US Navy, Canada Order 160 BQM-74E Target Drones / Pentagon Contract Announcement

US Navy, Canada Order 160 BQM-74E Target Drones / Pentagon Contract Announcement

(NSI News Source Info) January 26, 2009: Northrop Grumman Systems Corp., Integrated Systems Sector, San Diego, Calif., is being awarded a $49,088,731 modification to a previously awarded firm-fixed-price contract for the procurement of 160 BQM-74E Aerial Targets and associated technical data for the U.S. Navy (153) and the Government of Canada (7).

The BQM-74E is a subsonic, subscale, jet-powered aerial target capable of being air launched or surface launched (land or shipboard).

The BQM-74 Chukar is a series of aerial target drones produced by Northrop. The Chukar has gone through three major revisions, including the initial MQM-74A Chukar I, the MQM-74C Chukar II, and the BQM-74C Chukar III. They are recoverable, remote controlled, subsonic aerial target, capable of speeds up to Mach 0.86 and altitudes from 30 to 40,000 ft (10 to 12,000 m).

The BQM-74E supports Fleet training requirements for gunnery, surface-to-air and air-to-air missile exercises from fixed sites and during open-ocean and deployed remote site operations, both land and sea.

Work will be performed in San Diego, Calif. (31%); Walled Lake, Mich. (26%); Elmira, N.Y. (17%); Los Angeles, Calif. (12%); Palmdale, Calif. (9%); and Mandaree, N.D. (5%), and is expected to be completed in May 2011. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year.

This contract combines purchases for the U.S. Navy ($46,838,125; 96%) and the Government of Canada ($2,250,606; 4%) under the Foreign Military Sales Program. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Md., is the contracting activity (N00019-05-C-0040).

France Is Making It's Mark As A Major Arms Exporter

France Is Making It's Mark As A Major Arms Exporter (NSI News Source Info) January 26, 2009: France exported $8.28 billion worth of weapons last year, and hopes to increase that this year, even with the global recession. To this end, France is cutting a lot of the red tape and bureaucracy arms exporters have to put up with. France is keen on moving ahead of Britain, which has long exported more weapons. By virtue of a major aircraft sale to Saudi Arabia, Britain was the world's largest arms exporter in 2007, when they sold $19 billion worth of arms, passing the perennial leader, the United States. But over the past five years, the U.S. still has the lead, with $63 billion in sales. Britain was second, with $53 billion, and Russia third with $33 million. Russia exported $8 billion worth of weapons last year, about the same as the year before. There were hopes that sales might reach $10 billion in 2008, but that stalled because of problems with their two largest customers; India and China. These exports had been growing rapidly during the last few years. In 2004, Russian arms sales were $5.6 billion, and that went to $6 billion in 2005 and $7 billion in 2006. Russian arms sales have been rising sharply (they were only $4.3 billion in 2003), as the economies of their two biggest customers (India and China) grew larger. That, and the escalating price of oil (driven largely by increased demand from China and India), has sent international arms sales from $29 billion in 2003, to over $60 billion now. Oil rich countries, particularly those in the Persian Gulf, as eager to buy more weapons, with which to defend their assets. The United States and Russia are the largest exporters of weapons, together accounting for over 70 percent of world sales. Traditionally, the U.S. sold nearly three times as much as Russia, but lately that was getting closer to only twice as much. The reason is, more effort by the Russians to not just sell on price, but also on service and warranties. Most of the cost of a new weapon comes during the lifetime (often a decade or more) of use. In the past, Russia had a bad reputation for support, and lost a lot of those "after-market" sales. The U.S. was much better in that respect, but much more expensive. Now the Russians not only have the price advantage (often half, or less, the cost of equivalent American weapons), but an improving reputation for providing good service. The Russians are also selling more high tech, and expensive, warships. For many years, warplanes comprised about two thirds of Russian sales, but now, about half the sales were for warships. Russia has another advantage in that it is not shy about paying bribes. Britain achieved its large sales recently for the same reason, and attempts by British legal authorities to investigate bribery in Saudi Arabia was openly suppressed by the government (the Saudis threatened to take their business elsewhere, and cut off counter-terror cooperation otherwise.) Russia also has another problem with China. Over the last decade, about 40 percent of Russian arms exports went to China. That is now at risk, as Russian manufacturers feud with the Chinese over stolen technology. The Chinese have been quite brazen of late, as they copy Russian military equipment, and then produce their own versions without paying for the technology. Worse, the Chinese are now offering to export these copies. The Russians are trying to work out licensing deals with the Chinese, but are not finding much interest. The Chinese say their generals are angry over how Russia sells technology to potential Chinese enemies, like India. Recently, China signed a technology agreement with Russia, that is supposed to halt the Chinese patent piracy. We will see.

China Mastering Satellite Navigation Age

China Mastering Satellite Navigation Age

(NSI News Source Info) January 26, 2009: China has decided to expand its BeiDou satellite navigation system to cover the entire planet, like GPS, Galileo and Glonass. Think of the original BeiDou system as GPS light. That BeiDou (or BeiDou 1) only covered East Asia, and not even all of China. But it covers the areas along the coast, and Taiwan. The BeiDou 1 system is less accurate than GPS, slower, but it does allow two way traffic. This is useful for sending short messages (up to 120 Chinese characters so, about a hundred words). Sort of IM (Instant Messaging) class stuff. The system can only handle a few hundred thousand users, but that would be sufficient for the number of Chinese troops involved in any major operation. BeiDou 1 also suffered some reliability problems, and is apparently very vulnerable to jamming and spoofing. Because of all that, it was believed that BeiDou 1 was just a first generation system. A training system, one where China learns the ins and outs of building satellite navigation systems. China has confirmed that with the announcement that it plans to take its experience and build a world-wide "BeiDou 2" (or "Compass") system over the next six years. The success of the U.S. GPS satellite navigation system has generated all this competition. But so far, these other efforts have had rough going. A European consortium is going forward with its own version of GPS, called Galileo, despite growing costs and technical problems. Initially, Galileo was to be funded with private money. But the costs climbed beyond the most optimistic estimates of future income, so now Galileo will be paid for by tax dollars, as was GPS, and the competing Russian and Chinese systems. So far, only two Galileo satellites have been launched, simply for research, although the original plan called for all 30 satellites were to be in service by now, but the new goal is 2014 or so. Galileo will cost over $11 billion when completed, and the fifteen nations of the European Space Agency (ESA) have put in several hundred million dollars already. This however, is more than twice what the system was originally expected to cost. Galileo came about because the Europeans didn't like being dependent on an American system, and don't believe the Russians will be able to keep their GLONASS system viable. If Galileo becomes operational, the European nations will pay for it, but anyone can use it. Dual signal (GPS and Galileo) receivers won't cost much more (maybe 20 percent more) than GPS receivers do. Having two separate sets of signals makes for more reliable and accurate receivers. Also, the way Galileo is being set up, it will provide improved reliability in higher latitudes and in built up areas. Russia's answer to GPS, GLONASS, was at full strength (24 satellites) shortly after the Cold War ended (1995). But the end of the Cold War meant the end of the regular financing for GLONASS. Maintaining the system meant launching replacement satellites every 5-7 years. By the end of 2002, only seven GLONASS birds were still operational. However, the Russian economy recovered, and provided funds for a series of launches in 2003, that increased the number of active satellites to twelve, and that went to 18 by the end of 2007. Russia has twenty GLONASS satellites in orbit now, and plans to have the system fully operational by next year, and be a real competitor for GPS. The money for GLONASS is coming from a Russian government that does not want to be dependent on the American Department of Defense controlled GPS system. But the money is only there because of high oil prices. Most GLONASS receivers in use are actually combined GPS/GLONASS receivers. Russia will have to put billions of dollars into GLONASS over the next few years to get the system fully operational, and then spend even more money to maintain the satellite network. The Chinese Compass network plans to incorporate the best features of the GLONASS and Galileo systems, as well as items planned for the next generation GPS satellites. With all that, no one has found a way to make a buck off a network of navigation satellites. At least not directly. There are plenty of ideas, but no one has yet turned any of those ideas into cash. Moreover, there are problems between BeiDou, Galileo and Glonass, over who should use what frequencies first. Since GPS got into service first, no one is contesting the frequencies GPS uses. But the three other players have some problems.

US Navy Seeks Arms Bound For Hamas / Hunt For Iranian Ship Carrying 60 Tons Of Arms For Hamas

US Navy Seeks Arms Bound For Hamas / Hunt For Iranian Ship Carrying 60 Tons Of Arms For Hamas

(NSI News Source Info) January 26, 2009: An American naval taskforce in the Gulf of Aden has been ordered to hunt for suspicious Iranian arms ships heading for the Red Sea as Tehran seeks to re-equip Hamas, its Islamist ally in Gaza. According to US diplomatic sources, Combined Task Force 151, which is countering pirates in the Gulf of Aden, has been instructed to track Iranian arms shipments. Last week the USS San Antonio, an amphibious transport dockship that serves as the command and control centre for the taskforce, boarded the former Russian cargo vessel Monchegorsk, which is registered in Limassol and flying a Cypriot flag. The ship docked at an Egyptian Red Sea port for a detailed search during which, according to unconfirmed reports, weapons were found. The naval clampdown follows growing disillusion in Israel at the outcome of the 22-day war in Gaza. Although the incursion enjoyed overwhelming public backing, with 91% support at the time, opinion polls suggest that only half the electorate now believe that the military goals were achieved. With a general election due on February 10, conservative Israeli politicians have been scathing at the government’s failure to eliminate the threat from Hamas, the militant faction that seized control of Gaza in June 2007 and remains a proxy for Iran. A document circulated to ministers by Israeli military intelligence last week suggested that despite the bombardment, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard is well advanced with a huge programme of arms resupply for Gaza. According to the document, the Iranians are attempting to smuggle munitions from the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas, where the arms shipments are loaded onto commercial vessels. In recent weeks at least two Iranian destroyers have been sent to the Gulf of Aden on the pretext of fighting piracy. The Israelis suspect that the destroyers, which are currently in port in Aseb in Eritrea, may have had some role in the shipments. In January 2002, Israeli naval commandos stormed the Iranian cargo ship Karine A in the Red Sea. They found 50 tons of arms, long-range rockets and explosives being shipped to Yasser Arafat, then the Palestinian leader. Israeli defence sources believe the same route and methods are being used again. According to the sources, once in the Red Sea the cargo is taken on one of two routes. The first is to dock in Somalia and Sudan, where professional smugglers carry the cargo overland to Sinai. In Sinai, Bedouin specialists smuggle the shipment into Gaza through the notorious border tunnels. Despite intensive Israeli bombing, some tunnels remain open. Palestinian sources in Rafah, the Gaza Strip’s southern town, estimate that 100 tunnels are still in action, about 20% of the pre-war total. A second arms smuggling route into Gaza has also been used by Tehran, according to well briefed sources. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard has sent shipments through the Suez Canal into the Mediterranean to anchor off the Gaza coast, inside Egyptian territorial waters, where the Israeli navy is barred. After dark, Iranian frogmen transfer weapons in sealed containers to Palestinian fishing boats. This can prove dangerous as the Israeli navy may open fire without warning, but according to the sources it has worked well in the past. The intelligence report suggested that Iran plans to ship Fajr rockets with a 50-mile range to Gaza. This would bring Tel Aviv, its international airport and the Dimona nuclear reactor within reach for the first time. Tehran has also promised to rebuild Gaza. Last week Hamas announced that every home-owner whose house had been destroyed would receive €4,000 (£3,820). The families of those who died will receive €1,000 and the wounded will receive €500.

Indian Republic Day Parade Rehearsal

Indian Republic Day Parade Rehearsal

(NSI News Source Info) January 25, 2009: Indian paramilitary soldiers march during the final full dress rehearsal for the Indian Republic Day parade in New Delhi on January 23, 2009. India will celebrate its 60th Republic Day on January 26 with a large military parade.

U.S. Air Force Retaining B-52 Force For Foreseeable Future In Service Until At Least 2040

U.S. Air Force Retaining B-52 Force For Foreseeable Future In Service Until At Least 2040

(NSI News Source Info) January 25, 2009: The U.S. Air Force is going back to the future, by creating a new B-52 squadron, so that it will be possible to give all squadrons time to train for nuclear bombing missions. With a max takeoff weight of 240-250 tons, the BUFF (Big Ugly Fat Fellow) is basically a large aircraft designed to carry bombs cheaply and efficiently. Currently, the B-52 force is limited, by law, to 76 aircraft. The current four squadrons each have 14 bombers and 17 crews. The remaining aircraft are assigned to a training squadron, or idle while awaiting upgrades. Twenty B-52s will get electronic and mechanical upgrades that will make all 76 of equal capability. To obtain the aircraft for the fifth squadron, each unit will now have 13 aircraft and 15 crews. The active duty training squadron will become the fifth operational squadron, and the reserve training squadron will take over all the training duties it used to share with the active duty squadron. The Air Force intends to keep the B-52 in service until at least 2040, an unprecedented length of service for a military aircraft. B-52s are periodically refurbished at the USAF maintenance depots such as Tinker Air Force Base, Oklahoma. Boeing suggested re-engining the B-52H fleet with the Rolls-Royce RB211 534E-4. This would involve replacing the eight Pratt & Whitney TF33s (total thrust 8 × 17,000 lb) with four RB211s (total thrust 4 × 37,400lb). The RR engines will increase the range and payload of the fleet and reduce fuel consumption. However, the cost of the project would be significant. Procurement would cost approximately US$2.56 billion (US$36 million × 71 aircraft). A Government Accountability Office study of the proposal concluded that Boeing's estimated savings of US$4.7 billion would not be realized. They found that it would cost the Air Force US$1.3 billion over keeping the existing engines. This was subsequently disputed in a Defense Sciences Board report in 2003 and revised in 2004 that identified numerous errors in the prior evaluation of the Boeing proposal, and urged the Air Force to re-engine the aircraft without delay. Further, the DSB report stated the program would save substantial funds, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and increase aircraft range and endurance, duplicating the results of a Congressionally funded US$3M program office study conducted in 2003. The USAF continues to rely on the B-52 because it remains an effective and economical heavy bomber, particularly in the type of missions that have been conducted since the end of the Cold War, mainly against nations that have limited air defense capabilities. The B-52's capacity to "loiter" for extended periods over (or even well outside) the battlefield, while delivering precision standoff and direct fire munitions, has been a valuable asset in conflicts such as Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan. The B-52 is the cheapest, to operate, heavy bomber in the air force, and one of them can cover all of Afghanistan. B-52s are based on the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia when they are supporting operations in Iraq or Afghanistan. With five squadrons, there will be time available for squadrons to train each year for nuclear missions (using nuclear armed cruise missiles), while still covering overseas obligations. During the Afghanistan war in late 2001, ten B-52s dropped a third of the bomb tonnage. That's a remarkable record for a fifty-year-old aircraft design. The B-52 carried that much of the load because it's the most cost-effective heavy bomber we have. The B-52 has a lower accident rate than the B-1 and B-2. Compared to the supersonic B-1 and high-tech B-2, the B-52 is a flying truck. Thus the B-52, despite its age, was the cheapest, safest and most reliable way to deliver smart bombs over Afghanistan. Lacking the supersonic speed of the B-1, or the stealth and automation of the B-2, the B-52 can carry up to 150 tons of fuel, and normally carries 12-20 tons of bombs (max load of 35 tons). What made the B-52 so useful in the Afghanistan war is its ability to stay in the air for so long. The B-52s flying out of the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia to Afghanistan typically stayed in the air for some 16 hours. Since it can refuel in the air, the B-52 can fly anywhere in the world with a load of bombs or missiles. Over Afghanistan, carrying a dozen 2000-pound JDAM (GPS-guided bombs), or a larger number of smaller bombs, a B-52 could circle a combat area for hours, waiting for the special forces guys or Air Force controllers on the ground to send them the coordinates of a target. The JDAM landed (over 90 percent of the time) within 50 feet of the location the ground troopers wanted it. Better yet, most of the bombs arrived within ten minutes of the request. Surviving enemy troops admitted that they were demoralized once they realized how this was working. At that point, the enemy fighters knew that if they saw Americans looking at them with binoculars (that included a laser range finder, to provide the B-52 with precise location data for the target), they had ten minutes to run away, or die. And often the enemy troops didn't know they were being set up for a JDAM. No place was safe from the one ton JDAMs. If you ran into a cave, it had better have another exit, because the JDAM would permanently close the one you just entered. The B-52 can carry a large variety of weapons, including eight Harpoon anti-ship missiles and 20 cruise missiles. The B-52 has seen a lot of action in Vietnam, the Persian Gulf War, in the Balkans and over Afghanistan. The B-52 prototype first flew in 1952. The last one built, a B-52H, was in late 1962. It's a large aircraft, with a wingspan of 185 feet, a length of 159 feet and a height of 17.5 feet (to the top of the fuselage, 40.6 feet to the top of the tail). Empty weight is 86 tons. It has a crew of five (pilot, copilot, navigator, electronics warfare officer and radar navigator). There used to be a gunner for a rear-firing 20mm cannon, but this was eliminated in the 1990s. Automation can reduce this even more. The 1970s era B-1 has a crew of four, and the 1980s era B-2 has a crew of two. The only B-52s flying are the B-52H model, all built in the early 1960s. A true replacement for the B-52 was never built because no one foresaw the development of such accurate smart bombs, and the ability of the U. S. Air Force to destroy most anti-aircraft defenses. Indeed, even when faced with heavy defenses, the B-52 was able to fight its way through. During the twelve days of Linebacker II raids against North Vietnam in 1972, 15 B-52s were shot down by Soviet-built SAM-2 missiles. The 150 B-52s stationed in Guam flew 729 missions, for a loss rate of two percent. But because of the number of sorties flown, ten percent of the B-52s involved were brought down. Of the 92 airmen in the downed aircraft, 33 died. After Vietnam, the B-52s received several generations of new electronic warfare equipment, learning much from the experience during Linebacker II. But there never was enough money to keep the B-52 completely up to date, especially with the equipment needed to use some of the newer bombs. Some B-52s got their JDAM equipment just before the 2001 war in Afghanistan. And this was mainly because the upgrade was cheap - wiring from the weapons officer's station to the bombs so GPS location data could be changed in flight. The 50-year-old B-52 became the weapon of choice over Afghanistan, able to hang around for hours and drop one-ton JDAM bombs on demand. The B-52 was upgraded to use JDAM before the B-1B because the B-52 is more reliable. Currently, the Air Force has the capacity to shut down the high-altitude missiles systems of just about anyone, and then bring the B-52s in at high altitude to avoid low-altitude anti-aircraft guns and mobile antiaircraft missile systems. The B-1 and B-2 were built to deal with even more intense antiaircraft defenses. But with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, no one else has such a system. Perhaps, in the future, a nation like China may build another such formidable antiaircraft defense system. For the moment, because of the lack of first rate air defenses to stop it, the B-52 can still hack it in the combat zone, even delivering nuclear weapons.

South Korea Eventually Wants To Manage It's Own Affairs

South Korea Eventually Wants To Manage It's Own Affairs

(NSI News Source Info) January 25, 2009: South Korea is decreasing the amount of money it pays towards the costs of American troops being stationed in South Korea. Previously it contributed $790 million a year, but starting this year, that will be reduced to $692 million. There are currently about 28,000 American troops there, and it costs the United States nearly $4 billion a year to maintain that force in South Korea. A U.S. Marine uses his wireless telegraph set as a U.S. Marine helicopter readies to land during a combined arms live fire exercise at Rodriguez Range in Pocheon, north of Seoul, South Korea, Saturday, March 8, 2008. About 27,000 American troops, the USS Nimitz aircraft carrier, and an undisclosed number of South Korean soldiers were participating in the drills, dubbed Key Resolve and Foal Eagle, according to the U.S. and South Korean militaries.

American troops have been in South Korea for over 60 years, since the end of World War II in 1945. At the end of the Korean War, in 1953, there were over 350,000 U.S. troops in South Korea. Within a year, that shrank to 223,000, and by 1955 it was only 85,000. By the mid-60s it was 63,000. By the mid 70's there were only 42,000. There it stayed for over two decades. Then came the September 11, 2001 and the war on terror. U.S. troops were needed elsewhere. By 2004 the U.S. force in South Korea was down to 37,000. In 2006 that dropped to 30,000 and this year will go to 28,000. The troops are there to help protect South Korea from any other attack by North Korea (whose 1950 invasion led to a three year war, and a 56 year old ceasefire.) Babysitting a cranky North Korea has been seen in American's interests. As South Korea's economy has boomed, payments to defray the expense of U.S. troops was begun, in 1991, and have been increasing. The 1991 payment was $150 million. Such payments were first seen in Germany and Japan, where the U.S. urged those nations to help cover the cost of having American troops there to help defend them during the Cold War. Those payments continue, if only because the U.S. forces are also a major contributor to the local economy.

US Must Have An Edge On Fifth Generation Jet Fighters Over Russia, China, South Korea And India By Maintaining F-22 / Now The Pentagon Wants A Bailout

US Must Have An Edge On Fifth Generation Jet Fighters Over Russia, China, South Korea And India By Maintaining F-22 / Now The Pentagon Wants A Bailout F-22 Raptor Fighter Jet (NSI News Source Info) January 25, 2009: In Washington, you can judge whether a policy represents meaningful change by the strength and character of the opposition it generates. Entrenched interests often have big money invested in the status quo and almost always have allies in both political parties. Case in point: “The New York Times” ran an article on December 9 foreshadowing a looming fight for the new Obama administration over military spending and the F-22 Raptor fighter jet. The F-22 is a supersonic stealth fighter, which has been the crown jewel for the U.S. Air Force ever since it was first designed to fight the Soviets—about 30 years ago.The Lockheed Martin/Boeing F-22 Raptor is a fighter aircraft that uses stealth technology. It is primarily an air superiority fighter, but has multiple capabilities that include ground attack, electronic warfare, and signals intelligence roles. The United States Air Force considers the F-22 a critical component of the U.S. strike force, and states that the F-22 cannot be matched by any known or projected fighter aircraft. Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston, Chief of the Australian Defence Force, said in 2004 that the "F-22 will be the most outstanding fighter plane ever built." Faced with a protracted and costly development period, the aircraft was variously designated F-22 and F/A-22 during the three years before formally entering US Air Force service in December 2005, as the F-22A. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics is the prime contractor and is responsible for the majority of the airframe, weapon systems and final assembly of the F-22. Program partner Boeing Integrated Defense Systems provides the wings, aft fuselage, avionics integration, and all of the pilot and maintenance training systems.

The “Times” reported different views of supporters and opponents of the F-22, but framed the dispute as one of “creating jobs vs. cutting waste.” And therein lies the false choice. If the Pentagon now believes its mission is economic growth more than national defense, then the American people are only going to get more waste and less defense. In the case of the F-22, Air Force acquisition officials and defense contractors have shifted the rationale for why we need such an expensive Cold War plane to fight the war on terror. Now that the country stands in the shadow of a deep recession, the F-22’s justification has again morphed into a bread and butter issue. Meanwhile, the cost for the F-22 has soared to $350 million per unit, while contractors have failed to deliver on their promises and the number of planes we get for our money has plummeted. Lorelei Kelly, director of the Real Security Initiative at the White House Project, picked up on the trap that special interests are setting for the new administration and described it on The Huffington Post: Now that it [the Pentagon] has completely abandoned any desire to be strategically relevant, some parts of the defense industry are pitching themselves just as jobs providers. What we actually might need is beside the point. In other words, don’t be fooled. Whatever the popular justification of the day, the prime measure for success in the Pentagon is how much money you get from Congress. The F-22 is hardly a lone example of gross mismanagement at the Pentagon. A General Accounting Office report released last spring showed that 95 major weapons systems have run over cost to the tune of $295 billion. Bloated weapons systems are a trademark of every service branch, from the Marines’ V-22 Osprey to the Navy’s DDG-1000 Destroyer. The Pentagon has failed to complete an audit of its finances since the early 1990s and estimates that one will not be successfully conducted until 2016. In that time, the annual defense budget has climbed to its highest levels since World War II. As Winslow Wheeler notes in a report entitled “America’s Defense Meltdown,” published by the Center for Defense Information: …liberals, moderates and conservatives in the Pentagon, Congress, think tanks and the White House over time constructed an edifice that makes our forces smaller, older and less ready to fight, all at a dramatically increasing cost. And, we have done so with a system that, quite literally, does not know—or apparently care—what it is doing. After the American people just watched Congress appropriate $700 billion in Wall Street bailouts that vanished on the balance sheets of big banks without halting the recession, for a dysfunctional Pentagon to pretend it can save the economy is a scandal. Justifying more overblown weapons budgets in the name of job creation amounts to little more than a bailout for the Pentagon, which has a record of negligence to rival or even surpass Wall Street and the auto industry. But at least General Motors can tell you how much it costs to build a car. Vice Admiral Jack Shanahan (ret.) is the former commander of the U.S. Second Fleet and a member of the board of Senior Military Advisors of the Business Leaders for Sensible Priorities. Business Leaders for Sensible Priorities is working to increase funding for needed domestic programs by cutting wasteful spending at the Pentagon.

Highlight on Fifth Generation Jet Fighters

*Fifth Generation Jet Fighters - In service United States - Lockheed Martin / Boeing F-22 Raptor *Fifth Generation Jet Fighters - In development India - Medium Combat Aircraft (maiden flight expected in 2012) People's Republic of China - Shenyang J-XX (J-13 and J-14 expected in service in 2012) South Korea - KFX (maiden flight expected in 2014) Russia / India - Sukhoi PAK FA and Sukhoi/HAL FGFA (maiden flight expected in 2009) United States / United Kingdom / Italy / Netherlands / Canada / Turkey / Australia / Norway / Denmark - Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II (maiden flight achieved in 2006)

Highlight on Lockheed Martin/Boeing F-22 Raptor

Currently the cutting edge of fighter design, fifth-generation fighters are characterized by being designed from the start to operate in a network-centric combat environment, and to feature extremely low, all-aspect, multi-spectral signatures employing advanced materials and shaping techniques. They have multifunction AESA radars with high-bandwidth, low-probability of intercept (LPI) data transmission capabilities. IRST sensors are incorporated for air-to-air combat as well as for air-to-ground weapons delivery.

These sensors, along with advanced avionics, glass cockpits, helmet-mounted sights, and improved secure, jamming-resistant LPI datalinks are highly integrated to provide multi-platform, multi-sensor data fusion for vastly improved situational awareness while easing the pilot's workload. Avionics suites rely on extensive use of very high-speed integrated circuit (VHSIC) technology, common modules, and high-speed data buses.

Overall, the integration of all these elements is claimed to provide fifth-generation fighters with a "first-look, first-shot, first-kill capability".