USAF to Train on New F-35 Before Year's End

The U.S. Air Force will begin training on new fifth-generation F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) aircraft before the end of the year, the program's top official said.

The U.S. Air Force will begin training on new F-35 Joint Strike Fighters at Eglin Air Force Base before year's end, according to the program's top official. (Senior Aiman Julianne Showalter / U.S. Air Force)

The 33rd Fighter Wing at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla., will take delivery of 20 F-35A-model conventional take-off variant aircraft with Block 1 training software after a brief informal operational evaluation so that instructor pilots can begin their training, said Vice Adm. Dave Venlet, the new JSF program executive officer.

"We're going to put them in the hands of the fleet and the Air Force is going to be operating [Conventional take-off and landing aircraft] in training at Eglin before the year ends," Venlet told a luncheon hosted by the National Aeronautic Association.
However, because it is unusual for an aircraft to be delivered to line pilots before formal operational testing is complete, Venlet said that the program will conduct an abbreviated informal test prior to handing over the new fighters.
"It's not a full operational test, it doesn't resolve any measures of effectiveness," he said.
However, it will provide an independent evaluation to the services as to how well the new fighter performs in the real world.
"It will inform [Air Education and Training Command]," Venlet said, referring to the Air Force's training arm.
Other than the "operational assessment" of the Air Force F-35 version, Venlet said he hopes to complete sea-trials with the Marine Corps' vertical-landing F-35B model in the fall. That variant has made 30 vertical landings this year, which is good progress towards taking the plane out to sea, he said.
Additionally, the F-35C version for the U.S. Navy's carrier fleet will complete "static structural tests" this year to verify the strength of its airframe. Carrier-borne aircraft require especially robust structures to withstand the stress of arrested landings onboard a ship.
One area where there is a problem is the aircraft's helmet-mounted display, Venlet said. While the helmet is safe to fly, and test pilots fly with the equipment everyday, the images are jittery, he explained. However, the problem is especially pronounced with the night-vision system, Venlet said. The F-35 uses a revolutionary apparatus called the Distributed Aperture System where images from six infrared cameras mounted around the aircraft's fuselage are displayed in the pilot's visor.
Because pilots have to train with the helmet-mounted display, the program is looking at short-term alternatives. One alternative could be to display the imagery on the aircraft's head-down flat-panel displays, Venlet said. Early training flights could use night-vision goggle similar to current aircraft, he added. However, those are not satisfactory solutions long-term, Venlet said. "We're not giving up on the requirement," he declared.
Venlet also said that developmental testing is now slated to end in the first quarter of fiscal year 2016 when flight sciences testing of the A-model and C-model jets, along with the mission systems testing for the variants, will be complete. The F-35B, which has an especially challenging flight envelope to clear due to its unique vertical-landing capability, will lag behind until the fourth quarter of that year. The formal operational testing plan is being reviewed, Venlet said, in order to better integrate it with the flight test plan.
Overall, the Air Force requirement is holding steady at 1763 jets while the Navy and Marine Corps are still planning on buying 680 planes, Venlet said.

Ten Ships in U.S. Navy's Budget Request

Few surprises were evident in the U.S. Navy's 2012 budget request made public Feb. 14. Overall spending remains nearly the same in fiscal 2012 as the previous year, although the service is asking for modest increases in the number of ships and aircraft.
The Department of the Navy, which includes the Navy and Marine Corps, is asking for $161 billion in its baseline budget request, plus another $15 billion for war funding. The baseline request is $800 million over the 2011 request, while the department asked for $3.5 billion more in 2011 war funding.

The 2012 request asks for $45.8 billion in procurement spending, down from $46.6 billion a year ago. The Navy wants $46.6 billion in personnel costs, up from $45.1 billion in 2011; $47.9 billion in operations and maintenance as against $46.2 billion last year; $18 billion in research and development compared with $17.7 billion in 2011; and $3.1 billion in infrastructure costs, down from $5 billion.
Two ships were added to the 2012 request compared with plans a year ago. As announced in late December, an extra Littoral Combat Ship is being requested in 2012, for a total of four ships. An additional mobile landing platform (MLP) ship is now in the 2012 request, a change from the previous plan to buy the three ships in alternate years beginning in 2011. The new scheme to procure the ships in consecutive years allows shipbuilder National Steel and Shipbuilding in San Diego, Calif., to take advantage of efficiencies by accomplishing more work at once.
Two more Virginia-class SSN 774 nuclear attack submarines, an Arleigh Burke-class DDG 51 destroyer, a San Antonio-class LPD 17 amphibious ship, and a joint high-speed vessel (JHSV) round out the 2012 shipbuilding request.
An additional JHSV is being requested for the U.S. Army, for a total of 11 ships in the Pentagon's shipbuilding program.
Aircraft procurement showed a number of changes, many due to Defense Secretary Robert Gates' decision announced Jan. 6 to restructure the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program, pushing back procurement of the F-35B vertical or short take-off or landing (VSTOL) version for the Marine Corps.
That decision, which put the F-35B on a two-year "probation" period, included slashing the 2011 request from 13 aircraft to three.
For 2012, the Navy reduced its previously planned buy of 14 F-35Bs to just six - the minimum, Gates said, to maintain the Lockheed Martin production line.
Across the next six years, the Navy reduced its total F-35B buy from 115 aircraft to 50, and reduced the number of F-35C carrier-based JSF variants from 74 to 72.
To compensate, the number of Boeing F/A-18 E and F Super Hornet strike fighters was increased from 1 aircraft in 2012 to 28. The total number of Es and Fs to be purchased over the next three years jumped from 26 to 67.
The procurement of EA-18G Growler electronic countermeasures aircraft from Boeing remains the same, but the buy was split, moving from 24 planned for 2012 to 12 in 2012 and another dozen in 2013.
Planned buys of the new Boeing P-8A maritime patrol aircraft also rose slightly, to 11 for 2012, up from 9, and a total of 92 aircraft through 2016, up from a previously planned 85.
Overall buys of the new T-6 joint training aircraft from Raytheon fell, from 78 aircraft over the next two years to 60.
Planned purchases of the MQ-8B Fire Scout unmanned helicopter from Northrop Grumman, however, jumped in 2012 from three to 12, and rose over the next five years from 31 to 57 aircraft.
Weapons procurement saw a number of changes, with production of the SM-2 Standard surface-to-air (SAM) missile from Raytheon coming to an end - 239 missiles eliminated through 2016 - and buys of the new SM-6 SAM dropping, from 717 missiles through 2016 to 659.
Major gains, however, were found in the AGM-114 Hellfire missile from Boeing and Lockheed Martin, jumping in 2012 from 281 to 421, and the Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System from BAE Systems, jumping 60 percent in 2012 and more than 70 percent through 2016.
Research and development expenditures for the new Ohio-class ballistic missile replacement program are ramping up, from $672 million in 2011 to $1.07 billion in 2012. Work on the new Unmanned Carrier-Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) drone - the operational successor to the Northrop Grumman's X-47B concept demonstrator that first flew Feb. 4 - is also set to begin, with a request for $121 million in 2012.
Ship and aircraft maintenance funding is taking a hit in 2012. Last year's request sought to fund 99 percent of projected ship maintenance, 100 percent for deployed aircraft squadrons and 97 percent for non-deployed squadrons. The 2012 request will fund only 94 percent of total ship and aviation depot maintenance.
The Navy plans to lower its personnel end strength in 2012 by 3,000, for a force of 325,700 uniformed personnel. Reserve strength is to be reduced over the next three years from today's 66,200 to 63,300 in 2014.
Marine Corps end strength will remain at just over 202,000 through 2014, when a reduction of 15,000 will begin if forces are able to leave Afghanistan.

Few Details Released On '12 USAF Procurement

A White House overview of the 2012 defense budget request included a few details about Air Force weapons.
Proposed spending for the Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) satellites is $975 million, while the total for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program is $9.7 billion. Cyber security was budgeted for $2.3 billion, of which the nascent U.S. Cyber Command received $119 million.

The budget request also provides money to sustain the Air Force's arsenal of Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missiles through 2030, so the bomber force can continue to fly for the "indefinite future."
The Air Force, however, loses two air operations centers in the United States and two in Europe. That money is being plowed back into more urgent priorities.

Proposed U.S. DoD Budget: $670.6B

The Pentagon has proposed a $670.6 billion operating budget for fiscal year 2012, which is more than $38 billion less than it asked Congress for last year, according to federal spending documents released this morning.

The DoD request includes a $553 billion base budget and a $117.6 billion overseas contingency operations portion that would go directly toward the war in Afghanistan. (U.S. Air Force)

The request includes a $553 billion base budget and a $117.6 billion overseas contingency operations portion that would go directly toward fighting in Afghanistan, according to an overview of the proposal posted Feb. 14 on the White House Office of Management and Budget website.

As Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced in January, the budget proposal shifts $100 billion of expected savings over the next five years to "high-priority areas such as the development or purchase of unmanned intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance assets; more ships; a new ground combat vehicle; the Advanced Extremely High Frequency satellite; and the stealthy F-35 Joint Strike Fighter," the document said.
The budget proposal includes $113 billion for procurement; $75.3 billion for research, development, test and evaluation (RDT&E); $204.4 billion for operations and maintenance' $13.1 billion for military construction' $142.8 billion for personnel; $1.7 billion for family housing; and $2.7 billion in revolving management funds.
DoD's 2010 budget, which included two war supplemental spending bills, totaled about $693 billion. For 2011, the Pentagon proposed a $708 billion budget, including war funding, but Congress has yet to pass an appropriations measure. Instead, DoD has been operating on a continuing resolution, which is set to expire the first week of March.
The Pentagon's 2012 RDT&E request is about $800 million less than the still-looming 2011 request. Procurements accounts rose slightly over 2011.
This documents released by the White House this morning did not include a service-by-service breakdown.
As previously announced in January, the 2012 request recommends terminating several programs that are "experiencing significant development problems, unsustainable cost growth, or are not suited for today's security challenges," according to the documents. The list includes the Marine Corps Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle, the procurement of the Army Surface Launched Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile air defense system and the Navy's SM-2 Block IIIB surface-to-air missile.
"The capabilities that were to be provided by these niche systems will be largely met through the modernization and upgrade of existing systems at a fraction of the cost," the document said. "The total cost savings that will be realized from these terminations will exceed $13 billion."

Thales Issues 2010 Profit Warning

PARIS - French systems company Thales issued Feb. 14 a profit warning on its 2010 preliminary financial results, which are expected to show an operating loss of nearly 100 million euros ($135 million), due to provisions of more than 700 million euros for program overruns.
"EBIT (earnings before interest and tax) should be close to -100 million euros, due to additional charges and provisions exceeding 700 million euros booked on the contracts and activities mentioned below," according to a company statement.

The fresh provisions come on top of the 500 million euros of charges booked for 2009, making a total of 1.2 billion euros over the two years.
Thales set a target of 5 percent operating profit margin for 2011, rising to 6 percent in 2012. That compared to a net loss of 128 million euros in 2009, and a sharply lower operating profit of 151 million euros from 877 million euros in the previous year.
From 2005 to 2008, Thales's operating profit margin was between 5 and 7 percent, which included a capitalization of a significant amount of its research and development (R&D) spending, senior vice president Patrice Durand.
The present financial reporting excludes R&D from the profit line.
The 700 million euros of provisions included Thales' work on the Meltem Turkish maritime patrol aircraft program, the flight management system (FMS) for the A400M military airlifter, a ticketing contract for Denmark, and the Lorads III air traffic management contract for Singapore, Thales executive chairman Luc Vigneron told journalists.
The provisions were in part made possible by an agreement in principle with the Turkish government reached in September on the Meltem program, which gave Thales a "clear vision of the remaining costs," Vigneron said.
Thales is also in contract negotiations with Airbus in which the systems company hopes to get extra funding for its work on the flight management system for the A400M, Vigneron said. If Thales succeeds in the commercial negotiations, that might allow a claw back of some of the provisions on the A400M. Thales also supplies avionics and cockpit equipment on the A400M.
Vigneron declined to break down the provisions allotted to each of the programs. "This is commercially sensitive information," he said.
Thales engineers had worked intensively last year to clarify the work that needed to be done to deliver the Airbus A400M FMS to specification, he said.
"These recent developments significantly enhance the visibility on the execution conditions of these contracts and allow to remove the main operational uncertainties and better assess the estimates of their cost at completion and associated risks," the company said.
The detailed program analyses led Thales to take a "more prudent vision than we had before," Vigneron said. The programs were ones which dated before 2009 when Vigneron was made executive chairman of the company.
Thales has cut jobs in Australia, Britain and Spain as part of its reorganization, Vigneron said. The figures on the job losses were undisclosed for the time being, and come on top of an announced plan to cut 1,500 posts in France.
Sales for 2010 were forecast to rise two percent to 13.1 billion euros, due mainly to favorable foreign exchange effects, while orders worth 13.1 billion euros were booked, slightly down from 13.93 billion in 2009. Restructuring charges for 2011 were estimated at 1.5 percent of sales, while those for 2012 were forecast at 1 percent.
Net cash for 2010 stood at 191 million euros, up from a negative figure of 91 million a year ago. Free cash flow totaled 271 million euros in 2010.
Vigneron maintain the target for the Probasis restructuring program which was expected to yield 1.3 billion euros of cost cuts by 2014. Cuts in general overheads were ahead of target but the savings from tighter program management, dubbed "non-quality costs," were slower in coming, he said.

U.S. Will Not Field MEADS

The United States can no longer afford to purchase and field the trinational Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS), according to the Pentagon.

The United States cannot afford to increase funding for the design and development phase as requested by the NATO MEADS Management Agency, according to a Pentagon fact sheet on the program. (Lockheed Martin)

Links

• 
  

DoD has decided to continue the design and development (D&D) phase of the program under the current memorandum of understanding, but after schedule and cost overruns, the United States can no longer afford to fund production of the system, according to a Feb. 11 Pentagon fact sheet on the program.

Managed by NATO, MEADS is being developed for the United States, Italy and Germany. Lockheed Martin leads MEADS International, the industry team developing the system for the three countries.
The United States cannot afford to increase funding for the D&D phase as requested by the NATO MEADS Management Agency, the fact sheet said. Instead, it will provide up to the cost ceiling established in the current memorandum of understanding ($4 billion in 2004 dollars).
Since its conception in the mid-1990s, MEADS has suffered from a number of technical and management problems that have led to delays and cost growth.
MEADS was originally slated for production in 2007. When the countries signed an agreement for the D&D phase in 2004, production was moved to 2014.
This fall, the three countries had to consider whether to approve a restructuring proposal by the NATO MEADS Management Agency, which called for extending design and development by 30 months from the original 110-month program established in 2004. This extension would require at least $974 million of additional U.S. funding. The Pentagon's Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation Office put the figure at $1.16 billion, according to the Pentagon.
Currently, the U.S. funds 58 percent of MEADS, Germany 25 percent and Italy 17 percent.
Under this new plan, U.S. production would not begin until 2018.

Three Options Considered

Due to these changes, the Pentagon considered three options: terminating the program immediately, continuing development within the 2004 funding limits, or adopting the NATO MEADS Management Agency's plan and providing the additional funding.
The Pentagon has selected option two, saying "terminating the program now, just after successful completion of the MEADS Critical Design Review, would force the nations to devote significant funding to contractor termination costs instead of using this funding to bring MEADS development to a viable level of maturity."
With the remaining funding, the Pentagon proposes focusing the remaining activities on a "proof of concept" effort "that will provide a meaningful capability for Germany and Italy and a possible future option for the United States."
MEADS was designed to replace the Patriot systems in the United States and Germany and the Nike Hercules system in Italy. The proof-of-concept D&D program would end by 2014, when the current memorandum of understanding expires.
The Pentagon says this is the best option because it allows the countries to harvest the technologies.
To complete the D&D phase of the program under the 2004 cost limits, the United States will pay roughly $804 million between 2011 and 2013.
"This work would place the D&D program on stable footing should Germany and Italy wish to continue a MEADS development and production effort after the current funding is expended," the Pentagon says. "The same options would be available to the U.S. if its air defense plans should change."
However, the United States cannot afford to both purchase MEADS and make "required" upgrades to Patriot over the next two decades, the Pentagon says.
The Pentagon has already spent $1.5 billion on MEADS. In addition to the $974 million required by the NATO MEADS Management Agency, the Pentagon estimates another $800 million would be needed for U.S.-unique test and evaluation activities.

'Accept Some Risk'

Because of the schedule delays, the United States would not be able to replace Patriot with MEADS when originally envisioned. This means funds would have to be spent on Patriot modernization and MEADS purchases simultaneously, something the Pentagon cannot afford in the "current DoD budget environment," the fact sheet says.
"The U.S. is willing to accept some risk in our air defense portfolio in the near term, not just in MEADS, but in other major acquisition programs (for example, the [Joint Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensor], which has been scaled back, and [the Surface-Launched Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile], which has been canceled) in order to increase investments in new capabilities that our soldiers can use today to counter threats in Forward Operating Bases in Afghanistan, such as capabilities to Counter Rockets, Artillery and Mortars (C-RAM)," the Pentagon fact sheet says.
The Pentagon maintains that the United States can achieve some of MEADS' promised capabilities through its existing missile defense systems.
Until now, the Pentagon's main reason for continuing with the program has been its unique opportunity for trans-Atlantic joint development.
In the DoD fact sheet, the Pentagon says that international cooperative programs are just one way that Europe and the United States can interact in the defense industry arena. They are becoming "increasingly less statistically relevant as trade continues to open on both sides of the Atlantic and global supply chains become more robust," it said.

Iran names attacked scientist nuclear chief-report

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (2nd R) and Defense Minister Ahmad Vahidi (R) applaud as they look at a Safir-Fajr rocket engine, which is designed and made by an Iranian scientist, during a ceremony at a conference centre in northern Tehran February 7, 2011. – Reuters Photo

TEHRAN: An Iranian nuclear scientist who survived an assassination attempt last November has been appointed Iran’s new nuclear chief, the semi-official Fars news agency reported on Sunday.
Fereydoun Abbasi-Davani was slightly wounded by one of two bomb attacks on Nov. 29. The other attack killed another nuclear scientist. Tehran said the double-bombing was an Israeli operation aimed at harming its nuclear programme.
Abbasi-Davani, head of physics at Imam Hossein University, has been personally subjected to UN sanctions because of what western officials said was his involvement in suspected nuclear weapons research.
“President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, in a decree issued on Sunday, appointed Fereydoun Abbasi-Davani as vice-president and head of the Atomic Energy Organisation,” Fars said.
The position as one of Ahmadinejad’s deputies comes as part of the job and reflects the importance of the role in the Islamic Republic where the pursuit of nuclear technology is seen as a totem of resistance against the United States and Israel.
Tehran denies it is seeking nuclear weapons and asserts it has a right to peaceful atomic power. But international concerns about its activities have led to four rounds of UN sanctions and tougher unilateral measures from Washington and Europe.
Abbasi-Davani replaces Ali Akbar Salehi who was made foreign minister in December.
The last talks between Iran and the United States, France, Germany, China, Russia and Britain stalled, leaving the possibility of fresh sanctions.