US military news, discussions and history

[LeveragedBuyout]

Proxies, such as Hezbollah and Iranian Quds forces remain a sticking point in the way forward with Iran. Perhaps a normalization of relations with Iran will dampen the need for such asymmetric threats.

No, he has it backwards. When Iran stops sponsoring Hezbollah and eliminates the Quds forces, normalization will be possible, not the reverse. Iran doesn't deserve trust, then verify. It must be verify, then trust.

And no rapprochement is possible until Iran apologizes for the embassy hostage crisis, which is still an open wound to many of us.

 

[SvenSvensonov]

No, he has it backwards. When Iran stops sponsoring Hezbollah and eliminates the Quds forces, normalization will be possible, not the reverse. Iran doesn't deserve trust, then verify. It must be verify, then trust.

And no rapprochement is possible until Iran apologizes for the embassy hostage crisis, which is still an open wound to many of us.

I'm a bit different in my thinking. I have a lot of respect for the Iranians, and their navy in particular, but little to their irregular forces. They are doing what we do in the region and if we don't apologize for our actions or supporting proxies and militants, I wont demand an apology or lessening of support from Iran either. As far as I'm concerned it's geopolitics and everyone is doing it.

We don't apologize to Turkey for supporting the Kurds, even if our support omits the PKK and its affiliates, we still annoy Turkey. But Turkey and the US still maintain a healthy relationship. Turkey is an on-again, off-again friend/enemy of Israel and sometimes goes out of it's way to annoy the Israelis. We overlook that too. Then there is the problems between fellow NATO members Greece and Turkey. We don't pay too much attention. It's just geopolitics and everybody does it.

On the Iranian embassy crisis, I too would like an apology, but sometimes we must re-approach first before a sincere apology can be given. I would like for them to come out today an apologize, but I wont complain if we become more friendly and then both sides settle their differences.

I understand where you are coming from, and believe me it's not a unique viewpoint, it's very widely held in the US - I definitely saw it while in the navy, but you and I are just going to have to disagree a bit on this.

 

[AMDR]

USS H.W. Bush (CVN-77)

 

[SvenSvensonov]

Navy Researchers Counter Pilot Disorientation with New Simulations

Navy researchers have developed new simulation and training programs to help all Defense Department pilots avoid two potentially fatal spatial misperceptions during nighttime landings and in flight.

Spatial disorientation is the leading aeromedical cause of Class A mishaps not only throughout DoD aviation, but in commercial flying as well, Navy officials said in a report published this month in Naval Medical and Research Development News.

Henry P. Williams, a researcher with the Naval Medical Research Unit-Dayton, at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, who reported on the programs, said they have been forwarded to the Naval Survival Training Institute in Pensacola, Florida.

The phenomena include Black Hole Illusion, or BHI – when a pilot on a nighttime runway approach in a poorly lit area perceives he is higher than he should be and descends to a lower approach.

“If unlit high terrain or obstacles are near the approach path the results can be fatal,” Henry P. Williams, a researcher with the Naval Medical Research Unit-Dayton, at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, reported.

The unit tested a team of 38 pilots in day– and nighttime simulation landings, finding that they all flew near perfect approaching in the daylight. But 92 percent made “significantly low BHI approaches” in the nighttime simulation, the report said. On average, they were 148 feet too low when 1.5 nautical miles from the runaway, it said.

But after viewing a training video on BHI the pilots were, on average, just three feet too low at the same distance from the runway.

Another spatial disorientation problem tackled in the same study was Control Reversal Error, or CRE, which occurs when pilots lose visuals on a lead aircraft while making turns – as will happen flying into clouds, Williams reported.

When that happens pilots swap over to instrument control to recover from the turn, but in nearly a quarter of the cases pilots turned in the wrong direction and steepened the angle of bank, researchers found.

“This error can be extremely dangerous in actual instrument flight, leading to incapacitating [spatial disorientation] and a fatal departure from controlled flight,” Williams said.

From Navy Researchers Counter Pilot Disorientation with New Simulations | Defense Tech

*There was a system used previously called the "Malcolm Horizon" - here's some info on that http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a150789.pdf

 

[mehboobkz]

Boeing Completes Testing on New Anti-Jamming Technology

Boeing Completes Testing on New Anti-Jamming Technology

EL SEGUNDO, Calif., Nov. 4, 2014 – Boeing [NYSE: BA] has proven its new anti-jamming communications technology is capable of operating as either a ground-based user terminal or satellite-based networking hub, enabling the military to send and receive secure communications at a significantly lower cost by using existing terminals and satellites.

The anti-jam technology uses a protected tactical waveform, which shields signals from interference by adversaries or cyber-terrorists. This demonstration complements previous on-orbit demonstrations over satellites like ViaSat-1 and the sixth Wideband Global SATCOM (WGS-6), showing the ability to operate anti-jam waveforms over existing commercial and military spacecraft.

“We’ve confirmed this technology can be applied quickly and affordably to existing assets, especially operational WGS satellites and ground terminals,” said Dan Hart, vice president of Boeing Government Satellite Systems. “With threats to secure communications becoming increasingly frequent and sophisticated, providing this enhanced capability to warfighters on the ground is critical.”

The recent test was conducted between a Boeing ground terminal using a programmable modem, designed and developed by ViaSat using one of its commercial off-the-shelf platforms and a ground terminal designed and built by MIT-Lincoln Laboratory.

This testing, done under contract for the U.S. Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center and supervised by the U.S. government, confirms that the modem meets technical interface specifications, while successfully transmitting information to and from the ground user terminal.

A unit of The Boeing Company, Boeing Defense, Space & Security is one of the world's largest defense, space and security businesses specializing in innovative and capabilities-driven customer solutions, and the world’s largest and most versatile manufacturer of military aircraft. Headquartered in St. Louis, Boeing Defense, Space & Security is a $33 billion business with 56,000 employees worldwide. Follow us on Twitter: @BoeingDefense.

 

[SvenSvensonov]

Army Testing Improved Electronic Jamming Technology

The Army is testing a series of new electronic warfare technologies designed to address a wider range of threat signals in the electromagnetic spectrum, service officials said.

Electronic warfare can be used for a wide range of combat functions to include jamming or thwarting an electronic signal used to detonate an IED, identifying enemy communications or electronic signals, and attacking or disabling enemy electromagnetic signals.

The new EW technologies are being engineered to detect, respond to and operate in a wider range of frequencies to provide commanders with more offensive and defensive options. They are being designed as upgradable hardware and software that can accommodate new threat information as emerging signals are learned, Army officials said.

“The nature of the electromagnetic spectrum is such that it is increasingly contested and increasingly congested. You must be able to attack in the spectrum and defend in the spectrum and also ensure that you manage the spectrum. In order to do all of these things, you must gain and maintain an advantage in the electromagnetic spectrum,” said Col. Jim Ekvall, electronic warfare division chief.

The new EW systems will be configured to go on unmanned aircraft, helicopters and vehicles, among other platforms, Ekvall added.

One of the new technologies now in development is called Electronic Warfare Planning and Management Tool, or EWPMT, which allows commanders to synchronize and integrate a host of electronic warfare signals. EWPMT is slated to be ready by 2016.

Another new system, scheduled to enter formal production in 2021, is an offensive system called Multi-Function EW.

“This is an offensive oriented system consisting of airborne, mobile vehicle, man-portable and fixed-site applications. All of these variants are offensively oriented. In other words they are used to attack the enemy’s command and communications and other things that use the electromagnetic spectrum,” Ekvall said.

Defensive Electronic Attack, or DEA, is another Army EW system which attacks the enemy by preventing enemy EW systems from damaging personnel, materiel and buildings, Ekvall added. DEA is slated to enter production in 2023 after the Army completes an expected analysis.

The Army’s experience learning how to jam IED-detonating signals in Iraq and Afghanistan during more than a decade of combat has greatly informed the current EW modernization effort. As a result, the new technologies will be scalable, meaning they are being engineered to accept new frequencies and threat signal information as needed.

For example, IED-detonating electronic signals began with simple garage door openers or remotely-controlled electronic devices – and then quickly migrated to more advance frequencies using a wider range of devices such as cellphones and other technologies. New EW hardware, therefore, is being configured to accept software updates when new threat information is learned, Ekvall explained.

From Army Testing Improved Electronic Jamming Technology | Defense Tech

*So @mehboobkz provided us with new satellite jam resistant communications (up and downlink), now offensive jamming is being tested too.

 

[Aepsilons]

USS H.W. Bush (CVN-77)


View attachment 156549 View attachment 156551 View attachment 156552 View attachment 156553 View attachment 156554

Such an Awesome looking ship.

 

[AMDR]

Scientists hack a 25 year old chemical sensor into dual-use explosives detector
Scientists hack a 25 year old chemical sensor into dual-use explosives detector | Defense Update:

Scientists at the U.S. Army Edgewood Chemical Biological Center at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md., added the ability to detect explosive materials to the Joint Chemical Agent Detector. Photo: US Army

Scientists at the U.S. Army Edgewood Chemical Biological Centre (ECBC) at Aberdeen Proving Ground assisted by the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) Smith Detection, demonstrated recently how a standard chemical agent detector can be hacked into an explosive material detection sensor.

The modified device can already detect roughly a dozen compounds including TNT, RDX and EGN. Future efforts could increase the number of detectable compounds.

In service with the US military for 25 years, Joint Chemical Agent Detector (JCAD) was originally designed as a portable, automatic chemical warfare agent detector. Currently there are approximately 56,000 chemical warfare agent detectingJCADs in service within the Department of Defense. Recent needs have required the Army to find ways to create a similar sensor capable to detect explosive materials which include various types of explosive ordnance, improvised explosive devices and improvised/homemade explosives.

To convert an ordinary JCAD into a JCAD Chemical Explosive Detector, or JCAD CED, the existing rain cap is replaced with one with a new inlet. Once in place, scientists wipe any surface using the probe swab, which then retracts back into inlet. With a simple button push, the probe swab tip with the explosives sample heats up to a certain temperature, vaporizing the explosive residue. These additional features allow an ordinary JCAD to now have the role of a portable, automated explosives detector.

Developed under an Army Technology Objective (ATO) since 2010, Army scientists have looked for ways to exploit the 56,000 JCADs deployed in the field to provide explosive detection in addition to their chemical agent detection role. The program starting in 2010, under the requirement to assess which existing detectors could also detect explosives, ECBC’s Point Detection Branch began to research different options.

How its done?

Towards this capability demonstration the developers had to overcome significant challenges – for example, the original JCAD is designed to detect vapours. However, explosive materials are usually low vapor pressure solids. ECBC scientists had to figure out how the JCAD could detect solid explosive materials, without changing the hardware or original intent of the detector. Given these parameters the scientists sought to determine how to modify this detector while essentially keeping it the same.

“Many of the emerging chemical threats and explosives share the challenge of presenting little to no detectable vapor for sampling. By conducting research into the detection of solid explosive residues, we have learned valuable lessons that are equally important for detecting nonvolatile solid and liquid chemical agent residues as well,” said Dr. Augustus W. Fountain III, senior research scientist for chemistry.

The add-on pieces are a new JCAD Rain Cap with a Probe Swab and an inlet. Within the JCAD itself, scientists added two on-demand vapor generators: a calibrant and a dopant. The dopant changes the chemistry of the detector so that it can detect explosives easier.

“Within the Army, there is no other automatic, near real-time explosives detector at this time. There are many explosives detectors, but not ones that are dual-use and automatic,” said Charles Harden, Ph.D., a Leidos contractor with ECBC’s Point Detection Branch. “The best part is that the technology is already out in the field, and warfighters have been trained on this equipment,” Harden said. “All we’re doing is introducing small add-ons that will have a big impact.”

“There are several advantages with the improved JCAD CED system. First, its dual-functionality accurately detects vapors as well as explosive residue. Second, scientists successfully modified the system with easy-to-use add-ons, and the upgrade is cost effective and reduces the need for yearly maintenance,” said Blethen.

Scientists plan to determine the amount of explosives that can be detected and develop a concept of operations. Other goals include developing a methodology for detecting homemade explosives, and reaching a technology readiness level 6. JCAD CED will be demonstrated in a fiscal year 2015 military utility assessment.

 

[SvenSvensonov]

China is often bashed for its corruption within its military ranks, but truth be told, the US has a problem with it as well:

Navy's Fired Skippers Often Maintain Their Rank

In the past five years, 90 Navy skippers have been relieved of duty for indiscretions ranging from driving under the influence to having inappropriate relationships.

But for Navy officers, losing your job doesn’t always end your career.

Based on information provided by the Navy, Stars and Stripes has found that 53 percent of all officers relieved of command since 2010 still put on the uniform each day, most without loss of rank.

Navy Cmdr. Larry Gonzales was relieved of leadership duties aboard the USS Chafee in 2009 after he was investigated for groping a subordinate and carrying on an inappropriate relationship. In 2011, he became deputy director of research and analysis at the Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command in Hawaii.

In 2011, Cmdr. Timothy Murphy was relieved from Electronic Attack Squadron 129 after police cited him for driving under the influence. He later became a program team leader at the F/A-18 Hornet and EA-18G Growler Program Office in Maryland.

Last year, Capt. Lance Massey II was relieved as maintenance commander of the 33rd Fighter Wing for inappropriate behavior with female staff. Though he’s no longer in command, Massey is still with the 33rd.

While retaining commanding officers accused of inappropriate and sometimes illegal actions might look suspicious, naval scholars suggest cases must be examined individually.

The evidence and how each case is adjudicated ultimately determines the fate of those relieved.

Admirals looking at a case of alleged wrongdoing have two options, according to Navy Capt. Michael Junge, a military professor at the U.S. Naval War College who has been studying commander reliefs for more than a decade. They can pursue military charges and proceed to a court-martial — where a conviction could result in total separation from the military — or they can relieve a commander administratively. The latter is sometimes easier, especially if the evidence is weak.

Officials at the Navy Personnel Command declined to comment on the individual cases, instead referring Stars and Stripes to lower commands, which largely did not respond to requests for comment.

Junge said administrative actions would not necessarily make it into the sailor’s file, and therefore, the sailor would not be separated from the Navy.

An arrest for drunken driving or groping a colleague’s wife would likely see an officer relieved of command but not forced out of the service, Junge said. It’s likely, however, they would never command again and their career would be adversely affected.

“In the modern Navy, an officer relieved of their command doesn’t go on to command again,” he said. But, “if it isn’t a clear criminal act, then there’s no reason to send these guys out.”

Junge said the number of commanding officers who misbehave makes up a very small percentage of those who serve. Like in the civilian world, he believes some crimes or incidents of wrongdoing are mistakes, where relief of command is punishment enough. In some cases, it is better to help the individual and retain their almost 20 years’ experience, knowledge and training.

“Just because we have a zero-tolerance policy doesn’t mean you’re automatically fired,” he said. “Firing might not be the right answer all the time.”

One area that is often perplexing to Junge is who can fire whom. Sometimes an admiral will relieve a commanding officer but leave the commander’s immediate supervisor out of the loop. Other times, the immediate supervisor does the firing.

“It’s all over the place,” Junge said. “It’s hard to see who’s in charge.”

In 2009, 12 Navy commanders were fired, according to Navy information provided to Stars and Stripes. Personnel Command officials did not respond to requests detailing which commanders were still employed in the Navy.

In 2010, 17 commanders were fired, Navy officials said. As of February 2014, five of them were still in the Navy.

They include Cmdr. Jeff Cima, who was relieved from command of the USS Chicago for drunkenness in 2010, Navy officials said. As of February, he was working at the U.S. Mission to NATO in Brussels. Cmdr. Herman Pfaeffle was relieved of command after hitting a pier in the USS John L. Hall, but now is in Naval Operations.

Capt. Ronald Gero, commanding officer of the USS Ohio, was relieved by Rear Adm. James Caldwell due to a loss of confidence in Gero’s ability to command.

Loss of confidence is a response often used by Navy leadership to remove a commander early into a misconduct investigation, according to Navy spokesman Lt. Chika Onyekanne.

It is also used to remove a commander when there is not enough evidence to pursue formal charges. The information as to what the commander allegedly did is then often protected.

“‘Loss of confidence’ is a legitimate reason for a CO firing,” Onyekanne wrote to Stars and Stripes. “In many cases/situations the investigation of the incident, such as misconduct, is early in the process and ongoing. Relieving the CO also allows continuity of leadership at the command while decreasing and/or minimizing the possible distraction (at the command) of an ongoing investigation.”

Also in 2010, Cmdr. Charles Maher was relieved from the USS Memphis during the investigation of a cheating ring, Navy officials said. He was later hired at the Naval Undersea Warfare Center.

Lt. Cmdr. James Rushton was relieved from the minesweeper the USS Chief for fraternization with the executive officer to close out 2010. Earlier this year, he was stationed at Tactical Training Group Pacific.

In 2011, 23 commanders were relieved of their command for cause, Navy officials said. The number who were able to stay in doubled from the previous year to 10.

In addition to Murphy, Cmdr. Nathan Borchers was relieved from the USS Stout for a pattern of unprofessional behavior in overseas ports, according to Navy officials. He recently held a position at the Strategic Command at Colorado Springs.

Capt. William Mosk was relieved from Naval Station Rota after his command lost confidence he could effectively oversee an investigation. He wound up at Commander Carrier Strike Group 9.

Cmdr. Dave Koss was responsible for a low-flying maneuver, Cmdr. Michael Varney mishandled classified information, Cmdr. Karl Pugh was disciplined in an alcohol-related incident and Cmdr. Laredo Bell was cited for drunken driving. All remained in the service.

The reasons behind the firings of Cmdr. Joseph Nosse, Lt. Cmdr. Martin Holguin and Cmdr. Jonathan Jackson were cited as loss of confidence.

In 2012, 26 commanders were relieved for cause, Navy officials said. Of those, 14 were allowed to remain in the service, jumping to 54 percent from 43 percent the previous year.

Cmdr. Diego Hernandez was relieved for mishandling classified materials, Cmdr. Derick Armstrong for sexual harassment and fraternization, and Cmdr. Michael Ward for an extramarital affair. The justifications behind many of the firings have not been released.

From January 2013 through February 2014, 22 commanders were relieved, 21 in 2013 alone, Navy officials said. Nearly all of them (82 percent) remain in the Navy today.

From Navy's Fired Skippers Often Maintain Their Rank | Military.com

*Since these situations have been made public, they will be rectified. The US has corruption, but it also doesn't allow it to go unchecked.

 

[AMDR]

US Navy approves Super Hornet IRST for low-rate initial production
US Navy approves Super Hornet IRST for low-rate initial production - IHS Jane's 360

The US Navy (USN) has awarded Milestone C acquisition approval for an infrared search-and-track (IRST) system for the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet combat aircraft, the Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) announced on 2 December.

Having completed its first flight aboard a Super Hornet in February, the podded AN/ASG-34 IRST will now begin low-rate initial production (LRIP) for six units needed to take the programme forward to initial operating capability (IOC).

According to NAVAIR, with the awarding of Milestone C, "performance and aeromechanical flight testing will continue to determine the IRST capability's limits within aircraft constraints and to ensure operational stability and safety".

Developed by Lockheed Martin, with Boeing and General Electric, the AN/ASG-34 is a passive system geared at giving the Super Hornet the capability to locate and engage airborne and ground targets when use of the Raytheon AN/APG-79 active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar would give away the aircraft's position.

Unlike most other IRST systems that are fully integrated with their host aircraft, the AN/ASG-34 is designed to be carried in a modified centreline drop tank. Boeing officials have previously told IHS Jane's that locating the IRST underneath the aircraft should have no adverse effect on its ability to identify and track aircraft that might be flying higher than the Super Hornet, and that at 10 miles (16 km) from the target aircraft it will provide unlimited visibility up to 60,000 ft (as high as any target would fly).

Further, officials claim that having a podded system has the advantage of not requiring invasive integration work with the host aircraft, and the pod is able to hold 330 US gallons (1,249 litres) of fuel so little in terms of range is lost.

The podded IRST is being developed under a USD135 million engineering, manufacturing, and development (EMD) contract awarded in 2011, and is currently planned to be deployed by 2017.

Further to the AN/ASG-34 podded IRST, the US Navy and Boeing are set to roll out a number of further enhancements for the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and EA-18G Growler platforms under the Flight Plan programme. These include advanced fused sensors, an improved AESA radar, counter-electronic attack, Distributed Targeting System, multi-sensor integration, anti-surface warfare, IP-based linked networks, and advanced air-to-ground and air-to-air precision weapons operating on an open architecture.

Beyond the Flight Plan improvements, Boeing is developing further enhancements that comprise a fully integrated IRST to be mounted under the aircraft's chin, 'shoulder-mounted' conformal fuel tanks, enclosed weapons pods, an Elbit Systems large area display (LAD) 'glass' cockpit and next-generation avionics, an internal missile and laser warning system, and new General Electric F-414-400 enhanced engines.

To date, neither the US Navy or the Royal Australian Air Force (the Super Hornet's and Growler's only two customers to date) have signed up for any of these options, and while previously Boeing officials have stated that the improved economy of the F-414-400 enhanced engines made that upgrade the best bet in the near-term, any plans for a fleet-wide rollout have been stalled by continued budgetary pressures.

However, speaking at the IQPC Fighter Conference in London in November, a senior US Navy official said that the service is looking closely at adopting the conformal tanks for the Growler. The advantage of these tanks for this aircraft, he said, is that their location on the upper wing-root means that they do not impede the sensors' downwards view in the same way that underslung drop tanks do.

While he did not provide a timeline as to when these tanks might be fitted to the US Navy's aircraft, he did say that the Growler is leading the way in the service's thinking for fitting these Boeing-developed enhancements.


Omnibus Spending Bill Includes Money for 15 Growlers, 12th San Antonio
Omnibus Spending Bill Includes Money for 15 Growlers, 12th San Antonio - USNI News

An EA-18G Growler from the “Shadowhawks” of Electronic Attack Squadron (VAQ) 141 prepares to make an arrested landing on the flight deck of the U.S. Navy’s forward-deployed aircraft carrier USS George Washington (CVN-73) in 2013 US Navy Photo

The $1.1 trillion omnibus spending bill from Congress includes $1.46 billion for 15 Boeing EA-18G Growler electronic attack aircraft and $1 billion to start work on a 12th San Antonio-class (LPD-17) amphibious warship, according to a summary of the bill released late Tuesday.
The compromise bill agreed to by House and Senate appropriators and expected to pass both chambers will extend Boeing’s Super Hornet — the airframe on which the Growler is based — production line into 2017, according to Reuters.

The Navy gave Congress an unfunded wish list that asked for 22 Growlers at a cost of $2.14 billion. With the extra airframes, the Navy intends to expand its EA-18G squadrons from five aircraft up to seven.

The bill also gave the service $1 billion to start procurement on a 12th San Antonio-class amphibious warship — about half the total cost of the ship. The Marine Corps has been lobbying Congress and the Navy for the additional ship it says will act as a bridge to the next generation LX(R) amphibious warship which will be based on the San Antonio-hull.

Line items in the bill also fully fund the planned procurement of the Ohio-class Replacement Program ballistic missile submarine, fully funds the Navy’s Unmanned Carrier-Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) research and development efforts — despite restrictions in the parallel authorization bill — and includes $843 million to begin the refueling and complex overhaul of carrier USS George Washington (CVN-73).

The total Department of Defense funding included in the bill was $554.2 billion.

 

[osama zafar]

i believed in the yanks in the world wars but now they are just hopeless.

 

[Bratva]

Albeit a old but nevertheless interesting news. What's your take on Nepotism and Corruption in US armed forces , is it rampant in Navy and airforce? From what I read , Corruption is more rampant in US Navy than in air force or army @SvenSvensonov @gambit

Navy aviator’s career soars; pilot he downed suffers

By Rowan Scarborough - The Washington Times - Thursday, February 23, 2012

When retired Air Force pilot Mike Ross learned this month that the Navyaviator who shot him down is on a nomination list for the rank of admiral, he had a visceral reaction.

“I almost got sick,” said Col. Ross, 56. “He ruined by life.”

All the horror and pain came rushing back when he read The Washington Times story about NavyCapt. Timothy W. Dorsey’s pending promotion to flag rank. The Pentagon sent his nomination to the Senate Armed Services Committee this month.

This tale of two officers began nearly 25 years ago. Col. Ross, an Air Forcecaptain at the time, was flying his RF-4C reconnaissance jet over the Mediterranean Sea in a NATO non-fire exercise.

He refueled with an Air National Guard aerial tanker and saw Lt. (j.g.)Dorsey’s F-14 Tomcat monitoring him.

“Nothing like cheating,” Capt. Ross recalled thinking after getting back to his squadron at Aviano Air Base, Italy. “This is supposed to be an exercise. You’re supposed to come find me - not sit on my tanker and then chase me for 15 minutes and then shoot me down.”

Back-breaking whiplash

As Capt. Ross approached the aircraft carrier USS Saratoga, Lt. Dorsey literally obeyed a radio command to fire, even though the exercise was planned to be purely simulated. He launched a Sidewinder missile, blowing the RF-4C out of the sky.

A Navy investigation found that Lt. Dorsey knew the RF-4C was friendly, saying his decision to fire was “deliberate” and “illogical.” The Navy banned him from flying, a punishment that at the time would seem to have ended the career of the Navy admiral’s son.

Capt. Ross and his back-seat weapons officer ejected just before the fireball would have killed them.

First the canopy flew off, subjecting Capt. Ross to a strong gravitational force that pushed up his body and exposed his head to a 500-knot wind. The rocket-powered ejection seat slammed beneath him, thrusting him from the cockpit.

The subsequent whiplash took a slow, excruciating toll.

Over the years, his spine degenerated, requiring painkillers and multiple surgeries. The ejection also dislocated his shoulders, broke his left hand and his left knee, and damaged an ankle.

Capt. Ross, who had no history of back problems until the shoot-down, continued his Air Force flying career.

But his degenerating spine worsened. He had his first major back surgery in 1992. Six more would follow as surgeons installed screws, plates and rods to keep a cracked and fragile spine functional.

“I’m not trying to say I flew when I was unable. I never did that,” Col. Rosssaid. “But it got to the point where I started getting myself in positions where I was doing more desk work than flying.”

He decided on a medical discharge in 1997 and retired as a lieutenant colonel.

“My body was breaking down,” he said. “I just couldn’t do it anymore.”

Since then, he has watched as several of his contemporaries, such as Gen. Norton Schwartz, the Air Force chief of staff, attained senior rank.

‘A deliberate act’

Col. Ross said his mentors, performance evaluations and duty assignments would have put him on track to brigadier general or higher. “I had a damned good shot,” he said.

“It’s very interesting that folks like [Lt. Dorsey] get admiral and folks like me who are on a similar track have something like that happen,” Col. Ross said.

He assumed the incident would have ended Lt. Dorsey’s naval career.

After all, the Navy investigative report said: “The September 22, 1987, destruction of USAF RF-4C was not the result of an accident, but the consequence of a deliberate act. His subsequent reaction [to the radio command] demonstrated an absolute disregard of the known facts and circumstances.

“He failed to utilize the decision-making process taught in replacement training and reacted in a purely mechanical manner. The performance ofLieutenant Timothy W. Dorsey on September 22, 1987, raises substantial doubt as to his capacity for good, sound judgment.”

Lt. Dorsey was not punished beyond the ban on flying, nor was he forced to resign.

Instead, he held support jobs and then switched to the Navy Reserve as an intelligence officer while he pursued a law degree. He now works for theNavy inspector general and is due to lead an intelligence unit in Norfolk, Va.

“It was an unfortunate incident that occurred when I was a rookie naval aviator,” he told the Virginian Pilot on Tuesday. “I regret that it occurred, but I have worked very hard over the years since that time.”

Last week, the nominee for admiral declined to be interviewed by The Washington Times.

“I’m going to have to decline to talk right now, based on the kind of job I’m going to be taking,” he said. “I’m not really big on talking to press for anything.

“It means heading up some intel factions. So it’s really not something I would typically do. … I [would] rather not see my name in the paper at all right now because of the job I’m getting ready to take. A lack of press is good on what I’m getting ready to do.”

Col. Ross, a Milton, Ga., resident, estimates he has spent well over $100,000 on medical bills, paid by depleting his savings. He lives on Air Force retirement benefits and Social Security disability checks.

In one of his dozens of surgeries, doctors three years ago performed an anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Surgeons “removed my guts” during the eight-hour operation to reach his spine, then put them back, he said.

In 2010, a flight surgeon who had begun treating him in 1991 wrote on his behalf to the Department of Veterans Affairs, which was reviewing his disability status.

“I would like to assure you that indeed his current medical problems and level of disability are unquestionably and completely attributable to his combat-related shoot down and the subsequent injuries he received in the following high-speed ejection,” wrote Lt. Col. Scott Phillips. “He can no longer walk more than a few yards without assistance.”

After being fished from the Mediterranean, Capt. Ross ended up on the Saratoga minutes after Lt. Dorsey landed his F-14.

“I’ve never heard from him,” Col. Ross said. “He didn’t come over and apologize on the boat or anything.”

Navy aviator's career soars; pilot he downed suffers - Washington Times

Landing on USS Enterprise (CVN 65) at night

 

[AMDR]

 

[AMDR]

Video: Raytheon Test-Fires New GPS-Guided Mortar for Marines
Video: Raytheon Test-Fires New GPS-Guided Mortar for Marines | Defense Tech
(Cilck on link above for video)

Raytheon recently test-fired a new GPS-guided 120mm mortar round at Yuma Proving Grounds, Ariz., demonstrating a precision-firing technology designed to help Marine Corps commanders in combat.

The Marine Corps program, called Precision Extended Range Mortar, or PERM, is aimed at developing and fielding precision-guided mortar rounds able to better pinpoint targets compared to existing mortar rounds.

The rounds are configured with a GPS antenna and an inertial measurement unit, or IMU, which tells the round how it is flying, said Raytheon program manager Ty Blanchard.

In a recent test-firing, three rounds landed within 10 meters or less of the desired target, Blanchard explained.

“Three of the GPS-guided rounds flew to the required range and hit within the required distance of their targets. One round was fired to the minimum range requirement and impacted just a few meters from an off-axis target,” Blanchard added.

The rounds were fired from a Marine Corps M327 120mm Rifled Towed Mortar. Raytheon and Israeli Military Industries are jointly developing PERM.

The idea with PERM rounds is to give a combat commander the ability to destroy an enemy target at longer ranges using fewer rounds. A typical mortar round travels about seven to eight kilometers. the PERM rounds can reach distances up to 16 kilometers, Blanchard added.

“It has an extended range so you don’t need as many mortar systems to cover a specific area. Also, it requires less personnel and fewer rounds. You don’t need to fire as many rounds to hit a target so that reduces your logistics train. The second and third order effects are massive,” Blanchard explained. “You can do a lot more pre-mission planning. There are a litany of advantages which give the commander so much more flexibility.

PERM rounds are engineered with small fins called canards designed to increase glide and extend the range of the weapon.

“We get lift from the canards so we are able to glide and reach longer ranges. We developed this round with Marine Corps funding and we will deliver 42 rounds to the Marine Corps next month,” Blanchard said.

The Marine Corps plans an upcoming shoot-off of GPS-guided mortar rounds between Raytheon and ATK, Blanchard said. The winning vendor will be awarded a procurement contract to deliver rounds to the Corps.

In the future, Raytheon plans to add semi-active laser guidance to its PERM round in order to increase the options provided to commanders.

While PERM is primarily being developed for the Marine Corps, the round is able to fire from an Army smooth-bore mortar tube as well as from a Corps rifle tube, Blanchard added.

 

[quang minh]

These wars--which ranged from the seventeenth-century’s King Philip’s War to the Wounded Knee massacre in 1890--were a result of several complex influences on the U.S. military, including America?s emerging imperialistic impulses, technological military advances, officers