The company who won the contentious contest to build America’s next military handgun is throwing its hat in the ring to provide a potential replacement for a weapon used by the country’s most elite counterterrorism units since the 1970s.
In March, U.S. Special Operation Command posted a notice to industry to come up with a new so-called “personal defense weapon” that had nearly impossible specs to achieve. The weapon had to be no longer than 26 inches with the stock extended, had to collapse to less than 17 inches AND be able to fire from the collapsed configuration.
And oh, the weapon had to be made to fire both .300 Blackout cartridges and 5.56 rounds.
These rifles would replace the MP5 variants in special operations stocks — 9mm submachine guns that are both aging and offer significantly less effective range than more modern calibers compatible with subgun-length barrels.
Well, Sig Sauer, makers of the Army’s new M17 and M18 handgun, stepped up to the MP5 replacement plate with its new MCX “Rattler.”
“We had groups coming to us and saying the situations [they] were being put into with 9mm subguns, the caliber is not appropriate,” Sig Sauer officials said during a live event releasing the Rattler to the public.
The Heckler Koch MP5 submachine gun of U.S. Air Force Senior Airman Samuel Caines, assigned to the Supreme Allied Commander Europe Security Detachment, ejects a bullet casing at the Training Support Center Benelux 25-meter indoor range in Chièvres, Belgium, Oct. 22, 2015. (U.S. Army photo by Visual Information Specialist Pierre-Etienne Courtejoie)
They wanted, “an escape gun that is going to have the firepower that [they] need.”
Based roughly on Sig’s MCX design, the Rattler has a 5.5-inch barrel and with its folding stock collapsed, the entire gun is just 16 inches long.
And it can fire in that configuration.
“The PDW stock allows you to function the gun when it’s folded,” Sig officials told RECOIL magazine. “It is the shortest rifle that’s on the market today.”
In fact, the Rattler comes in at just 3.5 inches longer than the ultimate CQB weapon — the MP5K.
“We wanted to give these guys a gun in a subgun size but that had the firepower to shoot out to 200-plus yards and effectively do what they needed to do,” Sig said.
The Rattler can fire suppressed in the 300 BLK configuration, but Sig says the barrel is too short for operating 5.56 cartridges with a can.
The Rattler upper is swappable with any standard M4 or AR-15-style lower, checking the box for the SOCOM PDW request to have the gun be able to change caliber in less than three minutes.
San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock USS John P. Murtha (LPD 26) is underway to conduct Underway Recovery Test (URT) 7 in conjunction with NASA off the coast of Southern California.
URT is part of a U.S. government interagency effort to safely practice and evaluate recovery processes, procedures, hardware, and personnel in an open ocean environment that will be used to recover the Orion spacecraft upon its return to Earth.
This will be the first time John P. Murtha will conduct a URT mission with NASA. Throughout the history of the program, a variety of San Antonio-class LPD ships have been utilized to train and prepare NASA and the Navy, utilizing a Boiler Plate Test Article (BTA). The BTA is a mock capsule, designed to roughly the same size, shape, and center of gravity as the Crew Module which will be used for Orion.
NASA and Navy teams have taken lessons learned from previous recovery tests to improve operations and ensure the ability to safely and successfully recover the Orion capsule when it returns to Earth following Exploration Mission-1 (EM-1) in December 2019.
San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock ship USS John P. Murtha arrives to its new homeport Naval Base San Diego.
(U.S. Navy photo by Seaman Lucas T. Hans)
EM-1 will be an uncrewed flight, whose successful completion hopes to pave the way for future crewed missions and enable future missions to the Moon, Mars, and beyond.
During URT-7, John P. Murtha will conduct restricted maneuvering operations. Small boats carrying Navy and NASA divers will deploy alongside the BTA to rig tending lines, guiding the capsule to Anchorage as the ship safely operates on station.
Conducting both daytime and nighttime recovery operations, NASA crew members will work alongside the Navy to manage how the capsule is brought in, set down and safely stored.
NASA plans to conduct two more URT missions before EM-1 takes place.
John P. Murtha is homeported in San Diego and is part of Naval Surface Forces and U.S. 3rd Fleet.
Commander, U.S. Third Fleet leads naval forces in the Pacific and provides realistic, relevant training necessary for an effective global Navy. They coordinate with Commander, U.S. Seventh Fleet to plan and execute missions based on their complementary strengths to promote ongoing peace, security, and stability.
This article originally appeared on DVIDS. Follow @DVIDSHub on Twitter.
As part of Exercise Balikatan, an annual exercise between the Philippines and the U.S., the Marines took their HIMARS to that country and fired practice rockets. Watch the video and see how they quickly got the artillery systems to the country and into the fight:
Rising above a sea of asphalt parking are the stubby turrets of Russia’s first-ever foray into the theme-park business. At first glance, the complex in Moscow bears a slight resemblance to Disneyland, the American amusement park that Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev was not allowed to visit in 1959, but hoped one day to reproduce at home. Now, after several false starts, Russia finally has its own amusement park: Dream Island.
With none other than Russian President Vladimir Putin on hand, joining Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin, the park was opened to the public on February 29.
Officials are hoping millions of visitors from Russia and abroad will pass through the turnstiles annually, lured by Dream Island’s attractions scattered over its 30 hectares, all enclosed under glass domes to keep out the Russian capital’s notoriously harsh weather.
Russian officials are quick to note that the id=”listicle-2645441716″.5-billion theme park is the largest in Europe and Asia and to predict it will be a key part of the legacy Sobyanin leaves behind. The opening was delayed twice: once in 2018 and again in December 2019.
Many Russians, not least those active on social media, are skeptical to say the least with many lampooning what they see as a boondoggle and a poor imitation of the Disney original. Many lament the forest that was chopped down to make way for the park and the enormous expanse of parking. Others note the shady background of those involved with the project.
Perhaps more than anything, ticket prices at the park have been a lightning rod for criticism.
Tickets on the weekend cost 11,000 rubles (3) for a family of four. The average monthly wage in Russia last year was just over 46,000 rubles (3). And inflation continues to take bites of that. Overall, in 2019, about 14 percent of Russians lived on less than 0 per month, the official poverty line.
“According to the official site of the new Moscow park: ‘Dream Island is a socially significant site for the Moscow region.’ An entrance ticket for anyone over 10 years old costs 2,900 rubles . That means, it costs at least 8,700 [rubles, or 1] for a family [during the week]. The mayor’s office has a strange idea of ‘social significance,'” lawyer and moderator for the nationalist Tsargrad television channel Stalina Gurevich wrote on Twitter.
Others have taken issue with the id=”listicle-2645441716″.5 billion price tag. Twitter user Sakt points out that the Burj Khalifa, the needle-shaped, 830-meter skyscraper that dominates the skyline in Dubai, cost roughly the same, suggesting the United Arab Emirates got more bang for its buck.
Some are aesthetically appalled with what they consider a poor rip-off of the American theme-park icon.
Vasily Oblomov, also on Twitter, juxtaposed Dream Island and Disneyland.
“Today in Moscow the amusement park Dream Island is opening. One photo shows the pathetic foreign version. The other, the unique, Russian original. I think it won’t be difficult to figure out which is which.”
Another Twitter user, identified as Kolya Shvab, also was less than impressed with Dream Island’s castle: “What a mess. One look is enough to know that the person who designed this blindingly ugly barn with turrets, never in his life saw a real castle.”
“It was horrible from the beginning, but the builders managed to screw it up even more. All the rounded elements were made square. It’s not a ‘Dream Island’ but an island of shame,” he writes.
That message of disgust with the design of Dream Island was echoed by Twitter user, Sofiya, who identifies herself as an “architect” and “designer.”
“Dream Island is the ugliest thing I’ve ever seen in my architectural life. This is hell for an architect. But my son is 13 years old. That means I’ll probably go there soon as a loving mother, and while my son enjoys the attractions, I’ll be suffering.”
Others were perplexed by the massive parking lot stretching out for acres in front of the park entrance, wondering why it couldn’t have taken up less space by being built underground or as a multilevel complex.
“Are we correct in thinking that for the Moscow authorities Dream Island is parking in front and beautiful scenery in the background so that parking wouldn’t be so boring?” asked Twitter user Gorodskie Proekty.
“Parking in front of the park. Were the builders morons?” Katyusha Mironova asked on Twitter.
Even before its opening, the theme park was targeted for criticism, not least from those living near the site, who were among the loudest complaining after a forest was chopped down to make way for the project.
Twitter user Interesting Moscow posted what appears to be satellite imagery of the area before and after the park was built.
Others couldn’t help but notice the opening just happened to coincide with a demonstration in the Russian capital to commemorate Boris Nemtsov, the Putin critic who was shot dead near the Kremlin five years ago. Many used the event to protest proposed amendments to the country’s constitution. Critics say the planned changes are aimed at extending Putin’s grip on power after his current presidential term ends in 2024.
The owners of the complex are Amiran Mutsoyev and his brother, Alikhan. The two are the sons of Zelimkhan Mutsoyev, a shady businessman and former State Duma deputy from the ruling United Russia party with alleged ties to organized crime figures.
Whether any of that will matter to Russians considering a visit to Dream Island remains to be seen.
The Marine Corps’ Compact Laser Weapon Systems have been upgraded with stronger beams to take out drones. The laser systems, which can be mounted to vehicles and used on land or aboard ships, have already been used overseas. (Boeing photo).
The Marine Corps‘ ground-based laser systems, which can be mounted to the tops of vehicles to take down drones, now have stronger beams to combat airborne threats.
The Corps has a new $2.5 million agreement with Boeing to service its Compact Laser Weapon System for the next five years. The system, which can be attached to combat vehicles, can be used on land or at sea.
Boeing just completed a round of updates to the service’s Compact Laser Weapon Systems, giving Marines the ability to take out bigger drones. The updates also made the laser weapon more reliable and faster, and they allow Marines to target more aircraft from greater distances, according to Boeing.
The changes come as the top U.S. general in the Middle East warned last month that cheap, off-the-shelf drones pose the most concerning tactical development in that region since terrorists began using improvised explosive devices in Iraq and Afghanistan.Advertisement
“These systems are inexpensive, easy to modify and weaponize, and easy to proliferate,” Marine Gen. Kenneth McKenzie Jr., the head of U.S. Central Command, said last month.
Militaries are also using drones to target and surveil troops. Marines using another vehicle-mounted system in 2019 jammed at least one Iranian drone that flew within 1,000 yards of their Navy warship in the Strait of Hormuz, sending it plummeting into the sea.
The Compact Laser Weapon System doesn’t just jam drones but destroys them. Josh Roth, a spokesman for Boeing’s missile and weapon systems, said the lasers can take out what the Defense Department refers to as Group 1 and 2 unmanned aircraft, which weigh as much as 55 pounds and can operate below 3,500 feet.
Boeing’s system also has a counter-sensor capability at longer ranges for larger targets, Roth said. The system uses software to spot and track a threat. Once a drone is spotted, the weapon system focuses a high-energy laser beam on the threat until it’s disabled and defeated, he added.
Marines began testing the system, the first ground-based laser approved for military use, in 2019. The laser gives Marines a lightweight option to target drones, Roth said, since it can be carried and operated by just one person.
“It … affords the warfighter the opportunity to save more expensive air defense missiles for other threats and reduces the logistics footprint by eliminating resupply needs for conventional ammunition,” he said.
Roth declined to say how many of the laser systems have gone to the Marine Corps and what units received them, citing operational security. Marine Corps photos and videos show low-altitude air defense battalions on the East and West coasts testing the systems.
Last year, Marines tested the upgraded laser weapon in Yuma, Arizona, where they were able to take down 12 out of 12 drone threats, according to Boeing. Now, those upgraded systems have been delivered to Marine units, Roth said.
The system has also been used in real-world missions, though Roth declined to say where.
My daughter is six, an only child, a military child, and a true Daddy’s girl. I recently asked her the following:
Q. What makes Daddy a good daddy?
He takes me on bike rides and fishes with me.
Q. Why is Daddy important to you?
Because he works in the Coast Guard.
Q. What do you like about Daddy being in the U.S. Coast Guard?
He flies airplanes.
Q. What do you dislike about Daddy being in the U.S. Coast Guard?
He has to work a lot and has a lot of long work trips.
My daughter’s answers to these questions made me think about how she sees, loves, and respects her father as a hero. Every little girl deserves a father figure who is a hero in their eyes. How are military fathers equipped to be heroes to our daughters?
Military Fathers are Leaders
Serving in the military requires courage, strength, selflessness, resilience, and confidence. Leaders in the military are those whom subordinates rely upon for wisdom, direction, sound judgment, and guidance. Leaders must be determined, confident, able to delegate authority, and thoughtful. Daughters need leaders with similar qualities. The skills learned within the military are transferrable to parenting. Military fathers have a unique skill set that can help lead and guide our daughters.
There are many different types of families, extended families, relationships, and dynamics that may surround any daughter. However, fathers are often the first man in a girl’s life. Military fathers are well-equipped to excel in this role despite the time they are required to spend away from family. Leaders and mentors in the military can help shape lives, influence the decision-making skills of others, and help subordinates find their way. Couldn’t the same be said for fathers leading daughters at home?
Military Fathers Know How to Defend
When joining the military, one chooses to defend, protect, and fight for our country and our freedom. How do we teach our daughters to defend themselves both figuratively and literally? How do we, as parents, encourage them to protect their rights, health, safety, values, morals, and beliefs?
The military is rich with honor and codes of conduct, outlining what members can and cannot do. Dedication to duty, honor, service, and respect are of the highest importance. Military fathers can use these codes as moral and ethical roadmaps for our daughters.
From the first day of basic training until a member of the armed forces leaves the service, they are training for the next mission, preparing for future roles, and learning new skills. Military members are always ready. Training in this manner equips military fathers to teach our daughters to be prepared for challenges, face adversity, choose right over wrong, and take responsibility for their actions.
Military Fathers Are Heroes
The definition of a hero is a person admired for their courage, outstanding achievements, or noble qualities. We certainly have endless examples of heroism and ultimate sacrifice in the military. Look at any Medal of Honor, Purple Heart, or Distinguished Service Cross recipient, and you will find a hero. Military members are heroes for serving their country.
Daughters need heroes as strong role models to show them leadership, perseverance, and courage. If any father can fulfill this role and do it well, it is one in the military. Military fathers might not realize it, but they are superheroes in our daughters’ eyes.
Heroes protect others and know how to do the right thing. What better way to set an example and express love to a daughter than by being a hero for your country and family? Happy Father’s Day to all of our military heroes. May you never forget just how heroic you are to our daughters.
Google has long been on the forefront of new advancements in technology and products. Now, they are using their massive platform to support veterans in need.
With America quickly approaching 20 years at war, the needs of her veterans continue to rise. With the added stress of the pandemic, things are at a critical point. Post-traumatic stress diagnosis’ are rising and veteran suicides continue to dominate headlines. Google wanted to do something to combat those numbers and give back to those who served. The company began working with veteran employees as well as outside stakeholders and nonprofits to create a site dedicated to veteran resources.
“Men and women who served should be able to find help when they need it. We hope this website will provide helpful, authoritative information on mental health for veterans and their families,” Jose Castaneda, Google Spokesperson, said. It is with this in mind that the “Serving Veterans” initiative was created.
The site itself will be specifically geared toward veterans and their families. With minimal clicks, the search engine will bring them to the resources that they so desperately need. Google also formatted the site to include personal stories and videos from a broad and diverse group of veterans, which include well-known military leaders. The aim is to demonstrate that seeking help shouldn’t cause hesitation and that recovery through support can happen.
Code of Support Foundation CEO Kristina Kaufmann was thrilled with the program Google created. “The Code of Support Foundation is thrilled to see a global leader in technology like Google prioritize the needs of our nation’s veterans, their caregivers and their families with the launch of the Google for Veterans program,” she said.
The Wounded Warrior Project recently released a survey reporting that COVID-19 has significantly impacted veterans specifically, causing 52 percent to report that their mental health is even worse with the pandemic. The military itself has also stated that suicides have risen by 20 percent in 2020, which can most likely be attributed to the pandemic. All of this was fuel for Google to quickly assemble support for America’s veterans.
Recently, The Bob Woodruff Foundation shared that, “The COVID-19 pandemic creates at least three conditions: emergent trauma, loneliness due to social isolation and unplanned job or wage loss that could culminate in a “perfect storm,” threatening the mental health of many veterans.”
“We are proud partners in this effect to reach and serve more of those who served our country. This launch represents a shared commitment by Google and Code of Support to ensure veterans and their families can easily find and connect with local community-based resources for mental health, addiction, and suicide prevention at a time when these numbers are rising tragically,” Kaufmann said.
Google has put much of their focus in recent years in serving the military community with tools for transitioning and employment. This appears to be one more way for them to continue its commitment to give back to the 1 percent of America’s population that swears to defend and protect us all. By creating an easily accessible site to help veterans and their families find the support they continue to honor that commitment. One veteran at a time.
Every high school student knows that the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand at Sarajevo helped spark World War I. But did you know that he wasn’t the only one killed that day? The other victim was his wife, Sophie, whom he married against everyone’s wishes. Their wedding pretty much cost Franzi everything – including his throne and his life.
What an Heir-Head
Franz Ferdinand was the greatest catch in Europe at the time of his coming of age, especially for the heir to Austria-Hungary (downgraded from the Holy Roman Empire in 1867). As nephew and heir to Emperor Franz Joseph I – husband of the tragically beautiful Empress Elisabeth, a.k.a. “Sisi” – Franzi could have his pick of any eligible woman in Europe. He couldn’t marry just any woman! According to aHabsburg family statute of 1839, archdukes and archduchess could only marry with the consent of the head of their house (i.e., the emperor). But the marriage market of late nineteenth century Europe was a small place. No matter which way he went, an archduke would end up wedding a relative; since she had to be Catholic, the bride-to-be would probably end up being a French, Bavarian, Portuguese, Italian, or Spanish princess, or even an Austrian archduchess cousin.
In 1915, Polish noblewoman, Princess Catherine Radziwill, wrote a fabulously gossipy memoir calledThe Royal Marriage Market of Europe, detailing the available royals of Europe and their family foibles. She snarked about Empress Sisi and her family, but actually had nice things to say about Franz Ferdinand and his marital choices – which went against the grain and wrought havoc in his family. Who was his choice? Not a royal princess, but a lady-in-waiting named Sophie Chotek.
By modern standards, no one would blink at a royal marrying a noblewoman – in fact, the bride would probably be of higher rank than many other princely wives-to-be. But for the tottering Habsburg-Lorraine family and its weakening empire, it was imperative to maintain a “pure” bloodline, one worthy of the perhaps oldest and most prestigious Catholic clan on the Continent. Only the bluest of blood would do for an empress consort! Which led to a hell of a family squabble…especially after Franz Joseph’s only son, Crown Prince Rudolf, committed suicide and didn’t leave behind a son.
I Keep on Fallin’…
Franz Ferdinand first met Sophie Chotek when she was a lady-in-waiting to the wife of his distant cousin, Archduke Friedrich of Teschen. The snobby, upwardly mobile wife of Friedrich – Isabella of Croÿ – was barely good enough to make it as an imperial wife. Gushed Princess Radziwill, “The young man — he was barely twenty-two at the time — fell in love with the Princess Isabella of Croÿ, whose father, the Duke of Croÿ, though belonging to the higher order of the German aristocracy, was still looked upon as a simple gentleman, in possession of large means and an old title.” Scandalous!
Isabella was “a clever, ambitious woman, who at once understood the immense advantages of such an un-hoped-for marriage,” and the imperial family tried to prove that her family wasn’t good enough, stating that Friedrich and Izzy’s wedding should be morganatic (a union between people of unequal rank, when any resulting kids usually can’t inherit any thrones involved). Isabella came up with enough evidence to prove her house was sufficiently ancient and high-ranking, so the Habsburgs begrudgingly allowed her into their family.
After Isabella got her long-awaited title of archduchess, she popped out eight daughters before giving birth to her golden ticket, a son. With so many marriageable girls, Isabella had a ton of matchmaking to do, and what better match could be made than with the heir of the empire? One of her daughters marrying the future emperor would also finally silence any detractors who complained about her own lineage. So ambitious Izzy, always playing up her family because of her own insecurities about it, set out to snag Franzi for one of her baby girls, bringing him over to her country house time and again. During this courting process – sometime in the 1890s, although the exact date is unknown – Franz Ferdinand met Sophie.
Photo: Unknown photographer
One Less Problem?
Each time he was invited to court his cousins, the more he fell for the one woman he wanted – and the one he couldn’t have. To be fair, Sophie’s background wasn’t exactly dirt-poor; it was just not up to imperial standards. Her grandfather was an Austrian count, while her diplomat dad worked all over Eastern Europe. Her clan wasn’t rich, but it was often in the wings of major imperial events, so Sophie would’ve known Franzi by sight. She was young, pretty, and refreshingly un-stuffy, compared to the rest of his family. In other words, perfect for the archduke. Princess Radziwill had fairly nice things to say about her, but admitted, “Her sway over the mind of her husband was unlimited, and, perhaps, even in excess of the love which he undoubtedly bore her.”
FF and Sophie could get married – and they were, wed by a mere deacon – but she could never have imperial rank and their kids couldn’t inherit. As von Wallersee-Larisch noted, “the Emperor soon realized the marriage was a complete success,” so he bumped up Sophie’s rank to countess, then duchess. She still trailed behind every royal woman of the court and was probably shunned by all the archduchess. A shame no one realized that Sophie and FF made a popular couple that might have improved the imperial public image…especially with their three kids – Little Sophie, Maximilian, and Ernst.
In June 1914, Sophie and Ferdinand went on a diplomatic trip to an already uneasy area: Sarajevo. Only here, when Franzi was on military duty, could the two unequally married lovebirds ride together in a car, so she accompanied him on the journey. The portents weren’t good – when the car overheated,Franzi quipped, “Our journey starts with an extremely promising omen. Here our car burns, and down there they will throw bombs at us.” While out and about in an open motorcade on June 28, Franz Ferdinand and Sophie were both shot by Gavrilo Princip, a nationalist terrorist. This was after a failed bombing attempt occurred that same day, and FF decided to keep on trekking.
Sadly, these later shots were fatal. When Sophie slumped over her husband in the car, an already mortally wounded Franz Ferdinand shouted, “Sophie, Sophie, don’t die, stay alive for our children!” Both were later declared dead at the Konak palace. And, of course, Vienna took a hard line at the assassination of its heir and his wife. They declared war, and the rest of Europe chose sides…starting World War I.
Honduras won the first game (in Honduras). Then El Salvador won the second game (in El Salvador). When El Salvador won the third game in Mexico, all hell broke loose. Literally.
El Salvador was and is one of the most densely populated countries in the Americas. Honduras, in comparison, was and is sparsely populated. By the end of the 1960s, over 300,000 Salvadorians were living and working (often illegally) in Honduras.
The dilemma posed by these immigrants, many of whom cultivated previously unproductive land, was addressed through a series of bilateral agreements between the two Central American nations. The last of these agreements, conveniently, expired in 1969.
To make matters worse, the government in Tegucigalpa, the capital of Honduras, initiated land reform that effectively kicked Salvadorians off the land. Thousands fled back to El Salvador.
Then, El Salvador started claiming the land that had previously been held by its citizens in Honduras as El Salvador’s. It was in this climate that the two countries met on the soccer field to determine who would qualify for the 1970 World Cup in Mexico.
The first game was played in Tegucigalpa. Hondurans made sure their rival team did not have a good night’s rest by creating as much noise as possible outside their hotel rooms. El Salvador lost. Then the media in San Salvador started reporting that a young woman, so distraught after the loss, had shot herself in the heart.
El Nacional wrote, “The young girl could not bear to see her fatherland brought to its knees.” She was given a televised funeral and the President himself walked behind her casket. By the time the Honduran team got to San Salvador to play the second game, tensions were at an all-time high.
At the game, which El Salvador won, the Honduran flag was not flown during the opening ceremony. In its place, Salvadorian officials placed a rag.With the threat of all violence at the last game (it was to the best of three) a very real possibility, FIFA officials decided to hold the third game in Mexico City.
5,000 Mexican police officers kept both sides fairly under control. El Salvador went on to win the Mexico City game. Hours later, El Salvador severed all diplomatic ties with its northern neighbor. A mere two weeks later, the Salvadorian air force dropped bombs on Tegucigalpa.
La guerra del fútbol was obviously not fought over simply over soccer. But the games were used as incredible and very effective propaganda tools. The war lasted one hundred hours. Blocked by a U.S. arms embargo from directly purchasing weapons, both sides had to buy outdated military equipment from World War II. This war was the last time the world saw fighters armed with pistols dueling one another.
After the Organization of American States brokered a cease-fire, between 1,000 to 2,000 people were dead. 100,000 more were displaced. A formal peace treaty was not signed until 1980.
Although the war only lasted four days, the consequences for El Salvador were immense. Thousands of Salvadorians could no longer return to Honduras, straining an already fragile economy. Discontent spread, and just ten years later the country plunged into a twelve-year civil war that left 75,000 dead.
Capable of flitting through the air at multiple times the speed of sound, these planes take the pilot to the fringe of science fiction.
Although a number of these aircraft have since been retired, they continue to be the fastest manned aircraft in history.
The designs and advances achieved with these planes have also left an immense impact upon the development of the planes that succeeded them.
Here’s a look at the world’s nine fastest manned aircraft ever flown.
F-4 Phantom II
Maximum speed: 1,472 mph
Maximum range: 1,615 miles
First flight: May 27, 1958
The supersonic F-4 Phantom II jet was originally developed just for the US Navy and officially entered into service in 1960. In the mid-1960s, the interceptor was adopted by the US Marine Corps and the US Air Force.
The F-4 carries more than 18,000 pounds of weapons, including air-to-air missiles, air-to-ground missiles, and various bombs. The primary fighter jet during the Vietnam War, the Phantom II was gradually replaced by the F-15 and the F-18 Hornet.
Convair F-106 Delta Dart
Maximum speed: 1,525 mph
Maximum range: 1,800 miles
First flight: December 25, 1956
First introduced into service in 1959, the Convair F-106 was designed to intercept and destroy Soviet bombers during the Cold War. The Delta Dart carried sophisticated radar, infrared missiles, and a nuclear-tipped rocket, according to the Aerospace Museum of California.
The F-106 still holds the world record as the fastest single-engine fighter at 1,525 mph. The F-106 is considered one of the most challenging fighter jets to operate because of its heavy cockpit workload.
Mikoyan MiG-31 Foxhound
Russian Air Force
Maximum speed: 1,860 mph
Maximum range: 2,050 miles
First flight: September 16, 1975
First introduced into service on May 6, 1981, the Soviet MiG-31 remains one of the fastest combat jets ever designed. Built as an interceptor aircraft, the Foxhound continues to serve in the Russian and Kazakh air forces.
Despite its age, Russia plans to keep the aircraft in service until 2030.
Maximum speed: 1,883 mph
Maximum range: 913 miles
First flight: July 10, 1959
The Ye-152 was first introduced in 1959 and was an operational interceptor derived from the Mikoyan Ye-150. The Ye-152 is best known for paving the way for the Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-25 Foxbat.
Maximum speed: 2,056 mph
Maximum range: 4,288 miles
First flight: September 21, 1964
The XB-70 was a prototype of the never-completed US B-70 nuclear-capable strategic bomber. The bomber was intended to bomb targets while traveling at over Mach 3 at high altitudes.
Soviet missile defenses and the expansion of the role of intercontinental ballistic missile systems ultimately led to the abandonment of the B-70 program. The only two completed XB-70 prototypes were then used as test vehicles for high-speed flight.
Bell X-2 “Starbuster”
US Air Force Photo
Maximum speed: 2,094 mph
First flight: September 18, 1955
The Bell X-2, which only flew for a brief span between November 1955 and September 1956, was a research aircraft jointly constructed by the Bell Aircraft Corporation, the US Air Force, and the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics. The plane was developed to test flight between Mach 2 and 3.
On September 27, 1956, the X-2 reached its recorded maximum speed of 2,094 mph. During the flight, however, test pilot Milburn G. Apt died. He was the first man to break Mach 3.
Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-25 Foxbat
Maximum speed: 2,170 mph
Maximum range: 1,599 miles
First flight: March 6, 1964
The Soviet MiG-25, which was first introduced in 1970, was built as a supersonic interceptor and reconnaissance aircraft. Due to the aircraft’s large wings, the US assumed it was a highly maneuverable fighter. Instead, the Foxbat needed the large wings due to its weight.
The MiG-25’s maximum speed of Mach 3.2 is not sustainable without causing engine damage. Its top sustainable speed is 1,920 mph (Mach 2.83).
Freebase, Creative Commons
Maximum speed: 2,200 mph
Maximum range: 3,682 miles
First flight: December 22, 1964
The SR-71, designed by Lockheed Martin, was a marvel of a plane. It flew at altitudes of over 80,000 feet at speeds greater than 2,000 mph. The plane, engineered for surveillance, flew for more than 30 years and was capable of outrunning antiaircraft missiles lobbed at it.
For perspective, on its retirement flight from Los Angeles to Washington, D.C., the SR-71 flew coast to coast in only 67 minutes.
Maximum speed: 4,520 mph
First flight: June 8, 1959
The world’s fastest manned aircraft is the rocket-powered X-15. The X-15 flew for the first time on June 8, 1959, after successfully deployed at 45,000 feet from another aircraft. A few years later, on October 3, 1967, the X-15 pulverized all flight-speed records with a stunning 4,520 mph, or Mach 6.72, speed.
Three X-15s were made and flew a total of 199 flights before the $300 million program was retired.
The next round of Department of Defense funding will come with an important requirement: Congress wants the Pentagon’s outmoded and highly toxic practice of burning old munitions and other explosives in the open air to finally come to a stop.
The language of the 2019 National Defense Authorization Act made public in early May 2018, which proposes $717 billion in spending, also demands that the Pentagon report back to Congress with a specific plan for ending the centurylong burning of munitions.
“The Pentagon will have to tell us what it plans to do to stop this practice,” wrote U.S. Rep. Carol Shea-Porter, a Democrat from New Hampshire, in an emailed statement to ProPublica. Shea-Porter, a member of the House Armed Services Committee, introduced the amendment to the spending bill that deals with open burns. Shea-Porter earlier led efforts to curb the Pentagon’s use of open burn pits at overseas bases — a practice believed by medical experts to have sickened thousands of U.S. soldiers — and she has often pressed for action against other defense-related pollution risks at home.
“If these answers aren’t satisfactory, I am hopeful that the Armed Services Committee will require the Defense Department to take appropriate action to curb this disturbing practice,” she wrote.
Shea-Porter told New Hampshire Public Radio that she and the Armed Services Committee took up the burn issue in 2018, after reading ProPublica’s reporting.
Neither a spokesperson for the office of the Secretary of Defense nor for the Army’s munitions department immediately responded to requests for comment. But in previous statements to ProPublica, the Department of Defense has maintained that its open burn practices have already been vastly curtailed over the past decade, and where they still take place today, they are both safer and far less expensive than alternatives.
Congress has pressed the Pentagon to phase out open burning for more than a quarter-century. In 2018, the National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine began studying the risks and impacts of the Pentagon’s burn practices.
The new bill would force the Defense Department to report back to Congress on the findings of this study and set out exactly what it will do to implement any recommendations made by the National Academies. The measure appears designed to spur the Pentagon to propose its own solutions, but could well lead to a law requiring regulatory action.
If the Defense Department cannot lay out a specific course of action, “it is essentially telling the Committee that it won’t do anything after the Committee explicitly said it was concerned about the practice,” a Congressional staff person with knowledge of the bill told ProPublica. “That typically doesn’t go over well. The intent here is to get DoD to take this seriously.”
The top US general is on the Korean Peninsula as annual US and South Korean military exercises risk further increasing tensions with North Korea.
US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Joe Dunford said his visit to the region this week is aimed at reassuring allies South Korea and Japan, while building the military-to-military relationship with China in order to prevent miscalculations.
He met with South Korean President Moon Jae-In and South Korean Defense Minister Song Young-moo August 14 in Seoul, and travels to China August 14 and Japan later in the week.
Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson reiterated in a Wall Street Journal opinion article posted late August 13 that the US goal is the peaceful denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, and that it is up to North Korea to show its willingness to engage in good-faith negotiations.
“North Korea now faces a choice. Take a new path toward peace, prosperity, and international acceptance, or continue further down the dead alley of belligerence, poverty, and isolation,” Mattis and Tillerson said. They also highlighted a need for China to use its “decisive diplomatic and economic leverage over North Korea.”
Meanwhile, senior US national security officials said August 13 a military confrontation with North Korea is not imminent, but the possibility of war has increased.
CIA Director Mike Pompeo said on Fox News Sunday North Korea’s push to develop a nuclear-tipped ballistic missile capable of hitting the United States, “… is a very serious threat and the administration is going to treat it as such.”
President Donald Trump’s national security adviser, H.R. McMaster, on ABC’s This Week program said “…We are not closer to war than a week ago, but we are closer to war than we were a decade ago.”
Dunford said the military’s “primary focus” is supporting the administration’s diplomatic and economic campaign to denuclearize the Korean peninsula, while preparing military options in the event that campaign fails.
“We’re all looking to get out of this situation without a war,” Dunford said, even as he stressed Pyongyang possessing nuclear weapons that threaten the United States and its regional allies is “unacceptable.”
“As a military leader, I’ve got to make sure that the president does have viable military options in the event that the diplomatic and economic pressurization campaign fails,” he added.
But some experts do not agree that Pyongyang’s acquisition of nuclear weapons is an unacceptable option. Richard Bush, a senior fellow in the Brookings Institution’s John L. Thornton China Center, said the Trump administration has “made a big mistake” by determining that North Korea’s possession of nuclear weapons capable of hitting the United States is something to fight over.
“The bigger danger or focus should be ensuring that North Korea doesn’t use those capabilities,” Bush told VOA.
Dunford arrived at Osan Air Base plans to meet South Korean President Moon Jae-In and his South Korean military counterpart on Monday before traveling to China and Japan later in the week.
New military exercises to start
Annual exercises between the US and South Korean militaries, dubbed Ulchi-Freedom Guardian, begin later this month. North Korea has always condemned these exercises, and some experts fear these war games could increase hostilities from Pyongyang while irking Beijing, a key influencer of North Korea.
“If you have the current tensions and pile on top of that these exercises, it’s going to make for a much worse situation,” Joel Wit, who helped negotiate the 1994 US-North Korea nuclear deal that delayed North Korea’s nuclear program for almost a decade, told VOA.
A senior official with US Pacific Command, which overseas military activity in the region, said China will almost certainly propose to Dunford that the US and South Korea stop these exercises. However, the Trump administration would not agree to that proposal because it considers the exercises necessary for readiness in the event of an attack, the official added.
In the past, China has been reluctant to deny resources to North Korea in order to pressure Pyongyang to curb its nuclear weapons ambitions. But in the last few weeks, China has appeared to take measures to keep its bad-behaving neighbor in check.
Last week, China voted alongside a unanimous UN Security Council to impose strict new sanctions on Pyongyang in response to North Korea’s launch of two intercontinental ballistic missiles last month. Estimates say the new sanctions could cost Pyongyang $1 billion a year.
And on July 11, China’s Global Times Newspaper warned that China will not come to North Korea’s aid if it launches missiles threatening American soil and would only intervene if the United States strikes North Korea first.
Bruce Bennett, a defense analyst at RAND Corporation, noted that Chinese President Xi Jinping has held eight summit meetings with the South Korean president but none with the young North Korean leader, which he said “clearly suggests” that Xi “thinks Kim Jong Un is a lightweight and really not important.”
‘Locked and loaded’
The chairman’s visit comes just two days after US President Donald Trump warned in a tweet that military solutions were “locked and loaded” should North Korea act unwisely. “Hopefully Kim Jong Un will find another path,” Trump tweeted.
North Korean state media announced the country is drawing up plans to fire missiles near the US Pacific territory of Guam, as the US military continued preparations for a potential military response.
The United States has carried our several B-1B Lancer strategic bomber jet flights from Guam to the peninsula, with the last one carried out about a week ago. Japanese and South Korean jets have escorted the bombers at times.
The United States also has deployed Terminal High Altitude Area Defense anti-ballistic missile system to South Korea that can shoot down short, medium, and intermediate-range ballistic missiles. Two of the system’s six launchers are fully operational, and President Moon has ordered consultations on the possibility of deploying the final four interceptors, which are already in-country. THAAD’s ability to take out missile threats has proven 15 for 15 in tests conducted since 2005, when the system began operational testing.
THAAD is also deployed on Guam, along with Aegis ships that have Standard Missile 3 interceptors used to destroy medium and intermediate-range ballistic missiles.
The US mainland is defended from intercontinental ballistic missiles by ground-based interceptors located at Fort Greely, Alaska.
The Pentagon wants a new style of sophisticated protective eyewear that features adjustable vision enhancement so Marines and soldiers can identify and sight in on targets more quickly than ever before.
The goal of Vision Enhancement for the Dismounted Soldier is to “enhance natural eyesight to aid in visual detection, identification, and acquisition of targets, friendlies, and other items of interest that would otherwise be obscured or difficult to see in military relevant environments with the unaided eye,” according to a Sept. 24, 2018 solicitation posted on the government website for the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program, which is designed to encourage small businesses to engage in federal research and development.
The research effort is looking to defense firms to present designs that “take into consideration the pupil location of the individual wearer, as needed, to optimize performance and compatibility with weapon technologies,” the solicitation states.
“Hands-free activation (such as voice command) is also of interest, but not necessary for the purposes of this effort. In the event of power loss, imaging shall revert to an unaided mode for unobstructed vision,” the document states. “Ultimately, the objective of the effort is to increase lethality and survivability through enhanced vision, and faster target detection and identification times, of persons and items of interest in military environments, without limiting capabilities naturally afforded by unaided vision.”
Currently, soldiers and Marines rely on a combination of natural vision and optical aids such as scopes, binoculars, image intensifiers and thermal imagers to enhance combat vision.
Soldiers observe the impact zone during a howitzer live-fire exercise at the Grafenwoehr Training Area in Germany, Jan. 17, 2018.
(Army photo by Markus Rauchenberger)
“Donning and doffing of individual visual aids takes time and are impractical in situations when seconds count,” according to the solicitation.
The effort, however, is not intended to duplicate or replace current weapons’ optics and other sensors, it states.
The program is searching for concepts that:
Reduce time needed to detect targets or friendly forces as compared to performance when relying on unaided vision.
Ensure natural vision is not degraded in the event of power failure.
Ensure performance is reasonably stable in different operating environments, such as temperatures, lighting conditions and humidity levels.
Minimize distracting or confusing images that may decrease situational awareness, such as unwanted reflections, glare, ghost images, erratic flickering and image distortion.
Companies wishing to participate have until Oct. 24, 2018, to submit proposals, the solicitation states.
The document does not provide a timeline, contract awards or fielding goals except to say that phase one deliverables shall include monthly reports and conceptual drawings and designs.
Phase two deliverables include schematics and 12 working prototypes of spectacles or goggles.
“End item cost shall be considered early on,” the solicitation states. “Target cost is 0 or less (with an ultimate goal of 0 or less once in production).”
The target weight of the entire system — including batteries — is less than 3 ounces if a “spectacle platform is chosen” and less than 6 ounces if a “goggle platform is chosen,” the solicitation states.
“The ability to enhance vision and increase lethality shall be validated through testing,” according to the solicitation.
This article originally appeared on Military.com. Follow @militarydotcom on Twitter.