutions to problems

and bring technology to bear andconcepts to bear in a way that isquicker than the adversary is the

one that is going to win. It isabout speed. It is about range.And those are attributes that the

Air Force naturally brings. That isreally what this is about — dothat quicker, to bring new things,

new technologies as this speed oflife is accelerating, the speed ofchange is accelerating; those

people that can bring things tobear quicker than the adversaryare going to be the winners in the

long run. That’s what we aregoing to do.

Q. Should distance learning be given agreater role in military education?A. There is nothing magical about

the human brain, and there isreally nothing new about thehuman brain. It learns the same

way it did back in the Stone Age.We may have more evidence nowabout how it learns better, and

what techniques make it uniquefor you because you learn differ-

ently than I do. There is no magic

pill, and it is not OK to just say goto this website and you will learn

as well as you would if you were

sitting next to the professor in acourse where you actually traveland live at the institution. That is

just not true. However, there are enough

institutions out there leading the

way in this where we don’t haveto go this alone. So distancelearning is not necessarily a

panacea, but it is a tool to accen-tuate the brain’s ability to learnquickly and to stay adaptive and

relevant. N

By Aaron Mehta at Maxwell Air ForceBase, Montgomery, Alabama.

LT. GEN. STEVEN KWAST Commander and President,US Air Force’s Air University

On Nov. 10, Lt. Gen. Steven Kwast took over as commander andpresident of Air University, the center of education for the US

Air Force at Maxwell Air Force Base in Montgomery, Alabama.Kwast ran the Air Force portion of the most recent quadrennial de-fense review (QDR) before being tasked by Chief of Staff Gen. Mark

Welsh to increase the importance of education for the service. Hespoke with Defense News just days before taking on his new position.

ALBERT CESARE/MONTGOMERY ADVERTISER

Established: 1946 at Maxwell Air Force

Base, Montgomery, Alabama

Number of graduates (2013):n 76,078 resident/on site

n 154,728 distance learning

Includes: LeMay Center for Doctrine

Development and Education, Spaatz

Center for Officer Education, Holm

Center for Officer Accessions and

Citizen Development, Barnes Center for

Enlisted Education, Eaker Center for

Professional Development and Air

Force Institute of Technology

Source: Air University 2013 Annual Report

AU PROFILE

��

�� !�� "�� #�� $�%&� �� '( �� )(*((( �� * �� &� �� * ��&�� +�� * ��

Call on Honeywell, and get the job done.

For more information, visit aerospace.Honeywell.com.© 2014 Honeywell International Inc. All Rights Reserved.

2014_11_17 defense news intl

Documents

chinese j

twinengine j

d e f e n s e n e w

airshow china inzhuhai

increasing cost ofthe

fighter jet aswell

s price andperformance

whoface us export restrictions