February 17, 2009: Raytheon Co. said Monday it successfully completed the latest round of test launches for its newest precision-guided missile design.
The test, completed in Socorro, N.M., was a part of design testing for the Excalibur 1b missile. Waltham, Mass.-based Raytheon said the design uses fewer parts and simpler manufacturing than other precision-guided missiles, making them a more cost effective option.
Raytheon said the test projectiles were proven to be stable during flight and met the desired structural-integrity benchmarks.
The company started testing the Excalibur 1b, which is a modification of Raytheon’s Excalibur 1a missile, in July. Component testing is expected to continue through May..jpg)
Northrop Grumman completed builder's trials of the nation's newest and most advanced nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, USS George H. W. Bush (CVN 77), on Feb. 16, 2009. Photo by John Whalen, Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding.
Builder's sea trials provide an opportunity to test systems, components and compartments at sea for the first time. The trials also include high-speed runs and a demonstration of the carrier's other capabilities.
"The road to get CVN 77 to this point has been a long journey that started in January 2001 with the detailed design and construction contract," said Scott Stabler, Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding's vice president overseeing the project. "Since then, we've worked millions of man hours, installed more than eight and a half million feet of cable, updated more than 70 percent of the design, and brought 90,000 tons of steel to life. Seeing CVN 77 in action, doing what she was built to do, brings a great sense of pride and accomplishment. She's a credit to the shipbuilders from every part of the shipyard that made this possible."
"Builder's trials is a very exciting time for the crew of USS George H.W. Bush as it is the first time we take her to sea," said Capt. Kevin E. O'Flaherty, the aircraft carrier's commanding officer. "The success of sea trials wouldn't be possible without the hard work of the ship's crew working along side the shipbuilders to test and train on this complex and capable ship. I'm very impressed by the dedication of all."
USS George H. W. Bush sailors, shipbuilders from Northrop Grumman's Shipbuilding sector in Newport News, and the Navy's Supervisor of Shipbuilding and NAVSEA personnel worked side-by-side testing systems to ensure the warship can operate in defense of freedom around the world for the next 50 years. Also taking part in the sea trials were Adm. Kirkland H. Donald, director of Naval Nuclear Propulsion; Vice Adm. Kevin M. McCoy, commander, Naval Sea Systems Command; and Rear Admiral Michael McMahon, the Navy's program executive officer for aircraft carriers.
Following builder's trials, the ship will undergo acceptance trials, conducted by representatives of the U.S. Navy Board of Inspection and Survey, to test and evaluate the ship's systems and performance. Upon completion of acceptance trials, the ship will return to Naval Station Norfolk in Norfolk, Va.
Named after America's 41st president, USS George H. W. Bush is the 10th and final Nimitz-class aircraft carrier. Its keel was laid Sept. 6, 2003; it was christened Oct. 7, 2006 and commissioned Jan. 10, 2009. At 1,092 feet in length, USS George H. W. Bush is nearly as long as the Empire State Building is tall. Upon delivery to the Navy in the spring, it will weigh 97,000 tons and carry more than 80 combat aircraft. Its top speed will exceed 30 knots, and powered with two nuclear reactors, it will operate for more than 20 years without refueling.
Northrop Grumman Corporation is a leading global security company whose 120,000 employees provide innovative systems, products, and solutions in aerospace, electronics, information systems, shipbuilding and technical services to government and commercial customers worldwide. 
The vessels are manufactured by DCN and have a capacity of 16 M51 SLBM missiles manufactured by Aerospatiale (now EADS Astrium Space Transportation.)
The French Navy's goal is to operate a force of four SSBNs (as with the Royal Navy's Vanguard fleet), of which two are on patrol at any given time.
*Triomphant : Construction began on 9 June 1989; she was launched on 26 March 1994, and entered active service on 21 March 1997.
*Téméraire : Construction began on 18 December 1993; she was launched on 21 January 1998, and entered active service on 23 December 1999.
*Vigilant : Construction began in 1997; she was launched on 19 September 2003, and entered active service on 26 November 2004.
*Terrible : Construction began on 24 October 2000 was launched on 21 March 2008. She is expected to enter active service by 2010.
Sometime on Feb. 3 or 4, the British HMS Vanguard and France's Le Triomphant collided in the mid-Atlantic. The accident probably happened because the two submarines were not aware of each other. NATO operates a traffic control system that alerts allied nations to the deployment zones of friendly submarines. The system is designed to avoid collisions. But because France is not part of NATO's military command structure, it does not provide information on the location of its mobile nuclear arms to that system, according to Julian Ferguson, who commanded one of Britain's four V-class nuclear submarines until retiring in 2006.
"There is a system for operating areas that are reserved for American, British, Norwegian, Dutch and Canadian communities and if you want to go into someone's area of influence you tell them what you are doing. But if you are not in the NATO military structure you don't have to do that," says Ferguson.
The French Navy confirmed to TIME that it does not give the positions of its nuclear armed submarines to NATO forces: "France does not supply any information regarding the position of its nuclear arms or submarines carrying them, because France considers its nuclear arsenal the most vital element in its defense capabilities," says Jérome Erulin, spokesman for France's Navy. NATO sources told TIME that France is not alone in withholding information about nuclear-armed submarines — the Brits and Americans keep the location of their strategic deterrent secret too. In a prepared statement, a NATO spokesman said: "France uses the same procedures with regard to its submarine fleet as all other allies."
But Ferguson says the French are particularly secretive due to their position outside NATO's command structure. And past policy-level discussions suggest a concern over a lack of communication. In 1994, Britain and France discussed closer co-operation between their navies and a possible carve-up of deployment zones for their nuclear submarine patrols. It took until September 2000 for arrangements to be formalized in the U.K.-French Bilateral Defense Cooperation Agreement. That agreement called for port visits for British and French nuclear-armed submarines and regular exchanges on nuclear policy.
But it's unclear whether it included the exchange of information about nuclear armed submarine positioning, and many arms experts say it probably did not. "The fact that the collision occurred at all indicates that the two allies need to talk more," says Hans Kristensen, who monitors NATO's weapons for the federation of American scientists.
While the intersection of two sonar-equipped nuclear submarines in a vast ocean may seem an unlikely event even without communication, there are environmental anomalies in the Atlantic that make a collision more likely, according to Ferguson. Submarines on a deterrent mission, for instance, tend to congregate in places where they are unlikely to be found by other submarines and spy-planes. "There are oceanographic factors in which you can be on either side of an ocean front where the temperature is slightly different on your side than the others. Where the gulf stream comes across the Atlantic is a prime point of this. Sometimes these barriers can be quite hard — no sound penetrates at all. And if your business is hiding than you would hide in that vicinity. There is an added risk that given the environmental factors maybe you don't hear another submarine in time to do something about it."
The multiple, city-destroying warheads on the French and British submarines are not at risk of detonation from collision, Ferguson said. But had a nuclear reactor been damaged on either boat, it could have poisoned the crew and spread radioactive waste for miles across the Atlantic.
If in fact the collision could have been prevented by better communication between France and NATO, the revelation comes at a politically sensitive time: France is set to re-join NATO's military infrastructure in April. Its secrecy policy on the location of its nuclear-armed subs could come under fire before then, especially as the French say they will not budge on the issue. Explains Erulin of the French Navy: "Because this is so essential to France's strategic defense interests, this is something that will be maintained even after French is fully reintegrated into NATO's military command structure."
U.S. sold more than $200 billion worth of aircraft, missiles and space-related equipment in 2007. And $80 billion worth of autos and auto parts. Deere & Co., best known for its bright green and yellow tractors, sold $16.5 billion worth of farming equipment last year, much of it to the rest of the world.
Even before the recession, plants were hemorrhaging work to foreign competitors with cheap labor. And some companies were moving production overseas.
But manufacturing in the United States isn't dead or even dying. It's moving upscale, following the biggest profits, and becoming more efficient, just like Henry Ford did when he created the assembly line to make the Model T.
The U.S. by far remains the world's leading manufacturer by value of goods produced. It hit a record $1.6 trillion in 2007 -- nearly double the $811 billion in 1987. For every $1 of value produced in China's factories, America generates $2.50.
So what's made in the USA these days?
The U.S. sold more than $200 billion worth of aircraft, missiles and space-related equipment in 2007. And $80 billion worth of autos and auto parts. Deere & Co., best known for its bright green and yellow tractors, sold $16.5 billion worth of farming equipment last year, much of it to the rest of the world. Then there's energy products like gas turbines for power plants made by General Electric, computer chips from Intel and fighter jets from Lockheed Martin. Household names like GE, General Motors, IBM, Boeing, Hewlett-Packard are among the largest manufacturers by revenue.
Several trends have emerged over the decades:
-- America makes things that other countries can't. Today, "Made in USA" is more likely to be stamped on heavy equipment or the circuits that go inside other products than the TVs, toys, clothes and other items found on store shelves.
-- U.S. companies have shifted toward high-end manufacturing as the production of low-value goods moves overseas. This has resulted in lower prices for shoppers and higher profits for companies.
-- When demand slumps, all types of manufacturing jobs are lost. Some higher-end jobs -- but not all -- return with good times. Workers who make goods more cheaply produced overseas suffer.
Once this recession runs its course, surviving manufacturers will emerge more efficient and profitable, economists say. More valuable products will be made using fewer people. Products will be made where labor and other costs are cheaper. And manufacturers will focus on the most lucrative products.
Aircraft maker Boeing announced last month it was cutting about 10,000 jobs. At the same time, workers are streamlining the wing assembly for the 737, the company's best-selling commercial plane, said Richard McCabe, a wing line mechanic for 10 years and former Machinists union shop steward.
He and his co-workers at the factory in suburban Renton, Wash., were asked about 3 1/2 years ago to figure out how to switch from building wings in massive stationary jigs mounted vertically, "the way things have been done here forever," to "one-piece flow," assembling them horizontally on a moving line similar to automobiles. The new process is set to begin by the end of the year.
"I won't go to the wing. The wing will come to me," McCabe said. "It's going to save them millions in scrap and rework."
McCabe said there was a lot of initial resistance on the shop floor, but Boeing's increased outsourcing -- including wing production for the new 787 to Japan -- helped change workers' minds.
"I told the guys, it's development or die," McCabe said. "If we can get this done, it assures us the future."
About 12.7 million Americans, or 8 percent of the labor force, still held manufacturing jobs as of last month. Fifty years ago, 14.6 million people, or 28 percent of all workers, toiled in factories. The numbers -- though painful to those who lost jobs -- show how companies are making more with less.
Still, the perception of decline is likely to grow as factories and jobs vanish, and imports rise for most goods we buy at stores.
Thirty years ago, U.S. producers made 80 percent of what the country consumed, according to the Manufacturers Alliance/MAPI, an industry trade group. Now it's around 65 percent.
American factories still provide much of the processed food that Americans buy, everything from frozen fish sticks to cans of beer. And U.S. companies make a considerable share of the personal hygiene products like soap and shampoo, cleaning supplies, and prescription drugs that are sold in pharmacies. But many other consumer goods now come from overseas.
In the 1960s, America made 98 percent of its shoes. It now imports more than 90 percent of its footwear. The iconic red Radio Flyer wagons for kids are now made in China. Even Apple Inc.'s iPod comes in box that says it was made in China but "designed in California."
"Some people lament the loss of manufacturing jobs we could have had making iPods. So what?" said Dan Ikenson, associate director of the Center for Trade Policy Studies at the libertarian-leaning Cato Institute. "The imports of iPods support U.S. jobs," including engineers, marketers and advertisers.
Some U.S.-made products are hiding in plain sight.
Berner International Corp., based outside Pittsburgh, doesn't make the clothes, dishes or sponges sold at Wal-Mart, but its products hang above shoppers' heads as soon they come through the sliding doors.
The company's 60 employees make air curtains -- rectangular blowers mounted to the ceiling that keep out hot or chilly air, insects and dust while keeping in A/C and heat. Also called air doors, they hang from ceilings at Wal-Marts, Whole Foods, and Starbucks, and above the big factory doors at Ford and Toyota car plants.
Chief executive Georgia Berner keeps her company in the United States because she relies on her staff's deep knowledge of air blowers, which are custom made for clients using metal plates, fans, motors and electronic parts assembled at the company's 60,000-square-foot factory. Each box requires specific voltages and sizing, she says.
"I have a crew here (with) much of the product knowledge in (their) heads," she said.
To deal with the recession, her production manager is making the factory more efficient by move shelves of parts closer to workers.
She's also banking on a new line of air curtains for fast food drive through windows, noting that fast food demand is on the rise while other restaurants decline.
Other companies saddled with high labor costs -- sometimes called legacy costs that insured workers high wages, pensions and handsome benefits -- can struggle to survive.
In the early 1980s, the U.S. steel industry faced such pressure. Today, it's the auto industry, which is pressuring its unions to agree to deep reductions in pay and generous benefits. In fact, it's a condition of the $17.4 billion in emergency loans from the government to keep the industry in business.
But other American manufacturers -- and workers -- have adapted.
Judy Horkman, 47, of Manitowoc, Wis., was devastated when she was laid off after 13 years of attaching handles to saute pans on the Mirro Cookware plant assembly line. But two years ago, Horkman took a job making industrial light fixtures for office buildings and warehouses at Orion Energy Systems Inc. She makes $12.50 per hour -- not quite the $13.80 she earned at Mirro, but Horkman says she is fine with that.
Horkman said she takes tremendous pride in her work. When she assembled cookware she imagined that she would personally use the final product. When she switched to making lighting, she was driven by the same Golden Rule.
"Regardless of my product I'd put my heart into it. I put my hard work, my dedication, my quality into whatever I make," she said. "I just imagine someone out there really needs this, and I think about how good I'd want it to be if it was for me."
Associated Press writers Tim Klass in Seattle, Dinesh Ramde in Milwaukee and David Brinkerhoff in New York contributed to this report.
need to avoid treading on each others’ toes. A week ago, US President Barack Obama told a Washington press conference that his administration was “looking at areas where we can have constructive dialogue” with Iran. A day later Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad responded, telling crowds celebrating the 30th anniversary of the Iranian revolution: “Our nation is ready to hold talks based on mutual respect and in a fair atmosphere.”
Since President Obama travelled by train to his inauguration, he could do worse than bone up on the Trans-Iranian railway story before honing his Tehran pitch for its story remains central to the Iranian psyche. When the first Pahlavi Shah, Reza Khan, came to power in a British-facilitated military coup in 1921, he set out to modernise Iran. The Trans-Iranian railway was his premier project. London had long sought to prevent its construction, viewing it as a potential threat to the sacrosanct passage to India.
Construction of the 1,400 kilometre line lasted 12 years from 1927. It is a spectacular feat of engineering and it climbs 1,200 metres from the Persian Gulf to reach Tehran, before descending to the Caspian Sea.
Britain refused to recognise Iranian neutrality during the second World War and Anglo-Soviet forces invaded Iran in 1941. They deposed the Shah and seized control of the railway. With US assistance from 1942 onwards, the Trans-Iranian railway became a major Soviet supply route. Winston Churchill called it “The Bridge to Victory”.
The allies installed the Shah’s 22-year-old son, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, in 1941. He would never really shake his foreign puppet image. As the Norwegian sociologist and father of peace research, Johan Galtung, remarked: “The US promoted an Iranian middle class to produce an Iranian version of America, while the Soviet Union invested in Iranian heavy industry in the hopes of creating a proletariat. They got Ayatollahs instead.”
Iranians understandably feel that foreign powers tend to deny Iran access to the technologies it needs. The popular view of Iran’s nuclear programme slots neatly into this view as do the sanctions which have crippled the country’s petrochemical industry.
This is the context into which Obama’s initiative must step. In today’s metamorphosing Islamic Republic of Iran, everything must be viewed through three intermingling prisms – the Islamic, the nationalist, and the national. Elsewhere in the Muslim world, in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, around the Gulf, in Afghanistan, Pakistan and right across to Lebanon, Shi’ites are often second class citizens. Iran is the world’s only Shia state, and its achievements carry that extra emotional charge of Shia success.
Iranians are proud nationalists, even xenophobes, particularly towards Sunni Arabs. Iranian populist bluster about Israel, a country 1,500 kilometres away, is often at least as much a commentary on Arab failures as it is on Zionism. Iran has genuine security concerns, an unstable Iraq with significant US forces to its west. A crumbling Afghanistan and a troubled nuclear-armed Pakistan to its east. Along its northern borders lie the still-solidifying central Asian republics of the former Soviet Union. In this context, the acquisition of nuclear weapons holds a certain attraction.
Iran’s nuclear programme started under the Shah with US, Canadian and European, particularly French, equipment and training for those who are today its senior nuclear scientists and engineers. The programme mirrors the 2003 analysis from the US comedian Bill Hicks: “You know we armed Iraq. How do you know that? Uh, well . . . we looked at the receipts.”
It seems likely that Iran is working towards a Japanese situation where it would have the capacity to quickly assemble a nuclear weapon, even if it refrains from actually doing so. In October 2007 a US National Intelligence Estimate concluded that Iran did not have an active nuclear weapons programme.
Some commentators and think-tanks, largely those who advocated the stunning success of the Iraq war and the breathtaking efficiency of deregulated financial institutions, continue to regurgitate George Bush’s Axis of Evil mantra warning about Iran.
In this scenario a nuclear-armed Iran would create global instability and threaten the survival of Israel. Iran is also the root cause of Syrian intransigence, Hizbollah’s Lebanese success, and Hamas’s military capacities. Jacques Chirac put the Iranian nuclear threat in context when he said in a 2007 interview with the New York Times: “Having one or perhaps a second bomb a little later, well, that’s not very dangerous. Where will it drop it, this bomb? On Israel? It would not have gone 200 metres into the atmosphere before Tehran would be razed.”
An Iranian nuke hardly alters the global balance on a planet with over 20,000 nuclear warheads. Syrian demands to recuperate its territory, as more or less agreed in its discreet Turkish-brokered talks with Israel, are generated in Damascus, not Tehran. Hizbollah is a political force because it represents Lebanon’s oft mistreated Shia minority.
Iran is an important regional power. Over two thirds of its 72 million citizens had yet to be born when the Ayatollahs swept into power in 1979. The ebbing power of that Shia clergy could offer real opportunities for equitable engagement. Tehran and Washington have a common interest in a Iraqi and Afghan stability. The Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States of America are unlikely to launch into a passionate tango. But If they can avoid empty threats, bluster and condescension they should be able manage a coy minuet. That’s a diplomatic dance from which we would all benefit.
"State arms and materiel orders will be fulfilled in the volumes planned in the budget," said Lyubov Kudelina.
Kudelina said the Defense Ministry would transfer 65 billion rubles ($1.9 billion), to producers by the end of this week. She also said the ministry would transfer 35% of military contract payments in the first quarter of 2009.
The government is to disburse a total of 1.3 trillion rubles ($37 billion) to defense contractors this year.
The state arms production budget for 2009-11 has been approved at 4 trillion rubles ($115 billion).
Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said last week that Russia's major aircraft maker, MiG Corp., would receive 11 billion rubles ($308 million) in the first quarter of the year as part of a 17.3 billion-ruble ($485 million) state defense contract.
He also said the company had losses of some 11 billion rubles in 2008, and announced that he had signed a resolution allocating a further 15 billion rubles ($417 million) in federal budget funds to the corporation.
Last year, MiG, along with other "strategic" companies, was promised funding through the government's anti-crisis package, specifically firm production orders from the Russian Air Force. 
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, left, welcomes Bolivian President Evo Morales, right, during their meeting in the Kremlin, Moscow, Monday, Feb. 16, 2009. Morales is in Russia on an official visit.
Morales and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed a declaration emphasizing their similar positions on global issues and opposition to U.S. policies including the decades-old embargo against Cuba, plans for a missile shield in Europe and NATO expansion.
Morales praised the resurgence of Russian attention to Latin America, where Medvedev has courted Soviet-era allies and others in a bid to increase Moscow's influence and further its economic interests. He met with Morales in November during a regional tour that included Venezuela, Brazil, Peru and Cuba.
"Russia's return to the region is very important," Morales said at a joint news conference.
Medvedev said Russia's activities in Latin America are not aimed at undermining the U.S.
But plans to provide Bolivia with helicopters follow disputes with Washington over anti-narcotics efforts that badly strained Bolivia's ties with the Bush administration.
Morales expelled the U.S. ambassador in September and suspended operations of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, which he accused of spying. Before leaving for Moscow, he said he would discuss the immediate purchase of helicopters and loans of other aircraft to fight production of coca, the main ingredient in cocaine.
Medvedev and Morales oversaw the signing of agreements calling for cooperation in the arms trade and anti-narcotics efforts. Medvedev indicated Russia expects to reach a deal to provide helicopters soon.
"We hope that implementation of the first large contract, for the supply of Russian helicopters to Bolivia, will begin in the very near future," Medvedev said.
Medvedev did not say how many helicopters Moscow might provide, but Russia's top arms sales official, Mikhail Dmitriyev, suggested that it would be fewer than 20.
Dmitriyev said Venezuela is also interested in other Russian weapons, and that Russia might loan Bolivia money to buy the helicopters and other arms, the state-run RIA-Novosti and ITAR-Tass news agencies reported.
Medvedev stressed the importance of energy cooperation and said Russia's gas monopoly, OAO Gazprom, has signed memorandums to establish a "strategic project" for long-term involvement in Bolivia.
"We are talking about the Russian side helping our friends from Bolivia in the development of hydrocarbons and the construction of a gas transport system on the territory of Bolivia," Medvedev said. 
announced that a contingent of Netherlands Defence officials are visiting Thales Bendigo this week to review production progress under their country’s existing Bushmaster contract. 
An Israeli official (R) shows a corner shotgun to Indian soldiers during the "Aero India 2009" at Yelahanka air force station on the outskirts of the southern Indian city of Bangalore February 12, 2009. The 7th Aero India, organised by the ministry of defence, showcases the latest in the field of military and civil aircrafts. The show runs from February 11 to 15.
The Israeli pavilion even screened a bhangra pop number shot in Hindi-film style to attract Indian buyers. Israel's Rafael Advanced Defence Systems put up big screens showing Israeli artists wearing lehanga-choli and dancing to bhangra beats.
An Indian defence ministry official told IANS: "Last year, an Indian delegation led by Defence Secretary Vijay Singh had gone to Israel for talks to bolster the strategic ties between the two countries. And this year Israel has got one of the biggest pavilions at the Aero India. This signifies that the ties between the two countries will strengthen in the years to come." India is Israel's biggest customer for weapons and has a longstanding relationship with Tel Aviv despite geopolitical sensitivities and allegations of kickbacks in defence deals.
Since the 1999 Kargil conflict India has bought military hardware and software from Israel worth around $8 billion. General Deepak Kapoor, accompanied by two top army officers, spent considerable time at the pavilion set up by the Israeli heavy munitions and missiles manufacturing industry. Kapoor checked out Israel's Rafael Advanced Defence Systems, especially its short range and medium range missiles on simulators. He "blew up" an enemy tank using the short range "Spike" missile.
Kapoor also visited the pavilion set up by the Elbit system. The system specialises in the manufacture of defence airborne systems, unmanned vehicles and combat vehicle systems. In 2004, India ordered three Phalcon Airborne Early Warning radar systems from Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), fitted on Russian-built Ilyushin II-76 aircraft.
Israel has also sold IAI Malat-built Searcher MkII and IAI Heron unmanned aerial vehicles to the Indian Air Force. The IAI recently upgraded 32 Hind Mi-24 helicopters for the Indian Army. Currently, Rafael is a major company vying for a $10-billion contract for the supply of 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft to the Indian Air Force.
In 2008, Rafael won the Indian order for low-level quick reaction missile system (LLQRM), which was competing with the mobile SPYDER (Surface-to-air Python and Derby) short-range air defence system. The company is now competing for India's quick reaction missile (QRM) and medium range surface-to-air missile (MRSAM) order with the SPYDER-SR (short-range) and SPYDER-MR (medium-range) missile systems.
meant for the Chinese J-10 fighter, which entered service two years ago. But the Chinese Air Force was not satisfied with the reliability or performance of the WS10A, and have ordered another hundred AL31Fs from Russia, in order to continue building J-10s.
China has long copied foreign technology, not always successfully. But in the last decade, China has poured much money into developing a jet engine manufacturing capability. The Chinese have encountered many of the same problems the Russians ran into when developing their engine design and construction skills. Russia has yet to match the quality of Western engines, but has been closing the gap more quickly since the end of the Cold War, which made it possible for Western suppliers to provide Russian manufacturers with the best components and manufacturing technology.
China only publicly announced the J-10s status in January, 2007. What was not mentioned in the press releases was that only one J-10 squadron was stationed where it might encounter Taiwanese F-16s or Mirage jet fighters. That squadron is sitting at a base just out of range (560 kilometers) of the F-16s and Mirages. The Taiwanese believe that their pilots are much better trained than their Chinese counterparts. Moreover, the word out of China is that the J-10 is a maintenance nightmare, and that the Chinese are having a hard time keeping the aircraft operational in reasonable numbers.
The J-10 is the first modern jet fighter designed and built in China. The aircraft is an attempt to create a modern fighter-bomber that could compete with foreign designs. The experiment was not completely successful. Work on the J-10 began over twenty years ago, in an attempt to develop an aircraft that could compete with the Russian MiG-29s and Su-27s, and the American F-16. But the first prototype did not fly until 1998. There were problems, and it wasn't until 2000 that the basic design flaws were fixed. By 2002, nine prototypes had been built, and flight testing was going forward to find, and fix, hundreds of smaller problems. It was a great learning experience for Chinese engineers, but it was becoming apparent that the J10 was not going to be competitive with the Su-27s/30s China was buying from Russia.
The J-10 looks something like the American F-16, and weighs about the same (19 tons). Like the F-16, and unlike the Su-27, the J-10 has only one engine. Originally, the J-10 used a Russian AL-31FN engine, but China has been working for a decade to manufacture their own version of this, the WS10A. The WS10A is something of an acid test for them, as it is a powerful military engine, and a complex piece of work. Russia refused to license China to produce the AL-31FN, so the Chinese stole as much of the technology as they could and designed the WS10A. This engine has been tested, and officially approved for production, but apparently still has quality control and performance problems.
It's no accident that the J-10 resembles the F-16, because Israel apparently sold them technology for the Israeli Lavi jet fighter. Israel abandoned the Lavi project, because of the high cost and availability of cheaper alternatives (buying F-16s and F-15s from the United States.) But the Lavi was meant to be a super F-16, and incorporated a lot of design ideas from the F-16 (which the Israelis were very familiar with, as they used them, and had developed new components for them.)
nces eastern Algeria.
ed war is now being increasingly exposed.
The first squadron of the indigenously developed Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) named Tejas will be deployed down south in Tamil Nadu, when the first batch of the 20 fighter aircrafts are expected to be inducted by the Indian Air Force (IAF) in 2009-2010.
This will give IAF pilots an additional stage of training. Currently, Stage I is carried out on a basic trainer, the HPT-32; Stage II on slightly faster and more complex aircraft like the Kiran; and Stage III on the jet-engined, but sub-sonic Hawk AJT. The induction of an LCA trainer will allow IAF pilots to fly a supersonic, light fighter before graduating to the combat squadrons.
Most advanced western air forces do not conduct four stages of training; instead, they rely extensively on aircraft simulators. But the IAF, like some other air forces, has tended to prefer live flying. To benefit from such a demand, South Korea has built and is marketing a supersonic trainer called the T-50 Golden Eagle. Natarjan declared at Aero India 2009 that the Tejas trainer would compete effectively with the Golden Eagle.
Ashok Nayak, Managing Director of HAL’s Bangalore Complex and the company’s next chief, explains that the Tejas assembly line will be busy until 2014, producing the IAF’s first order of 20 Tejas aircraft, which will include 16 single-seater fighters and 4 twin-seater trainers. Then, while the Tejas is reengineered and flight-tested with a new, more powerful engine, the assembly line will produce 12 more trainers.
For HAL, the new order is a relief, as it will keep the Tejas assembly line rolling. Nayak points out: “It is not in the interest of the Air Force, or of HAL, to have a break in production.”
Business Standard travelled to HAL for an exclusive look at the new Tejas trainer. From the outside, there is little to distinguish it from the single-seater fighter that performed aerobatics at the just-concluded Aero India 2009 show. A closer look, however, reveals an expanded cockpit, in which two pilots — an instructor and a trainee — sit one behind the other, both equipped with all the controls needed to fly the aircraft.
The design team for the twin-seater Tejas trainer was led by two women engineers — Poongothai, and Mamatha K — of HAL’s Aircraft Research and Development Centre. They pointed out that the additional pilot’s seat and controls have all been squeezed into the existing airframe, obviating the need for time-consuming redesign of the single-seater Tejas’ airframe.
The Boeing EA-18G Growler is a carrier-based electronic warfare version of the two-seat F/A-18F Super Hornet. It began production in 2007 and is slated for fleet deployment in 2009. The EA-18G will replace the US Navy's EA-6B Prowler.
The EA-18G Maintenance Trainer (EAMT) is a set of three devices used to train Navy maintenance technicians to support the EA-18G's unique systems, primarily the AEA avionics. The majority of these avionics are installed on a pallet in the gun bay and in two wingtip pods.
"With the Growler aircraft scheduled to become operational in 2009, Boeing's timely delivery of the maintenance trainer is crucial to keeping our warfighters and their aircraft safe," said Mark McGraw, vice president for Training Systems and Services, a division of Boeing Integrated Defense Systems Global Services and Support.
Two of the three EAMT devices are mockups of aircraft hardware: One represents the gun bay and pallet, and the other a wingtip pod. The mockups are used to support training on installation and removal procedures.
The third device in the set, the Visual Environment Maintenance Trainer, consists of a fully replicated cockpit, an instructor/operator station, and two touch-screen displays that provide graphical representations of the aircraft and support equipment. The student interacts with the trainer via the cockpit and displays to test and troubleshoot. The trainer simulates a variety of maintenance situations and provides realistic feedback to students' actions. 
nt and future threats from the EA-18G aircraft as the target platform. Under the contract, Raytheon will use its unique combination of multi-beam jamming techniques and antenna array technology to investigate the effectiveness of alternative next-generation jamming solutions. (Photo/Image of EA-18G aircraft).
"Effective airborne electronic attack requires electromagnetic spectrum dominance in the air and on the ground," said Roy Azevedo, deputy vice president for Raytheon's Tactical Airborne Systems mission area. "This study will provide a vital foundation for the development of a more robust open-architecture jammer with greater spectral precision, power, reactive speed and directivity. The expected improvements in availability and lower life-cycle costs will ensure a viable future capability for naval electronic warfare."
Work on the study is being done by the company's Space and Airborne Systems business at its Tactical Airborne Systems facility in Goleta, Calif.
Raytheon Space and Airborne Systems is a leading provider of sensor systems giving military forces the most accurate and timely actionable information available for the network-centric battlefield. With 2008 revenues of $4.4 billion and 12,000 employees, SAS is headquartered in El Segundo, Calif. Besides Goleta, other facilities are in Forest, Miss.; Dallas, McKinney and Plano, Texas; and several international locations.
Raytheon Company, with 2008 sales of $23.2 billion, is a technology and innovation leader specializing in defense, homeland security and other government markets throughout the world. With a history of innovation spanning 87 years, Raytheon provides state-of-the-art electronics, mission systems integration and other capabilities in the areas of sensing; effects; and command, control, communications and intelligence systems, as well as a broad range of mission support services. With headquarters in Waltham, Mass., Raytheon employs 73,000 people worldwide.+APC+%233.jpg)
+APC+%232.jpg)
The Namer (Tiger) heavy armored personnel carrier is a mayor element of the IDF modernization plan. The latest design of the Namer is based on the Merkava Mk.4 main battle tank chassis. Currently it is one of the most protected APCs in the world. It provides infantry with the level of protection and mobility matching those of the latest main battle tanks. A first batch of production vehicles was delivered in 2008. Israel plans to acquire few hundreds of these heavy armored personnel carriers.
Golani soldiers used their veteran Achzarit APCs during most of the offensive in the Gaza Strip, but during the final days of the operation, they also brought some of the new vehicles into battle to test their capabilities. The new APC served as a forward command position for the Golani commander. Some crews received rushed training in order to use the vehicle in Gaza. The IDF has ordered about 130 such vehicles, at a cost of $3 million each, and there are plans to acquire as many as 800.
Three Hawk Advanced Jet Trainer aircraft fly past during the induction ceremony at Bidar Air Force Station some 150 Kms from Hyderabad. Indian Defence Minister A.K. Antony inducted the British-built Advanced Jet Trainer (AJT) Hawk as a training aircraft for Indian Air-Force fighter pilots.
The IAF, through a $1.75-billion contract signed in March 2004, is receiving 66 Hawk Mk 132 advanced jet trainers. Of these, BAE Systems has supplied 24 in direct supply mode, while the remaining 42 are being assembled from semi knocked down and completely knocked down kits — progressively using indigenous components — at Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), Bangalore. HAL is contracted to assemble all the 42 Hawks by 2011. The aircraft entered service at Air Force Station Bidar, Karnataka, in February 2008.Apprehensions
In January 2008, the IAF prevailed upon the government to allow it go in for a further batch of 57 Hawks, with 17 of them being for the Navy. But the IAF now appears to have apprehensions over the follow-on order. The aircraft in the follow-on order were to have been indigenously assembled by HAL, with product and technical support from the OEM.
Highly placed sources told The Hindu that the slow pace of deliveries from HAL, tardy product support from BAE Systems and poor serviceability had led to the IAF’s rethink.
The IAF which had to pull out all stops before BAE Systems rectified a number of technical and spares-related issues especially on the initial batch of Hawks, is also worried over the price being quoted by HAL for the follow-on order. HAL officials said the company had indicated the prices taking into effect inputs on spares, technical help and product support from OEMs BAE Systems and Rolls Royce (for the engine).
Refusing to comment on the price issue, a spokesperson for BAE Systems said that all the pricing details had been provided to HAL. Commenting on problems over spares for the direct supply of Hawks, he said BAE Systems had “delivered all the spares that had been contracted for.”
The IAF would like HAL to indigenously develop an AJT, a natural follow on to the Intermediate Jet Trainer that is being built.
At Aero India 2009 here, M. Natarajan, Scientific Adviser to the Defence Minister, also announced the development of a lead-in-fighter-trainer quite similar to South Korea’s T-50 Golden Eagle. He told The Hindu that the trainer which will be a derivative of the Light Combat Aircraft Tejas would be far superior to the Hawk and could be flying in five to six years.
The Hawks allow trainee pilots to make the transition from flying sub sonic to super sonic aircraft and are being used by the IAF for its fighter training programme. 
U.S. AND NATO SUPPLIES, NO LONGER VIABLE ROUTE VIA PAKISTAN: Soldiers of Pakistan's paramilitary force guard a newly built bridge to lead a trailer truck with U.S. and NATO supplies into Pakistani tribal area of Khyber neighboring Afghanistan on Friday, Feb. 6, 2009. A suicide car bomber blew himself up in the troubled Khyber tribal region after tribal police signaled him to halt during a routine check, government official said. The bridge was destroyed by militants Tuesday.
Foreign Ministry officials could not be reached for comment late Saturday, and the reports did not say whether the supplies would transit Russia by land or air. However, Russia announced last week that it would allow U.S. shipments of non-lethal military supplies to Afghanistan.
Supply routes to Afghanistan for the U.S.-led international military operation have become an increasingly critical issue in recent months amid growing militant attacks on the land routes through Pakistan that carry about 75 percent of U.S. supplies.
The U.S. plans to send around 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan this year.
Concerns rose further this month when Kyrgyzstan's president announced that the Central Asian country intends to evict a U.S. military base that is an important transit point for Afghanistan-bound troops and supplies. The base also is home to tanker planes that refuel military aircraft over Afghanistan.
The planned closure — which still must be approved by the Kyrgyz parliament — was announced shortly after Russia announced an aid package totaling more than US$2 billion for the impoverished country. The timing led to wide speculation that the aid and the base closure were linked.
Russian officials have denied any linkage, but the Kremlin is clearly uncomfortable with a U.S. military presence in the ex-Soviet republic that it regards as part of its traditional sphere of influence.
But Russia recently has shown renewed willingness to help the international forces fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan. Russia also has responded favorably to President Barack Obama's go-slow approach on a proposed U.S. missile shield in Europe and recent signs of U.S. accord with Moscow.
After agreeing this month to the transit of non-lethal U.S. supplies to Afghanistan, Lavrov raised the prospect that Russia could also agree to allow the transshipment of U.S. armaments — presumably in exchange for U.S. concessions such as backing off from support for NATO membership for Georgia and Ukraine and from the proposals to put elements of a missile-defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic.
Iran's Defense Minister Brigadier General Mostafa Mohammad Najjar, left, visits the 2000-pound "smart" bomb at the production line for manufacturing the Iran-made bomb in Tehran, Iran. "We will use these (bombs) against our enemies when the time comes," Defense Minister Mostafa Mohammad Najjar said on state TV. The guided bomb, named Qased or Messenger, can be deployed aboard Iran's aging U.S.-made F-4 and F-5 fighter jets. Najjar made the comment as he unveiled the mass production line of the weapon in the capital, Tehran. "We will use this weapon where we want to ... hit (our) enemy's strategic and defense targets" Najjar said. Pictures of Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, left, and Iran's late leader Ayatollah Khomeini, right, are seen in background.
Najjar is scheduled to travel to Moscow on Monday to discuss military and technical cooperation and review implementation of agreements inked by the two countries, according to Iran's defense ministry.
He is also slated to pay a visit to Russian defense industries.
In December, Deputy Director of the Russian Federal Organization for Military and Technical Cooperation Alexander Foumin said that his country intended to expand joint cooperation with Iran, which would have a positive impact on stability in the Middle East region.
Such a cooperation has raised concerns about the rising military capabilities of Iran, as the Western observers has elaborated.
However, earlier this month, Iranian ambassador to Russia Seyed Mahmoud Reza Sajjadi played down such concerns.
"Probably, there will be some changes, but generally the scale of this cooperation is not that large as (the media) allege," Sajjadi told a news conference in Moscow, adding that "We think that Iran-Russia military-technical cooperation is slightly exaggerated." 
n Sunday the 20th anniversary of the Soviet troops' withdrawal from Afghanistan.
On February 15, 1989, the last Soviet troops left Afghanistan, nine years after they swept into the country.
Ceremonies will be held all across Russia to lay flowers at the tombs of Soviet soldiers and officers who died in the Afghan war.
The war in Afghanistan was a nine-year conflict involving Soviet forces supporting the Marxist PDPA (People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan) government against the largely Islamic fundamentalist Mujahideen insurgents.
It began on December 25, 1979 and over 14,000 Soviet troops died in the conflict, over a million Afghan civilians are reported to have been killed in the war.
The war had a profound impact on the Soviet Union, and has been cited as one of the key factors in the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. 
The Collins class submarines are the current class of submarines serving in the Royal Australian Navy (RAN). The class is made up of six vessels: Collins, Farncomb, Waller, Dechaineux, Sheean, and Rankin; all six are based at HMAS Stirling in Western Australia. They were built by the Australian Submarine Corporation at Osborne, South Australia. Entering service from 1996, the class replaced the Oberon class submarines previously operated by the RAN.
This comes amid a severe breakdown of goodwill between the Government and Defence chiefs over the impact of cutbacks to perks the officers enjoy, including limousines and valet services.
Navy chiefs lobbied for a fourth destroyer, but the global economic meltdown has seen that idea killed.It also means Adelaide's highly skilled defence-technology and ship-building industries face an uncertain time because the fourth ship was expected to form a bridge of work to the next big contract, the replacement vessels for the Adelaide-built Collins-Class submarines. It is understood that the existing Air Warfare Destroyer contract to build three destroyers at Osborne will not be affected.
Mothballing the submarines may involve placing the boats in dry-dock and redeploying the crews to other duties.
This would come at serious cost to the nation's maritime defences.
Shelving or delaying the fourth destroyer flies in the face of widespread strategic advice and recent comments by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd that Australia faces a growing threat in the region.
"There has been an arms race under way, or an arms build-up, let me put it in those terms, across the Asia-Pacific region for the better part of the last decade," Mr Rudd told the RSL's national conference last September.
"What I'm saying is that when I look at the Australian navy, we need to make sure that we have enough capability there to deal with future challenges."
Proposed cuts to senior officers' perks have sparked what Defence insiders have dubbed "the battle of the butler".
The Advertiser has been told many senior officers are angry about losing taxpayer-funded butlers, valets, batmen, housekeepers, cooks, drivers, first-class travel entitlements (reduced to business class), spouse travel and access to the RAAF's luxury VIP aircraft.
Some senior officers have threatened to resign if the Government proceeds with the cuts.
The White Paper is still with the Defence Department, but will be taken to Cabinet's National Security Committee next month for approval before a late-April release.
The document includes a new and more realistic funding model for spending based on a "defence oriented index".
The White Paper includes major savings proposals such as extending the life of three guided-missile frigates and keeping the air force's F/A-18 Hornet fighters flying longer.
Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon told The Advertiser yesterday he would not pre-empt the White Paper nor would he confirm or deny any initiatives.
"I am determined that we deliver value for taxpayers' money and that our people on the frontline have all the capability, protection and training they need," he said. "The Defence leadership has been co-operating and is working with me to achieve these objectives."
Top brass will keep generous household and travel allowances and other benefits such as free rent and health care as well as annual salary packages ranging from $344,000 to $428,000.
The cuts are part of a massive efficiency drive under the White Paper and the millions of dollars saved will be redirected to the "sharp" end of defence.
Mr Fitzgibbon instructed the White Paper team, led by ambitious Defence toe-cutter Mike Pezzullo, to ensure the efficiency gains would be felt by everyone in Defence, including top brass.
"He wanted prominent and visible signs that the senior people were making changes," a source told The Advertiser.
There are about 150 "star"-ranked officers in the Australian Defence Force who will be affected by the cuts.
In some cases the loss of car and driver will reach down to colonel level, but those most affected are the chiefs of the navy, army and air force who occupy taxpayer-funded historic houses.
Vice-Admiral Russ Crane, Lieutenant General Ken Gillespie and Air Marshal Mark Binskin will all lose their cook, housekeeper and butler/valet as well as their limousine and driver.
Defence Chief Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston keeps most of his entitlements for security and entertainment purposes, but even he will be travelling in business class from now on without his wife.
In future, spouse travel will be allowed only with ministerial approval.
ACM Houston had his first taste of the new order recently when he was denied access to the air force's VIP jet.
He travelled to Hawaii for a high-level meeting in star class on budget airline Jetstar.
Other senior officers have had low-priority, but expensive, travel plans cancelled at the last minute.
 |
