-Caveat Lector-   <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">
</A> -Cui Bono?-

WJPBR Email News List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Peace at any cost is a prelude to war!


000257.  C-17s deliver a brigade in 30 minutes or less

by Danita L. Hunter
Air Mobility Command Public Affairs

SCOTT AIR FORCE BASE, Ill. (AFPN) -- Air Mobility Command C-17s will soon be
able to airdrop a brigade of troops and equipment within 30 minutes, meeting
the Army's goal for how long the airdrop should take.

The requirement, called Strategic Brigade Airdrop, is currently met by a mix
of AMC's C-141 and C-17 fleets, but will be accomplished solely by the C-17
fleet when the C-141 is retired.  The following three initiatives will allow
this to happen:  reduce the spacing between aircraft during personnel
airdrops, install a dual-row airdrop capability, and install new equipment
that will allow the aircraft to fly in tighter formations during inclement
weather.

An Army brigade, which contains about 3,250 troops and 3,450 tons of
equipment, is airdropped and airlanded in two phases.  During the first
phase of the SBA, the aircraft must be able to drop roughly 2,500 troops and
1,350 tons of equipment within a limited amount of time.  During the second
phase of the operation, the remaining 750 troops and 2,100 tons of equipment
are delivered to a landing zone.

Had none of the initiatives currently underway taken place, it would take a
C-17 SBA formation about 25 minutes longer than the Army's requirement for
the airdrop portion.

"As soon as we realized that we wouldn't be able to meet the Army's
requirement, AMC started working to change that," said Maj. David Kasberg,
chief, C-17 tactics.  To get to the time requirement, AMC decided on its
three-pronged approach to fix the problem.

The first step was to reduce aircraft spacing.  Only 12,000 feet was
required between lead aircraft airdropping personnel with the C-141.
However, vortices created by the C-17 means a larger spacing is needed to
ensure jumper safety.

"The C-17 has the same length and wingspan as the C-141, but a much wider
cargo compartment, and is heavier overall," said Kasberg.  "The heavier
airplane, especially with the same length wings, causes a lot more wake
turbulence.  It's a physics problem we're trying to overcome."

Using computer models, the command began investigating 15,000 feet spacing
between element leads and gradually increased the spacing to the current
40,000 feet to decrease the number of interactions between the aircraft's
vortices and the jumpers.

"I got involved in building the model trying to come up with a better way of
predicting where the vortex would be and how it would interact with the
jumpers," said Lt. Col. Hans Petry, mobility analyst.  Petry was a student
at the Air Force Institute of Technology, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base,
Ohio, when he worked on the model.

Using a Wright Lab engineer's static model, Petry and a fellow student made
the model move, added wind effects and random variation of the jumpers'
trajectories, and snaked the vortices behind the aircraft instead of in a
straight line.  This created a much more realistic picture of what was
actually happening around the aircraft in flight.

"We went over a bunch of iterations and cases in trying to figure out
anything that could possibly happen, and came up with some predicted
percentages of encounters and ranges of spacing," Petry explained.  "At
28,000 feet, we predicted that we would have an acceptable range -- minor
encounters that would keep anybody from getting hurt -- and that's where
they started testing."

The testing was completed in December at Pope AFB, N.C.  Despite the
predictions, at 28,000 feet there were still several major encounters
between the mannequins and the vortices, so the spacing was increased to
32,000 feet.

Before progressing to using real paratroopers, AMC dropped 712 mannequins
with element lead aircraft spaced 32,000 feet apart to ensure the spacing
was safe, said Lt. Col. Pete Livingston, AMC C-17 operational test manager.
Then 60 test jumpers, followed by 302 paratroopers from the Army's 82nd
Airborne Division at Fort Bragg, N.C were airdropped to complete the test of
the reduced spacing.  All test events were completed successfully and
safely.

"We feel that the risk that hasn't increased by moving the aircraft from
40,000 feet apart to 32,000 feet apart and it meets the Army's pass time
requirements," Kasberg said.  "For safe training and during contingencies,
32,000 feet is right for our standard spacing."

More time is shaved off the airdrop time by developing a dual-row airdrop
capability in the C-17.  The dual logistics rails allow two rows of
equipment to be airdropped from the C-17.  This more than doubles the
capacity of each C-17 and cuts in half the number of C-17s required to
airdrop the heavy equipment portion of the SBA.

"Right now, the airplanes rolling off the assembly line have dual-row
capability and we will have enough dual-row airplanes by July to meet the
Army's SBA requirement," Kasberg said.

Current station-keeping equipment, or SKE, is in use throughout the Air
Force on most mobility aircraft.  Using radio wave frequencies, it allows
aircraft to fly in formation during inclement weather.  A new version of
this equipment called SKE Follow-On is currently in development.  It will
continue to allow C-17s to fly in poor weather conditions while reducing the
amount of space needed between aircraft.

"The SKE allows us to fly in formation in the clouds (when you can't see the
airplane in front of you)," Kasberg said.  The current SKE causes
interference if formations use the same radio wave frequency in close
proximity to each other.  This interference is not a factor with the new
SKE.  It is expected to be installed in the aircraft by the fourth quarter
of fiscal 2004.  (Courtesy of AMC News Service)


000256.  Global positioning system munitions mark evolution of weaponry

by Steven R. Ford
Ogden Air Logistics Center Public Affairs

HILL AIR FORCE BASE, Utah (AFPN) -- In the wake of lessons learned from the
conflict in Kosovo, the Air Force is fitting its Paveway III munitions with
global positioning system satellite guidance systems.

The modifications, in addition to increasing the accuracy of the weapons,
could provide potential new workload here.

"The biggest advantage of GPS weapons is that they're launch-and-leave-type
weapons," said Col. Robert George, commander of the Air-to-Surface Munitions
Directorate, which manages the Paveway II and III systems.  George said that
current weapons require pilots or aircrews to stay in the area and designate
the target with a laser.

"Our goal, if we have to go to war, is to destroy the enemy target without
loss of American life," he said.  With GPS-equipped weapons, "you go to a
point, drop your weapons and get out of Dodge as quickly as possible.  You
don't have to linger in the area."

Laser-guided munitions came to prominence during the Gulf War when
television screens across America showed the accuracy of the weapons.  Iraqi
bunkers, buildings and armored columns were routinely destroyed with
unprecedented accuracy, helping make the Gulf War one of the most decisive
military victories in global history.  In the desert, only a sandstorm or,
in some cases, the smoke created by burning targets nearby, would prevent
the delivery of laser-guided munitions.

Kosovo, on the other hand, reinforced the limitation that laser-guided
weapons systems are only effective if the target is not obscured.  There,
the poor weather and low visibility made laser-guided munitions
undeliverable or inaccurate and, in a handful of cases, dangerously so.
Northrop Grumman's Joint Direct Attack Munition, a GPS-guided munition, was
instrumental in the campaign during Kosovo's consistently poor weather
conditions.

"GPS guidance will still direct the munitions to target regardless of the
weather," George said.  "If you lose your laser spot while the weapon is
guiding, chances are you'll miss your target."  A small number of GBU-24,
GBU-27 and GBU-28 laser-guided bombs currently in the Air Force inventory
will be upgraded, but the majority of the inventory of such weapons will be
purchased from the manufacturer with GPS already installed.

"There were reports that we're doing GPS (modifications) on all our
laser-guided bombs," George said.  "We're doing some, but we don't plan to
retrofit the entire inventory."

While the conversion will end the laser-guided munitions era and relegate
the laser guidance system to secondary status, according to George, contrary
to published reports, the GPS conversion doesn't mean that the Air Force's
inventory of laser-guided weaponry will be mothballed or no longer used in
future warfare.  It merely gives Air Force pilots options and flexibility.

"The GPS will guide the weapon to within a few meters. Add laser guidance to
that, and, in theory, you should be able to guide it through an open
window," George said.

But if GPS is the present state-of-the-art, what is on the horizon?  George
sees a number of possibilities that could make GPS munitions look as
low-tech as inertial guidance.  Of the more fanciful ideas, George sees a
proliferation of so-called "Star Wars" directed-energy weapons.  Noting such
systems as the airborne laser currently in testing, George thinks
directed-energy weapons might someday be reduced to a size that would allow
delivery by a fighter aircraft.

With the military's focus increasingly toward "smart munitions" that will
help safeguard American lives, he envisions an expansion of the unmanned
aerial vehicle program, such as the Global Hawk already in use.  Unmanned
fighter aircraft would have the obvious advantage of being less expensive,
more maneuverable without a human pilot, and unlikely to risk the life of
the "pilot" flying it from many miles away.

Ideas have also been proposed to create autonomous weapons that are
launch-and-leave; a small warhead that will loiter around a target area,
selecting potential targets, and then attacking them.  In the more immediate
future, George sees a redesign in conventional munitions to keep civilian
casualties to a minimum.

"What we're pushing for is the development of smaller, more accurate
munitions," George explained, "going from a 500-pound to perhaps 100-pound
bomb with laser or GPS guidance.  We want to be able to hit and destroy a
target with little collateral damage.  We want to be able to knock out the
enemy but not the enemy civilian population."  (Courtesy of Air Force
Materiel Command News Service)


000260.  Acquisition official discusses F-22 role in air power future

by Capt. Tim White
Arnold Engineering Development Center Public Affairs

ARNOLD AIR FORCE BASE, Tenn. (AFPN) -- The Air Force's top acquisition
officer for all fighter and bomber programs visited here recently to discuss
the service's No. 1 acquisition priority and the importance of Arnold
Engineering Development Center to that priority.

Maj. Gen. Claude M. Bolton Jr., program executive officer for fighter and
bomber programs in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force
for Acquisition, explained the need for the Air Force's next fighter, the
F-22 Raptor, and the work being done to bring the next generation of air
dominance to the battlefield.

"Maintaining our air superiority and air dominance is No. 1 for us because
it is the enabler for everything else we do," said Bolton.  "It allows us to
prosecute our war plans and allows our Army and Navy colleagues to do what
they need to do without worrying about who is flying over them."

"Today we have four aircraft around the world that are on par with our
F-15," Bolton said.  "There are two Russian aircraft, the Eurofighter that
is coming on line and there is the French Mirage 2000.  When you combine
that (one of those planes) with the very good air-to-air missiles that the
Russians have, you are faced with one heck of an airplane."

Those aircraft threats, coupled with increasingly more sophisticated and
lethal surface-to-air missiles, have dramatically increased the importance
of the F-22's capabilities.  The new fighter will bring together in a single
package four capabilities no other fighter system in the world possesses:
the ability to fly supersonically without the use of afterburners, or what
is called supercruise; stealth design; greater maneuverability at supersonic
speeds; and an integrated avionics package designed to present better and
clearer information to the pilot.

In addition to stretching the performance envelope to new levels, the Raptor
is an aircraft designed for easier maintenance and inexpensive repair.  The
general recently witnessed this first-hand during a test flight at Edwards
Air Force Base, Calif.

"We had a foreign-object damage incident where a stone hit one of the engine
blades," Bolton said.  "We took the engine out, blended the blade without
replacing it and put it back on the aircraft in only five hours.  Today, if
I have a problem like that on the F-15, it's at least three days and I
likely have to change the engine."

Although the F-22 is now flying at Edwards as part of its flight test
program, it has been a long road to get there.  A typical acquisition
program for a fighter aircraft will last 20 years before the system is
fielded and ready for combat if needed.  Thousands of hours of testing take
place at the Department of Defense's aerospace ground test facility here.

Bolton recognized the work AEDC people have done for more than 10 years in
F-22 testing, including engine testing and wind tunnel tests to measure
aerodynamics and clean separation of munitions and fuel tanks from the
aircraft.  The center has also helped predict high-cycle fatigue
characteristics.

"What the people at Arnold (AFB, Tenn.), have done is step up to more
testing when the customer has wanted it better, faster and cheaper," said
Bolton.  "AEDC has met that challenge with glowing reports."  (Courtesy of
Air Force Materiel Command News Service)


000261.  F-15 system program office wins Air Force award

by Dan Murray
F-15 System Program Office

WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Ohio (AFPN) -- The F-15 Project Team was
recently awarded the "Program Executive Office Team of the Year Award" for
1999.

The team was recognized by Maj. Gen. Claude M. Bolton Jr., Air Force program
executive officer for fighters and bombers, for its efforts in managing and
executing a highly aggressive $350 million F-15 Active Electronically
Scanned Array, or AESA, radar upgrade program.

"The team clearly demonstrated incredible ingenuity and management expertise
in developing a 'first-ever' radar system that will exceed the warfighter's
operational requirements," said Lt. Col. Gregory Postulka, development
system manager for the F-15 System Program Office.

The team members include:  Don Thompson, Capt. Ron Jackson, Greg Barker, Tom
Kielbaso, Earl Kessinger, Jim Cashatt, Leslie Smith and Sherlyn Robinson.

The F-15 AESA program includes the modification of 18 Pacific Air Forces
F-15C jets using APG-63(v)1 radar components currently in production.  The
new AESA program features a new advanced identification friend or foe
system, an upgrade to the environmental control system, and uses selective
APG-63(v)1 backed components currently in production.  These aircraft will
be stationed at Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska, by December.

The Boeing Co. is the prime contractor for the APG-63(v)2.  The major
subcontractors are Raytheon for the AESA radar development; Allied Signal
for the enhanced environmental control system; and GEC Marconi Hazeltine for
the advanced identification friend or foe system.

"The AESA radar technology is the cornerstone for future Air Force fighters
including the F-22 Raptor and the Joint Strike Fighter," Secretary of the
Air Force F. Whitten Peters stated in a Dec. 7 news release.  "Lessons
learned from the deployment and employment of the radar will help the Air
Force better prepare for our next generation fighter aircraft while helping
keep the F-15C the world's best air superiority fighter today.  These will
be the first operational fighter aircraft AESA radars in the world."
(Courtesy of Air Force Materiel Command News Service)


000254.  A-76 process broadcast slated

WASHINGTON (AFPN) -- People interested in learning more about the A-76
process can tune in to a special broadcast Feb. 24 that will focus on key
aspects of the process.  Under the A-76 process, the Air Force finds the
most efficient and effective way to provide support services by competing
the services between in-house staff and private contractors.

The broadcast, titled "Spirit of A-76," will air from 1:30 to 3:30 p.m. EST
and is sponsored by the Acquisition Reform Office, Office of the Secretary
of Defense.  The host will be Stan Soloway, deputy undersecretary of defense
for acquisition and technology.

Mr. Soloway will be joined by a panel of representatives from industry and
government.  There will also be previously taped interview segments from
people throughout the Air Force and other services.  Issues being discussed
about the A-76 process include public announcement; contract
solicitation/negotiation; cost comparison between government and private
sector; centralized management approach and administrative appeal process.

This broadcast will be accessible via television, telephone call in, and
Internet/computer.  People can obtain specific information regarding
broadcast access at the following web site http://12.26.72.174/arcweb/a76/


000258.  Unmanned combat air vehicle technologies mature at AFRL

by Sue Baker
Aeronautical Systems Center Public Affairs

WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Ohio (AFPN) -- In early 2001, when
America's first unmanned combat air vehicle flies above the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration's Dryden Center at Edwards Air Force
Base, Calif., it will carry more than a dozen unique technologies matured by
researchers and engineers at the Air Force Research Laboratory here.

Working side-by-side with Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
officials, about 100 full- and part-time AFRL workers in seven directorates
are helping Department of Defense decision-makers determine the right mix of
critical aerospace technologies for the UCAV system.

A $140 million, advanced technology demonstration jointly funded by the Air
Force, DARPA and Boeing Co., the UCAV is being developed as an affordable
weapon system that expands tactical mission options for U.S. warfighters,
while providing new revolutionary air power for two lethal roles:
suppression of enemy air defenses and precision strike.

"We're ensuring that AFRL will be able to (transfer) mature robust
technologies into the UCAV system, as the (advanced technology
demonstration) enters Phase III, risk reduction and operational evaluations,
slated to begin in late 2002," said Maj. Mark Garner, program manager and
technology integration and development team leader in the lab's Air Vehicles
Directorate.

"Since March 1999, when Phase II began, our team has categorized more than
145 current AFRL research technologies that could be used in UCAVs.  We've
divided them into categories I and II, depending on the level of risk
reduction they bring to the program, and when they might be needed," Garner
said.

"The category I technologies are more near-term (by 2005)," he said.  "The
category II technologies will be applied later, during the engineering,
manufacturing and development phase, and the initial operational capability
of the UCAV system, now planned for approximately 2010."

Such promising technologies center in 13 research areas, currently managed
by seven of AFRL's nine directorates, according to Garner.  They include
information collection and fusion; information assessment and presentation;
autonomous targeting identification and recognition; miniature munitions
systems; fluidless power, actuation and cooling; low-observable antennas;
miniaturized modular training environment; mission management and planning;
higher-thrust, limited-life, storable engines; and low-cost structures and
manufacturing.

"By identifying potential UCAV technologies early on, during the present
detail, design, fabrication and flight-test phase, we're trying to 'buy
down' (reduce) the risk for Phase III," Garner said.  "Each technology area
has (descending levels of risk) and demonstrations scheduled from now
through 2003, to help AFRL determine how specific, matured technologies
might benefit UCAV development."

One example of a UCAV advanced technology demonstration risk-reduction
effort:  investigation of low-observable air data, directed by Stanley
Pruitt and Dan Thompson of the Air Vehicles Directorate.

"If you had a radar antenna or refueling boom projecting into the air from
the surface of a UCAV, that would significantly cut down on its mandated
stealthiness," said David Lanman, deputy chief of UCAV advanced technology
demonstration.  "Our AFRL researchers are working with design engineers at
Boeing's Phantom Works in Seattle to make UCAV systems as low-observable as
possible, to achieve their intended missions."

Phase I of the UCAV advanced technology demonstration began in May 1998,
with award of contracts worth $4 million each to Northrop Grumman Corp.,
Lockheed Martin Tactical Aircraft Systems, Boeing Co. and Raytheon Systems
Co.

In March, DARPA and the Air Force selected Boeing to continue Phase II of
the UCAV program.  During Phase II, Boeing will complete the UCAV
demonstration system, which will involve fabrication of two vehicles and a
reconfigurable mission control station.  In addition, Boeing will develop
and integrate critical technologies being matured by AFRL researchers;
continue risk-reduction activities; and conduct flight tests.  There is a
priced option, currently unfunded, to continue the program into Phase III,
according to program officials.

"The Boeing UCAV concept will exploit real-time on-board and off-board
sensors for quick detection, identification and location of fixed,
relocatable, and mobile targets," said Lt. Col. Mike Leahy, DARPA UCAV
advanced technology demonstration program manager.  "The system's secure
communications and advanced cognitive decision aids will provide
ground-based, human operators with situational awareness and positive air
vehicle control necessary to authorize munitions release.

"This tail-less, stealthy air vehicle will carry multiple, advanced,
precision-guided munitions, while relaying confirmed battlefield damage back
to its mission control system," Leahy said.  "Stored in ready-to-ship
containers until needed, the UCAV will be able to deploy and operate
globally in concert with manned (aerospace) expeditionary forces."
(Courtesy of Air Force Materiel Command News Service)


000259.  Health officials battle combat stress

by Army Staff Sgt. Kathleen T. Rhem
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON (AFPN) -- The Defense Department is aiming to ensure that the
services treat people for stress reactions from combat and other traumatic
events.

"Many things beside combat can cause a combat stress reaction," said Army
Dr. (Lt. Col.) E. Cameron Ritchie, director of Mental Health Policy and
Women's Health for the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Health Affairs.  "We may have less combat action today, but we still have
danger and sleep deprivation, in training exercises and deployments."

Ritchie said service members today have to deal with the sight and smell of
dead bodies on peacekeeping missions, accidental deaths of unit members, and
"working in an environment where people you came to help are shooting at
you, as in Somalia."  Any of these things can cause a combat stress
reaction, she said.

"Some people are very critical of the term 'combat stress control,' because
we're seeing a lot of situations other than combat," she said.  "We're
seeing 'operational stress.'  That's really the term I prefer."

Commanders should be aware that home-front stresses often cause
difficulties.

"A person may be doing great where he is, but it's the news that his wife is
divorcing him, or his kid is having problems in school, or he needs to
figure out what to do with his elderly parents, that becomes a precipitating
factor", Ritchie said.

Two aspects differentiate a "perfectly normal" reaction to trauma and a more
severe reaction that requires professional treatment -- how long the
reaction lasts and its severity.

"It depends on the symptom," Ritchie said.  "Nightmares might go on for
weeks, but uncontrollable shaking shouldn't last more than a few hours.  If
someone becomes suicidal or even homicidal it becomes a medical issue.  The
chain of command should work closely with their medical team to provide the
service member immediate help."

DOD mental health experts are trying to emphasize to the services the
importance of combat stress control to the overall health and fitness of the
force, Ritchie said.  DOD Directive 6490.5, signed Feb. 23, attempts to
implement combat stress control policies throughout the department.

The Army has devoted dedicated resources to combat stress control with
active and reserve combat stress control units.

"The chaplain is a good resource when medical personnel aren't immediately
available," Ritchie said.  "Corpsmen and medics should also be trained in
the basic ideas of combat stress control."

"Initial treatment is simple," Ritchie said.  "We use the phrase 'three hots
and a cot.' I personally think it should be 'three hots, a cot and a warm
shower.  My mental health goes down drastically after a couple days without
a shower."

She said soldiers need to know that psychological reactions to traumatic
events are normal.  Ritchie explained it's also important to treat combat
stress casualties as close to the front or to their units as possible, and
with the understanding they will return to duty.

"We've found that if you ship people out of their units, most never go back,
and they don't recover as well," she said.  "There's quite a bit of stigma
attached to being removed from a unit, and some of these people develop
chronic psychiatric conditions."

But, Ritchie explained, this policy is also for the unit's benefit.  "One of
the things we explain to the commands is that 80 (percent) to 90 percent of
these people can be returned to duty usually within three days," she said.
"If you start evacuating large numbers of soldiers, you're going to have an
epidemic, especially if you get into a situation where there's real combat."




**COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Section 107,
any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use
without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest
in receiving the included information for nonprofit research and educational
purposes only.[Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ]

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soap-boxing!  These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds�is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to