The submarine was spotted at the Sinpo South Shipyard in North Korea, which has seen significant infrastructural improvement recently.
Officials at the U.S. Korea Institute at SAIS speculate that a “shorter naval version of the Musudan intermediate-range ballistic missile, a Nodong medium-range ballistic missile, or naval versions of the solid-fuelled KN-02 short-range ballistic missile” could be the missile used aboard the submarine.
Of course, a ballistic missile submarine would pose a new risk to South Korea. However, the analysts at Johns Hopkins pointed out that the imagery doesn’t mean the North Koreans are necessarily close to completing the project.
Much like North Koreas ICBM program, experts believe this sort of technology is still lacking north of the 38th parallel.
Known by such illustrious nicknames as “Mr. E,” “Meal, Rarely Edible,” and “Meal, Ready to Excrete,” the military meals ready-to-eat aren’t exactly known for their delightful taste.
Luckily, the taste of (at least) some MRE’s has improved over the years. Troops these days don’t have to deal with the terror that was the “Four Fingers of Death” — aka hot dogs — or the bean burrito. If you are opening a box of meals out in the field, these are the ones to look for.
#6: Chili with Beans
It’s got a Ranger Bar! Sadly, this bad boy comes with cheddar cheese and snack bread — which sucks — so you should probably trade that out with the one weird guy in your platoon who actually likes snack bread. Oh, and the chili is kind of good too.
#5: Maple Sausage
This is obviously better around breakfast time, since most of the contents are geared toward that very important meal of the day. The sausage, if heated up, isn’t half bad. But the big takeaway here is the Maple Muffin Top. Unfortunately they couldn’t jam a full muffin in there, but hey, the top is the best part anyway.
This also has the trail mix, crackers and cheddar cheese, and orange beverage powder. Don’t eat it all in one sitting.
#4: Cheese Tortellini
There are so many MRE’s with totally crappy main meals. I’m throwing it out there right now: I actually like the cheese tortellini. Unless you don’t heat it up. Not only is the main meal pretty damn good, but it’s got all kinds of goodies, including wet pack fruits, a first strike protein bar, peanut butter and crackers, and beverage powder.
And if you are feeling extra brave, throw that extra hot hot sauce on top of the tortellini. Just make sure a port-a-john is on standby.
#3: Beef Ravioli
If you are Italian, you are going to hate this meal, since calling this concoction ravioli is probably a grave sin. But for the rest of us, it’s actually a decent meal when it’s hot. But the best part: Bacon cheese spread. In the field, you can probably sell that stuff and make serious bank.
#2: Meatballs in Marinara
Just like the beef ravioli, this one is pretty decent. It also has jalapeno cheese spread and tortillas, and who doesn’t like that Jal-op-eno? The potatoes au gratin are fairly terrible, but at least there’s a first strike bar, and beef snack strips. Unless you are a fatty who eats the entire meal, there’s lots of trading opportunity here.
#1: Chili and Macaroni
Chili Mac is the best. There’s no question. Main meal: delicious. But wait, there’s more. This has a pound cake, jalapeno cheese spread and crackers, candy, and beverage powder. Even the accessory packet is the best: There’s coffee AND matches in there. Brew up a cup of joe then burn things when you’re bored.
There are way more MRE’s in existence of course. We didn’t rank them all. If you want to see what’s in the current batch, you can check out MREInfo.com.
This would end up putting two very well-equipped air forces against each other, and each has a plane that looks very much like a F-16 Fighting Falcon.
While China’s Su-27 and J-11 Flankers have drawn a lot of attention, the People’s Liberation Army Air Force and the People’s Liberation Army Navy Air Force also have a number of Chengdu J-10 “Firebird” jets in service. This is a single-engine fighter, using the same AL-31 powering the Su-27 family of fighters.
The Mitsubishi F-2 is also a single-engine fighter, also able to carry air-to-air and air-to-ground weapons. The plane is best described as an F-16 on steroids, and it is receiving upgrades. It replaced the Mitsubishi F-1, and fulfills not only an anti-shipping role (by carrying up to four ASM-2s), it also can carry guided bombs.
FlightGlobal.com notes that China has over 250 J-10s in service between the PLAAF and PLANAF. Japan has a total of 62 F-2A and 19 F-2B fighters in service. This gives China a three-to-one edge, but the F-2A’s anti-air capabilities with the AAM-4 are considered to be far superior.
The J-10, though, is not a bad plane, and the sheer numbers can have a quality of their own.
An American who fought beside Kurdish Peshmerga fighters against ISIS has died.
Kurdish officials said on Wednesday that the man, who has not officially been named by Syria, was “martyred” near Kobani. The co-deputy foreign minister of the Kobani district, Idris Nassan, has also verified the death to NBC news.
Several Kurdish Facebook and Twitter handles have named the volunteer soldier as Keith Thomas Broomfield, and American officials have reportedly contacted Bloomfield’s next of kin.
Cristina Silva of International Business Times has more:
“I didn’t want him to go but I didn’t have a choice in the matter,” said his mother, Donna, in a tearful phone interview with NBC News. She said he traveled to the Middle East four months ago to fight and they had little communication during that time. “I’m waiting for his body to come back,” she added.
The Marine Corps announced on June 20, 2018, that BAE Systems will make the service’s brand-new amphibious combat vehicle, planned to replace aging tracked amphibious assault vehicles that have been in service since the 1970s.
After almost three years of testing, the Corps announced it will award several contract options, worth up to $198 million, to BAE to build 30 low-rate production ACV 1.1 vehicles, John Garner, Program Executive Officer for Land Systems Marine Corps, told defense reporters.
Additional contract options could raise the value of the deal to $1.2 billion.
BAE, a British defense contractor, was one of two companies the Marine Corps selected in 2015 to build 16 ACV 1.1 prototypes for testing as part of a “lower-risk, incremental approach” to replacing the Corps aging amphibious assault vehicle fleet. The other company that built a prototype was Virginia-based SAIC, which teamed up with Singapore Technologies Kinetics.
“Today, after a rigorous and thorough test and evaluation period of two competing prototypes, we are taking another major step in fielding that much-needed capability to our Marines,” Garner said.
The decision comes after the assistant secretary of the Navy for Research, Development and Acquisition, James “Hondo” Geurts, made the Milestone C decision for the program to move forward, Garner said.
Milestone C signifies a validation of early testing and clearance to move forward with an operational platform.
ACV1.1 will bring a “modern wheeled capability with land mobility on par with modern battle tanks, along with the remarkable survivability the system has for under-body blast and also other threats,” said Col. Wendell Leimbach, Program Manager for Advanced Amphibious Assault.
The first low-rate initial production vehicles will be delivered to the Marine Corps by the fall of 2019, Garner said, adding that the service will conduct initial operational test and evaluation in late 2020.
The 3rd Amphibious Assault Battalion on the West Coast will be the first unit equipped with the ACV 1.1, Marine Corps officials said.
The Marine Corps plans to buy 204 ACV 1.1 vehicles in this first phase of the effort. Phase Two will be the development of the ACV 1.2, an upgraded amphibious platform, also made by BAE, that the Marines hope field to as a replacement for the fleet of 870 amphibious assault vehicles.
BAE will make some minor improvements to the ACV 1.1 LRIP vehicles before initial delivery, but “there are no issues” in terms of major system capabilities such as survivability, Garner said.
“Quite frankly, we could field the vehicle right now the way it is,” Garner said. “But we will always — as we do with any program — continue to do improvements to it.”
This article originally appeared on Military.com. Follow @military.com on Twitter.
It’s official: top Pentagon officials will not clear the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter for full-rate production this year, after setbacks during a crucial testing phase.
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment Ellen Lord on Oct. 18, 2019, said officials may not sign off on the F-35 full-rate production milestone — a sign of confidence in the program to produce more fighter jets — until as far out as January 2021 because of the latest testing lapse.
“I’m going to make some decisions about when that full-rate production decision will be made shortly,” Lord said at a briefing at the Pentagon Oct. 18, 2019.
September 2019, it was revealed that the Lockheed Martin-made F-35 would not complete its already-delayed formal operational test phase by the new fall deadline due to a setback in the testing process.
A combat-coded F-35A Lightning II aircraft.
(U.S. Air Force photo by Alex R. Lloyd)
Military.com first reported that while F-35 Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOTE) was supposed to be complete by late summer, the testing was incomplete due to an unfinished phase known as the Joint Simulation Environment. The F-35 Joint Program Office and Pentagon at the time confirmed the delay.
“We are not making as quick progress on the Joint Simulation Environment integrating the F-35 into it,” Lord told reporters during the briefing. “It is a critical portion of IOTE,” she said, adding inspectors need to get JSE “absolutely correct” before further testing can be done.
The Office of the Secretary of Defense would be the authority to sign off on the decision, moving the program out of its low-rate initial production (LRIP) stage.
The JSE simulation projects characteristics such as weather, geography and range, allowing test pilots to prove the aircraft’s “full capabilities against the full range of required threats and scenarios,” according to a 2015 Director, Operational Test Evaluation (DOTE) report.
An F-35 Lightning II flies around the airspace of Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Ariz., March 5, 2016.
(U.S. Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Brandon Shapiro)
JPO spokeswoman Brandi Schiff in September said the JSE is in the process of integrating Lockheed’s “‘F-35 In-A-Box’ (FIAB) model, which is the simulation of F-35 sensor systems and the overall aircraft integration.” FIAB is the F-35 aircraft simulation that plugs into the JSE environment.
“This integration and the associated verification activities are lagging [behind] initial projections and delaying IOTE entry into the JSE,” Schiff said at the time.
Lockheed Martin originally proposed a Virtual Simulator program for this testing. But in 2015, the government instead opted to transition the work — which would become the JSE — to Naval Air Systems Command at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Maryland.
In December 2018, the JPO and Lockheed announced that all three F-35 variants belonging to the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps would be field-tested “for the purposes of determining the weapons systems’ operational effectiveness and operational suitability for combat.”
The testing had originally been set to begin in September 2018.
IOTE paves the way for full-rate production of the Lightning II. Three U.S. services and multiple partner nations already fly the aircraft.
Some versions of the F-35 have even made their combat debut.
This article originally appeared on Military.com. Follow @militarydotcom on Twitter.
Police around the country have begun using a new tool that comes straight out of comic book lore: a device that shoots out a cord, binding a person’s arms or legs together.
The BolaWrap 100, which some media organizations have compared to a tool from Batman’s utility belt, was developed by Las Vegas-based Wrap Technologies. It allows the police to fire a Kevlar cord, and wraps tightly around a person.
Wrap Technologies has touted the benefits of the device as a way to subdue suspects without using force. But last week, when Los Angeles Police Department leaders told the city’s board of police commissioners that it intended to test the device for a trial period in January, the LA Times reported that critics pushed back at this notion.
One member of Black Lives Matter, Adam Smith, told commissioners the department would probably deploy the tool mostly in minority communities, according to the LA Times.
Wrap Technologies has said over 100 police agencies across the country currently use the Bola Wrap.
Or, it binds their legs together, restricting their movement.
The LAPD intends to start testing the device during a trial period in January.
This article originally appeared on Business Insider. Follow @BusinessInsider on Twitter.
The English Electric Canberra is a classic Cold War bomber. Its service with the United Kingdom and a host of other countries began less than five years after World War II, and it stuck around until 2006 with the Royal Air Force, while India flew them until 2007.
But less well-known is the American version of the Canberra, the Martin B-57, which has had the distinction of supporting combat troops almost 40 years after it was retired.
Here’s the scoop on this plane. According to aviation historian Joe Baugher, the Korean War showed the United States that it would need a replacement for the A-26/B-26 Invader in the role of a night intruder.
The Air Force looked at the North American B-45 and A2J Savage, both of which were already in service, but found them wanting. Then, the Air Force looked abroad, and considered the CF-100 from Canada before deciding to license-build the English Electric Canberra.
What won them over was endurance: The Canberra could hang around a target 780 miles away for over two hours. The B-57 could carry up to 7,300 pounds of bombs, could mount eight .50-caliber machine guns or four 20mm cannon, and had a top speed of 597 miles per hour, according to MilitaryFactory.com.
The Air Force liked that long reach, and eventually 403 B-57s were built. The plane served as a bomber in the Vietnam War and some were modified to carry laser-guided 500-pound bombs and called the B-57G under a program called Tropic Moon III. One of the B-57Gs was even equipped with a M61 Vulcan and 4,000 rounds (which is a lot of BRRRRRT!). However, the United States soon realized that the Canberra’s true calling was as a high-altitude reconnaissance bird.
The definitive reconnaissance version, the RB-57F, could reach an altitude of 65,000 feet. This gave it a very high perch that many fighters in the 1960s could not reach. Even one of today’s best interceptors, the Su-27 Flanker, can only reach a little over 62,000 feet, according to MilitaryFactory.com. Some of the RB-57Fs later were designated WB-57Fs to reflect their use as weather reconnaissance planes.
A WB-57F parked on the ramp at Yokota Air Base in Japan. (USAF photo)
The Air Force retired the B-57s in 1974. However, a number of the WB-57F planes found their way to NASA, where they were used for research. This included monitoring for signs of nuclear tests.
At least two of the NASA birds, though, are reported to have served over Afghanistan in the War on Terror. Spyflight reported one of the NASA birds flew sorties from Kandahar in 2008, officially as a “geological survey” for Afghanistan. Wired.com reported in 2012 that two NASA planes have alternated flying out of Kandahar to help relay data, alongside modified RQ-4 Global Hawk drones and versions of the Bombardier business jet known as the E-11A.
This means that nearly four decades after officially retiring from service, these B-57s have been serving in wartime – while under NASA’s flag. Not bad for a plane that first took flight in 1949!
If you’ve seen Top Gun, then you probably remember the enemy MiG-28s that enter the fray at the beginning and the end of the film. If you know your aircraft, however, you quickly figured out that the on-screen “MiGs” were actually Northrop F-5E/F Tiger II fighters from the Navy’s aggressor squadrons.
The F-5E/F has done a lot more than play a body-double for Russian aircraft, though.
The Northrop F-5E/F Tiger first saw action in 1972 in Vietnam. The early versions of this plane flew several missions and it was quickly understood that, while fully operational, the plane needed some upgrades. The result was called the “Tiger,” and it was intended to match the Soviet MiG-21 “Fishbed.”
Three F-5E Tiger II aggressors in formation.
The F-5E had a top speed of 1,077 miles per hour, a maximum range of 1,543 miles, and was armed with two 20mm cannon, AIM-9 Sidewinder air-to-air missiles, and could carry a number of bombs, rockets, and missiles for ground attack. The Navy and Air Force bought some as aggressors, but the real market for this jet was overseas.
Taiwan bought a lot of F-5Es to counter Communist China’s large force of J-5 and J-6 fighters, South Korea used the specs to build a number of airframes locally, and the Swiss bought a significant force of F-5E to make their presence known in Europe. Countries from Morocco to Thailand got in on the Tiger action.
F-5E Tiger IIs and F-14 Tomcats prior to filming for ‘Top Gun.’
The Air Force retired its Tigers in 1990, allowing the F-16 to take over the aggressor role. The Navy and Marines still use the Tiger as an aggressor – and is even putting on a global search for a few good replacements to bolster the ranks.
Learn more about this long-lasting fighter that spent some time as a Hollywood villain in the video below.
Longtime readers of WATM know that the U.S. Navy had flying carriers in the 1930s that eventually failed as zeppelins began crashing and fighters increased in size and weight. But the Air Force wanted their own aircraft carriers in the 1970s, and they thought the new Boeing 747s were just the ticket.
The Air Force’s Crazy 747 Aircraft Carrier Concept
So the Air Force figured, “What if we made jet fighters small enough to fit in the fuselage?”
The Air Force had already experimented with different methods of pairing bombers and fighters through the late 1940s to 1960s. But the only flying carrier was tested on the B-36 Convair. The Gremlin fighters that could fit in the bomber were too tiny and susceptible to turbulence, and pilots couldn’t make the linkups work.
A mock-up of how planes could fit inside the 747 on a conveyor belt along the plane’s spine.
So when the Air Force asked Boeing to take a look at an airborne-carrier variant of the 747, Boeing imagined its own tiny “microfighters.” Ten of these could be teamed with a single 747 equipped with a conveyor belt that could hold them in the plane and shift them to the open bays for launching.
The concept even called for a crew that could re-arm microfighters while the carrier was in flight. And the fighters could be refueled without fully re-entering the plane.
But the Air Force never pursued the idea beyond the 60-page proposal from Boeing, which might be best since a lot of important questions were left unanswered. Could the 747s really carry enough fuel to keep themselves and the microfighters going in a battle? Would the microfighters struggle with the same turbulence problems as the B-36s Gremlins?
What would be the combat radius for a microfighter after leaving its 747? Would it be large enough for the 747 to stay out of range of air defenses while remaining on station to pick up the fighters after the mission?
Boeing experimented with different microfighter designs, but none of them ever went into a prototype phase.
Most importantly, Boeing believed that microfighters could go toe-to-toe with many full-sized fighters at the time, but was there any real chance that Boeing could keep iterating new microfighters that could out-fly and fight full-sized fighters from Russia as the years ticked by?
It seems like it would’ve been a big lift for the aircraft designers and military planners to make the whole program militarily useful.
A new concept that uses drones instead of piloted fighters has popped up multiple times in recent years, and it features a number of key improvements over the 1970s 747 concept. Most importantly, drones don’t have pilots that need to be recovered. So if they face a range shortfall, have to fight Russian fighters on disadvantaged terms, or need to be left behind to save the carrier crew, it’s no big deal.
The 120mm mortar has become a standby for American troops. It is used by just about any type of battalion, and the Marines have deployed the M327 Expeditionary Fire Support System — which is based off a French design — that makes this potent weapon super mobile.
However, Israel has its own systems. The first, CARDOM, is used by a number of countries, including on the M1129 Stryker Mortar Carrier. According to Defense-Update.com, CARDOM is a recoil-based mortar system based on Israel’s SOLTAM mortar system, merging it with modern target acquisition devices. With precision-guided PERM rounds, CARDOM can reach out and hit targets roughly 10 and a half miles away.
But the system is heavy. The Israelis, though, began work to lighten the system, and created the SPEAR. According to Elbit Systems, an improved recoil system allows SPEAR to be deployed on vehicles as light as a HMMWV or the new JLTV.
SPEAR has an initial burst rate of fire of 15 rounds per minute. That means that this system can be airlifted in by helicopters. This would give Army units like the 82nd Airborne Division, the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault), and the 10th Mountain Division a huge boost in terms of firepower without losing their strategic mobility.
SPEAR can get in action in roughly one minute, and it takes about that long to be prepped for moving again. That enables it to “shoot and scoot,” thus avoiding counter-battery fire. It only needs two or three crew to operate. In short, this is a system that could rapidly ruin any bad guy’s day.
As part of a strategy to develop and deliver new robotics capabilities to future soldiers, Army researchers have partnered with world-renowned experts in industry and academia.
The University of Pennsylvania hosted a series of meetings in Philadelphia, June 5-7, 2018, for principal investigators and researchers from the Army’s Robotics Collaborative Technology Alliance, or RCTA.
“We are coming together to tell each other what we’ve done over the last year,” said Dr. Stuart Young, a division chief in the U.S. Army Research Laboratory at Adelphi, Maryland, and the RCTA’s collaborative alliance manager.
(U.S. Army photo by David McNally)
The group formed in 2009 to bring together government, industrial and academic institutions to address research and development required to enable the deployment of future military unmanned ground vehicle systems ranging in size from man-portables to ground combat vehicles.
• General Dynamics Land Systems – Robotics • Carnegie Mellon University – The Robotics Institute • Massachusetts Institute of Technology • Florida State University • University of Central Florida • University of Pennsylvania • QinetiQ North America • Cal Tech/Jet Propulsion Lab
Young said the laboratory is focused on transitioning new capabilities to industry partners so they can continue to mature them.
“Since this is a basic and applied research program, we’ll transition it to them so they can get it into an experimental prototype in development,” he said. “Certainly the problem that we are working on is very hard. It is difficult to operate robots in the wild, anywhere in the world, but that’s the kind of problem the Army has to solve.”
(U.S. Army photo by David McNally)
The Army’s vision is to make unmanned systems an integral part of small unit teams.
“We’re trying to go from tools to teammates so you can work side-by-side with them,” Young said, continuing with, “In order for robots to be teammates, they must operate in unstructured, complex environments.
“And then in order for the robots to be a useful teammate, they have to communicate naturally like a human does,” Young said. “We’re doing a lot of work in human-robot relationships, understanding concepts in the same way that humans do, trying to get the robots to understand those concepts in the same way so that the teaming can occur more naturally.”
Over the eight years of the alliance, researchers have achieved many milestones in the robotics field.
“New methods for robots to autonomously interact with and perceive the outside world have been developed to improve reasoning, situational awareness, trust and mobility in challenging battlefield environments,” said Dr. Jaret Riddick, director of the lab’s Vehicle Technology Directorate. “In the past eight years, researchers have teamed with academia and industry supported by the Robotics CTA to establish robotics technology critical to next generation Army objectives for multi-domain operation.”
(U.S. Army photo by David McNally)
The alliance conducts research in four technical domains:
Perception: Perceive and understand dynamic and unknown environments, including creation of a comprehensive model of the surrounding world
Intelligence: Autonomously plan and execute military missions; readily adapt to changing environments and scenarios; learn from prior experience; share common understanding with team members
Human-Robot Interaction: Manipulate objects with near-human dexterity and maneuver through 3-D environments
Dexterous Manipulation and Unique Mobility: Manipulate objects with near-human dexterity and maneuver through 3-D environments
“We’ve certainly come a long way, and yes, we have a long way to go,” Young said. “We’ve made a lot of progress in understanding and developing new theory and techniques for communicating between the robots and the humans. We must generate more novel techniques to be able to address those types of problems.”
Researchers said the meetings in Philadelphia were a valuable experience as they continue to plan for a capstone event at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, in 2019, where they will demonstrate the culmination of their research achievements to Army leaders.
The U.S. Army Research Laboratory is part of the U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command, which has the mission to provide innovative research, development and engineering to produce capabilities that provide decisive overmatch to the Army against the complexities of the current and future operating environments in support of the joint warfighter and the nation. RDECOM is a major subordinate command of the U.S. Army Materiel Command.
One of the signature wounds of the War on Terror has been the traumatic amputation of limbs.
Today, advanced prosthetics help wounded troops recover much of their independence and live their lives more fully than those who’ve lost limbs in the past.
And while the science and engineering of prosthetics has markedly advanced, the military is working on ways to make those prosthetics flesh and blood.
According to military doctors and scientists, Army medical researchers are trying to figure out how salamanders are able to re-grow their limbs, and apply that to wounded troops who have lost limbs.
“What we’re trying to do is develop a toolkit for our trauma and reconstructive surgeons out of various regenerative medicine products as they emerge to improve long-term outcomes in function and form of injured extremities,” Lt. Col. David Saunders said during a recent Military Health System research symposium.
The symposium also featured technologies closer to current science. A number of projects involving synthetic grafts have shown amazing potential, including one involving bone fillers that are treated to reduce the possibility of infection. Other projects have focused on recovering or preserving nerves, or regrowing muscle.
One researcher is even looking at a mouse to help improve the treatment of burn victims. In this case, the African spiny mouse has been known to lose much of its skin to escape a predator, yet it can quickly recover the skin with a minimum amount of scarring.
“Warfighters and civilians alike suffer large surface [cuts] and burns, and these result in medically and cosmetically problematic scars,” said Dr. Jason Brant of the University of Florida. “The ability to develop effective therapies will have an enormous impact not only on the health care system but on the individuals as well.”
One Army officer, though, is developing biocompatible sponges that can also reduce scarring by promoting better skin healing. Major Samuel Tahk of Fort Detrick noted that in addition to the sponges being a step along the path towards furthering regenerative medicine, the devices could also cut costs by making treatment of patients simpler.
With this host of new technologies, it’s no wonder Saunders is excited, not only noting that wounds to limbs have become far more survivable, but also about the many advances “emerging in the field of regenerative medicine to restore form and function to our wounded warfighters.”