Bye-Bye Pave Low, Hello Osprey

The deployment of the CV-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft to North Africa this month for Operation Flintlock 09 overshadows the retirement of the long-serving MH-53 Pave Low helicopter. The final Pave Low mission was flow in Iraq in September by the Air Force’s 20th Expeditionary Special Operations Squadron.

Once numbering 39 helicopters, the Pave Low fleet was employed around the world for low-level missions to insert and take out special forces as well as for Combat Search And Rescue (CSAR) operations. The Sikorsky H-53 series is the largest helicopter flown in the West, with the largest (three-turboshaft) H-53E variants also flown by the U.S. Navy (MH-53E) and Marine Corps (CH-53E).

The Air Force retired the last MH-53M Pave Low IV variants -- all upgraded from earlier models -- in September. The Air Force is acquiring 50 Bell-Boeing CV-22 tilt-rotor aircraft for the special operations role. The CV-22 and MH-53 are roughly the same size (but with very different configurations); however, the Osprey is much faster and has a greater range, and is provided with an in-flight refueling capability. (In July 2006 two MV-22s flew across the Atlantic in the first trans-ocean flight of the aircraft.)

The Marine Corps has already forward deployed its Osprey variant, the MV-22. In October 2007 the Marines sent ten MV-22s to Iraq, where they continue to operate. The Marines have a requirement for 360 MV-22s for the assault and combat support missions, replacing the long-serving CH-46 Sea Knight helicopter. (The original Marine requirement -- developed during the Cold War era -- was for 552 MV-22 aircraft.) The Marines currently have four MV-22 deployable squadrons plus a transition squadron, with a schedule to activate two additional squadrons per year.

http://www.defensetech.org/

War Spurs Change in Sniper Gear, Tactics

October 08, 2008

The conflicts stemming from the attacks on 9/11 showed America's military snipers were badly in need of modernization. Their gear, operational doctrine and training needed an update -- and fast. As the war evolved, units with combat experience shared lessons learned, identifying new requirements for a unique conflict. Fortunately the services took notice and began to revamp the sniper community in numerous ways.

Problem: Inadequate/outdated doctrine.

Solution: Small-unit leaders began to develop employment strategies that earlier training never covered, based on the current situation and environment. This, coupled with after-action reports, lessons learned and the general sharing of information, led to comprehensive sniper planning, support and employment-things like providing security for the sniper team during movement and relying on the sniper to provide the real-time intelligence for on-the-spot combat decisions.

Probably the biggest change was when-and-how to bring the snipers to bear for the desired result. Unit leaders learned that snipers could control large areas, create enemy reluctance and force enemy movement in a desired direction. There was a gradual recognition of how valuable assets like snipers and designated marksmen could be when properly utilized.

Problem: Inadequate equipment.

Solution: A number of commercially procured items became popular, including the Eberlestock pack, which allows the sniper to carry his rifle on his back protected and concealed while he carries a battle rifle for his own protection during movement. Other items such as rests, tripods and various bipods were procured to meet the varied terrain and conditions.

The issued spotting scope and tripod did not perform as needed in environments where ranges were either very long or very short, and precise optical definition was an absolute requirement for friend-or-foe identification. High-end spotting scopes such as the Leupold 12-40x60mm Mark 4, Zeiss 85mm, and Swarovski ATS 80's were quickly procured along with better quality tripods/mounts. Hydration systems, too, became a crucial ingredient in the sniper's pack.

The sniper of today is vastly better outfitted than he was six years ago. Individual and organizational efforts outside of official channels to provide free equipment/gear to snipers played a huge role in sniper evolution as well. Groups such as "Adopt a Sniper" (www.AmericanSnipers.org) collected and pushed large quantities of equipment to operators in the war zone and provided a conduit for specific requests from the field. In most cases the equipment was donated by industry or provided at a huge discount.

Problem: Inadequate optical sights.

Solution: Early on the word went out to procure optics for a variety of uses from crew-served weapons to M4 carbines. Many snipers purchased or procured variable-power optics for use on their sniper systems to allow them to open up their field of view while retaining the zoom capabilities.

In other cases higher-power optics were procured to allow the snipers to engage at extended ranges. The Marine Corps was in the process of selecting the Schmidt & Bender PMII (a.k.a. M8541), which has proved to be an outstanding product. Many Army units procured the Leupold Mark 4 M3 LR/T 3.5-10X as a replacement for the fixed 10X Leupold M3 "Ultra." Many other optics companies such as U.S. Optics and Nightforce saw increased sales of their products in an effort by the military to meet field requirements.

The acquisition of new optics also opened up the need or desire for mission-enhancing accessories. Devices such as the "angle cosine indicator" from Sniper Tools and a variety of mounting solutions like the Modular Accessory Rail System from Remington became popular and are now in widespread use.

In addition to the new optics, mounts and accessories, this new war brought interest in new reticule systems such as those offered by Horus Vision, Leupold, Nightforce and U.S. Optics, which provide different or enhanced approaches to range estimation, hold offs, elevation/windage changes and firing solutions.

Problem: A shortage of snipers and precision weapons.

Solution: Simple things such as adding an optic to an M4/M16, which previously had been considered "Hollywood," became the norm with the widespread purchase of the Trjicon ACOG. While not by itself a "sniper" system, units quickly discovered that troops with above-average shooting ability and snipers could extract a heavy toll on the enemy with such a system. It was this revelation that helped define the concept of the designated marksman - basically a soldier with slightly more training than the average grunt, equipped with an optically sighted rifle to engage targets at ranges the "typical" shooter could not.

Problem: Modernization of existing SWS (Sniper Weapons Systems.)

Solution: Around 2004, Remington introduced its M24A2 as an upgrade to the M24. This included a new stock, variable power optics, an optics rail that allows the use of in-line night vision IR lasers and a sound suppressor. While being very popular with the snipers, funding and authorization have never materialized. The U.S. Navy worked with Sage International to procure the Enhanced Battle Rifle, which is a modified M14 placed in an aluminum chassis that features multiple rails and a collapsible stock. They found this combination, although somewhat heavy, to be very effective. The Corps has conducted a variety of experiments with adding suppressors to their M40A3's but to date these suppressors are not in widespread use.

Problem: Rate of fire.

Solution: This problem gave rise to the development by the Army of the Semi-Automatic Sniper System solicitation. This effort was intended to procure a 7.62 semi-auto system that provided the accuracy of a bolt system in addition to the rapid firing capability of a semi. The Army eventually selected a system which they are now beginning to field in small quantities. The original concept was to replace all of the bolt-action systems with the new autoloading system. But it now appears that snipers need both capabilities. The USMC and USAF are currently reviewing the concept to determine which direction they will go.

Problem: Weight and the inability to engage targets at ranges beyond 1,000 meters.

Solution: Early solutions included the application of the .300 WinMag, but the availability of ammo was an issue. Many U.S. allies fielded systems chambered in .338 Lapua Magnum, which has gained considerable popularity among U.S. snipers. It remains unclear as to what direction this will take, as both industry and the services themselves are exploring alternatives.

The benefit of the current conflict in terms of equipment and technology development has been vast and modernization efforts in this area will likely continue. As in any war, necessity has been the mother of invention and snipers have never been as educated and well equipped as they are today.

http://www.military.com/news/article/war-spurs-change-in-sniper-gear-tactics.html?col=1186032369115

M4 Round Has Strong Competitors

October 10, 2008

Eugene Stoner and ArmaLite designed and built a lightweight, powerful, small-caliber shoulder weapon after the Army asked for help to develop a 5.56x45mm chambered military rifle in 1957.

The Army, looking ahead to a jungle war in Southeast Asia, picked the lightweight design to equip its new, highly-mobile soldier. But the Army did not fully adopt the specific design requirements that made the original AR-15 operate effectively.

No one recognized that the ball powder substituted by the Pentagon had a greater fouling effect on the AR bolt assembly and chamber area. In addition, troops were not properly trained on how to clean their new rifles. The result was a weapon that was susceptible to jamming in the field, giving the new rifle a bad reputation right off the bat.

The poor initial performance, together with the marginal incapacitating ability of the 5.56 round, led to doubts about the Stoner design that linger today. But the mobile warriors of today are frequently getting in and out of vehicles and need a shorter weapon. The loss of active barrel length in the M4 further cuts the overall effectiveness of particular loads of the 5.56 round that many already considered to be too small and weak.

Recognizing the dilemma, military and civilian manufacturers are developing rounds for the AR platform that could bridge accurate lethality and shorter barrels. Two different approaches are strong contenders: the 6.8 SPC (Special Purpose Cartridge) and the 6.5 Grendel.

Both the 6.8 SPC and 6.5 Grendel have a greater potential for immediate lethality than the 5.56, based on a heavier bullet traveling at a comparable speed. During tests, shots taken at distances ranging from 50 to 75 yards with the 6.5 Grendel at medium-sized wild hogs produced many first-round lethal hits, as well as immediate incapacitation. The bullets did not exit but fragmented during passage through the tissue.

The accuracy of 6.5 Grendel and 6.8 SPC was excellent. The groups for each caliber met or exceeded previously published data. The ability to stay on target during full-auto fire was achievable and far exceeded any similar .308-caliber weapon on hand for controllability. Our overall conclusion is that both the 6.5 Grendel and 6.8 SPC demonstrate superior effectiveness when compared to the 5.56 -- transferring more energy using a larger, purpose-formed bullet.

The 6.8 SPC is a well-engineered combination of velocity, accuracy and reliability for combat engagements up to 500 meters. With a trajectory very similar to the .308 WIN, the 6.8 SPC provides almost 50 percent more downrange, terminal-energy than the 5.56 NATO at 100-200 meters. However, at distances greater than 400 yards, performance of the 6.8 SPC is inferior when put up against the .308 Win or the 6.5 Grendel.

The 6.5 Grendel bullet is designed for energy retention during flight and has about twice the mass of the 5.56 NATO, with ballistics superior to the soviet-era 7.62x39 mm round. It maintains a devastating impact on tissue at longer ranges. The flat-shooting round has demonstrated one minute-of-angle accuracy beyond 600 meters, where the performance of the 6.8 SPC falls off.

Overall, both the 6.5 Grendel and 6.8 SPC offer similar hard-hitting short-and-intermediate range performance with .308 accuracy out to intermediate ranges. The 6.5 Grendel has the edge past 600 meters. Given a choice, I would take the better ballistic bullet of the 6.5 Grendel, which has incapacitating lethality for most tactical situations from CQB to out beyond 600 meters. However, the logistical support for the 6.5 Grendel and 6.8 SPC has been inconsistent. In addition, the demonstrated ability of the 5.56 green-tip to penetrate light armor and steel plate better than the 6.5 Grendel or 6.8 SPC will be of interest to operators who might have to take on technicals when under fire.

Although no single caliber will provide the operator with a solution to every tactical problem, many warriors interviewed would still take the M855 5.56 due to overall satisfactory performance and ammo availability. One of the important aspects of the "is the M4 good enough" argument is to ensure that the "real" trigger-pullers have the loudest voice and overriding opinion about what works in the field.

http://www.military.com/news/article/m4-round-has-strong-competitors.html?col=1186032310810

The Kommando Spezialkräfte (Special Forces Command, KSK)

The Kommando Spezialkräfte (Special Forces Command, KSK) is part of Germany's Special Forces. Organized under the Special Operations Division (Div. Spezielle Operationen, DSO), it is closely modeled on the British Special Air Service (SAS).History

Prior to KSK’s formation in 1996, Germany, and before it West Germany, placed little emphasis on special operations beyond the counter-terrorist police unit GSG 9. At the time, the airborne brigade commandos and Fernspäher companies were the only army units comparable to Special Forces (the navy already had its Kampfschwimmer company for years). All the early specialised army units except for one Fernspähkompanie have been disbanded or merged into the KSK since its activation on April 1, 1997.

Like all German military units, KSK deployment requires parliamentary authorization, providing evidence of operations in Kosovo, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Afghanistan. Specific operational details, such as success or casualty rates, are top secret and withheld even from members of parliament. This practice drew heavy criticism, resulting in plans to increase transparency and accountability by relaying mission details to selected members of the Bundestag.

Structure

The fighting units are divided into four commando companies of about 100 men each and the special commando company with veteran members, taking supporting tasks. Each of the four commando companies has five specialized platoons:

* 1st platoon: land insertions
* 2nd platoon: airborne operations
* 3rd platoon: amphibious operations
* 4th platoon: operations in special geographic or meteorological surroundings (e.g. mountains or polar regions)
* 5th platoon: reconnaissance, sniper and counter-sniper operations
* Command Platoon

There are four commando squads in every platoon. Each of these groups consists of about four equally skilled soldiers. One of each group is specially trained as weapons expert, medic, combat engineer or communications expert respectively. Additionally a group can contain other specialists, e.g. heavy weapons or language experts.

Selection and training

Initially, only officers and non-commissioned officers of the Bundeswehr could apply to the KSK. The basic Bundeswehr Commando course ("Einzelkämpferlehrgang") was a prerequisite for application. Since 2005, application is also open for civilians and enlisted personnel, who have to complete an 18-month Long Range Surveillance training before the KSK selection phases.

The selection is divided into two phases, a three-week-long first phase with a fitness and psychological test (about 50% pass rate) and a three-month-long second phase testing physical endurance (8 - 10% pass rate). The KSK use the Black Forest as a testing area for this phase. In this time the candidates must undergo a 90-hour long distance cross-country run. Then they have to go through a three week international survival, escape and evasion course called Combat Survival Course at the German Special Operations Training Centre (formerly the International Long Range Reconnaissance School) in Pfullendorf.

If candidates have passed these tests, they can begin their 2 to 3 year training in the KSK. This training includes about 20 Jungle, Desert, Urban and Counter-terrorism specialist courses at over 17 schools worldwide, e.g. in Norway (Arctic), Austria (Mountains), El Paso/Texas or Israel (Desert), San Diego (Water) or Belize (Jungle).

According to press releases from May 2008, the Bundeswehr aims to advance the attractivity of service in the KSK to women[1]. This is in part due to the fact that the KSK could never reach its targeted number of troops in the past[2]. Although the KSK wasn't explicitly restricted to male troops since the Bundeswehr opened all units to women in 2001, so far no woman has been able to pass the physical requirements of the KSK.

Equipment:

* H&K P8 semi-automatic pistol
* H&K USP Tactical
* H&K Mark 23
* H&K 416 assault rifles
* H&K G36 assault rifle with AG36 grenade launcher, in different versions including the G36C
* H&K G3
* H&K MP5 submachine gun in various versions including the H&K MP5K
* H&K MP7 submachine gun
* H&K UMP submachine gun
* G22 sniper rifle
* G24 sniper rifle
* H&K PSG-1 sniper rifle[citation needed]
* Panzerfaust 3 rocket propelled grenade
* H&K MG4 squad automatic weapon
* H&K 21 general purpose machine gun
* Rheinmetall MG3 general purpose machine gun
* H&K GMG automatic grenade launcher
* Mercedes-Benz G-Class utility vehicles
* AGF (Light infantry vehicle)
* Snowmobiles
* Klepper canoes
* Round parachute and HALO/HAHO equipment.

German Commandos Withdrawn From Afghanistan

October 9, 2008: Germany is pulling its commandos out of Afghanistan. The KSK commandos have been there for most of the last seven years. Many Germans, especially leftist politicians and journalists, have not been happy with that. This has resulted in several unflattering, and largely inaccurate, articles about the KSK in the German media. There was also an investigation of several KSK men, accused of kicking an Afghan prisoner. While the KSK were allowed to fight, they also operated under some restrictions. They generally could not fire at the enemy unless first fired upon. This led to at least one senior Taliban leader getting away from the KSK. The fleeing Taliban honcho was not firing at the pursuing KSK, so the commandos could not take him down.

Germany sent 120 KSK commandos to Afghanistan in late 2001. They were not given their own area of operation, but worked with American special forces and commandos as needed. The KSK commandos are the first German troops to engage in combat since 1945 (not counting some communist East German military advisers who may have had to defend themselves in places like Africa. German peacekeepers in the 1990s Balkans have not had to fight.) KSK's achievement was celebrated in late 2001, when a supply of quality German beer was flown in for the troops.

The KSK were respected by their fellow special operations soldiers, and particularly liked because the Germans were sent beer rations (two cans a day per man). The KSK troops would often share the brew with their fellow commandos, which sometimes resulted in favors in the form of special equipment or intel data. Even with the restrictions, the KSK saw lots of action, but little of it was publicized, lest it generate more criticism back home.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htsf/articles/20081009.aspx

Tiger - Eurocopter

Apache Lifts Off at Balad

A AH-64 Apache Attack Helicopter hovers before takeoff, Jan 3. A 30 mm automatic Boeing M230 chain gun is located under the fuselage. It provides a rate of fire of 625 rounds per minute. The helicopter has capacity for up to 1,200 rounds of ammunition. Photo by Master Sgt. John Nimmo Joint Combat Camera Center

http://strategypage.com/military_photos/military_photos_200812402858.aspx

Looking for Enemies in Iraq

A Kiowa helicopter crew searches for possible enemy activity along the Zaghytun Chay river in northern Iraq, Nov. 20

http://strategypage.com/military_photos/military_photos_200811902040.aspx

Standard Missile 3

Standard Missile-3 is being developed for Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) as part of the Missile Defense Agency’s Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS). The Aegis BMD system integrates SM-3 with the Aegis Weapon System (AWS) aboard U.S. Navy cruisers to provide an umbrella of protection against short to intermediate-range ballistic missile threats. SM-3 is compatible with the MK 41 Vertical Launching System (VLS) deployed on many U.S. Navy and international surface combatants.

As a ballistic missile threat rises above the horizon, ship’s radar acquires, begins tracking, and the weapon system begins calculating the engagement solution. Upon command from the ship’s weapon system, the SM-3 boosts out of the launcher and establishes radio communication with the ship.

After MK 72 booster burnout, the MK 104 Dual Thrust Rocket Motor (DTRM) ignites. In-flight communications from the ship guide the missile toward the predicted intercept point. After MK 104 burnout and separation, the MK 136 Third Stage Rocket Motor (TSRM) ignites, propelling the third stage out of the atmosphere. Throughout its flight, the missile continues to receive in-flight target updates from the ship to refine the intercept guidance solution. The TSRM contains two separate pulses that can be initiated to optimize the engagement timeline. During flyout, the third stage pitches over and ejects the nosecone, exposing the SM-3 Kinetic Warhead (KW). Following TSRM burnout roughly 30 seconds before intercept, the SM-3 KW separates from the third stage and immediately searches for the target based on pointing data received from the ship. The KW acquires the ballistic missile warhead with its long-wavelength imaging infrared seeker. The KW’s Solid Divert and Attitude Control System (SDACS) precisely maneuvers the KW to enable a hit-to-kill intercept. As the KW closes on the target, it will identify the lethal payload area and shift its guidance aimpoint to ensure a lethal hit, destroying the target with more than 130 megajoules of kinetic energy, or the equivalent of a 10 ton truck traveling at 600 miles per hour.

http://strategypage.com/military_photos/military_photos_200821554053.aspx

Religious Frictions In The Moslem World

May 27, 2008: The West, and non-Moslems in general, aren't the only ones suffering from the effects of Islamic extremism. It isn't just the violence of terrorists, it's the threats and harassment. Moslems suffer from this the most, and that has led to a strange revival of Christianity in Moslem nations. In Algeria, for example, the local Christian community has grown from a few hundred, to over 30,000, in the last 25 years. Moslems are looking for a change, and those that cannot get out, try and find solutions closer to home. This in spite of the fact that Islamic extremists are particularly hostile to Moslems who convert to any other religion.


During the Lebanese civil war of 1975-1990, Christians and Moslems fought bitterly over political, cultural and, ultimately, religious differences. The capital, Beirut, was divided into Christian and Moslem sections by the Green Line. The name came from the fact that in this ruble filled no man's land, only grass and weeds survived. There have been a lot more Green Lines since then. Few realized it at the time, but this war was but the first of many between Christians and Moslems in the 20th and 21st centuries.


Many of the earliest Moslem converts were Christians. And many of the peoples Moslem armies unsuccessfully sought to conquer were Christian. But Islam as a political force was in decline for several centuries until the 1970s. Then things changed, and continue to change. Islam was again on the march, and few have noticed how many places it was turning into religious war with Christians and other non-Moslems.


In Asia we have a green line between India and Pakistan. Inside India, many Moslem communities remain, and feelings aren't always neighborly. Indonesia and the Philippines suffer growing strife between Moslems and non-Moslems. Malaysia has more fanatical Moslems persecuting more laid back ones, as well as some large non-Moslem minorities. China has a large Moslem community that generates an increasing amount of violence. Russia and America have formed a curious partnership to deal with Islamic based terrorism coming out of Afghanistan. And in Chechnya, Russia faces Islamic inspired violence all alone.


Africa has a rather dusty green line south of the semi-arid Sahel region. Many African nations are split by increasingly sensitive religious differences. The Moslems are in the north, Christians and animists in the south. Nigeria, Chad and Sudan are among the more violent hot spots at the moment. Although when the Moslem Somalis stop fighting each other they will return to raiding their Christian and animist neighbors to the south and west.


The Middle East still contains many of non-Moslems. None have their own country, except for Israel. But Egypt contains five million Copts, native Christians never converted to Islam. Similar small Christian communities exist throughout the Middle East, and growing hostility from Moslem neighbors causes many to migrate, or get killed. Moslems have also turned their righteous wrath on dissident Moslem sects. The Druze and Alawites are considered by many Moslems as pagans pretending to be Moslems. Similarly, the Shias of Iran and neighboring areas are considered less orthodox not just for their admitted differences, but because many adherents openly practice customs of the pre-Islamic Zoroastrian religion. These differences are less frequently overlooked today. To survive, the many Druze have allied themselves with Israel, and most of the current Syrian leadership are Alawites who ally themselves with Shia Iran, the better to keep their majority Sunni population under control.


Even Europe as a Green Line. The Moslems in the Balkans (Albanians and Bosnians) have been a constant source of strife for the last decade. Moslem migrants in Europe face even more persecution because of all those Green Lines, and this makes it easier for radical groups to recruit and carry out their crusade against Christians.


But the Green Lines are about more than religion. A lot of it is politics. One of the reasons Islam ran out of steam centuries ago was that the Moslem areas never embraced democracy, or many kinds of political and technological change. Until the 20th century, most Moslems were ruled by colonial overlords or dictatorial tyrants. The colonies are gone, but democracy has had a hard time taking hold. The dictatorships are still there. And the people are restless. Radical Islam arose as an alternative to all the other forms of government that never seemed to work. In theory, establishing "Islamic Republics" would solve all problems. People could vote, but only Moslems in good standing could be candidates for office. A committee of Moslem holy men would have veto power over political decisions. Islamic law would be used. It was simple, and it makes sense to a lot of Moslems in nations ruled by thugs and thieves.


Islamic Republics don't seem to work. The only one that has been established (not counting others that say they are but aren't) is in Iran. The major problems were two fold. First, the radicals had too much power. Radical religious types are no fun, and you can't argue with them because they are on a mission from God. Most people tire of this in short order. To speed this disillusionment, many of the once poor and now powerful religious leaders became corrupt. This eventually sends your popularity ratings straight to hell.


It will take a generation or so for everyone in the Moslem world to figure out where all this is going. This is already happening in Iran, where moderates are getting stronger every day and everyone is trying to avoid a civil war. While the radicals are a minority, they are a determined bunch.


Radicals throughout the Moslem world continue to take advantage of dissatisfaction among the people and recruit terrorists and supporters. To help this process along they invoke the ancient grudges popular among many Moslems. Most of these legends involve Christians beating on Moslems. To most radicals it makes sense to get people agitated at far away foreigners rather than some strongman nearby.


Most radicals lack the skills, money or ability to carry their struggle to far off places. So most of the agitation takes place among Moslem populations. Any violent attitudes generated are easily directed at available non-Moslems. Thus we have all those Green Lines. But the more violence you have along those Green Lines, the more really fanatical fighters are developed. These are the people who are willing to travel to foreign lands and deal with non-believers, and kill them for the cause. We call it terrorism, the fanatics call it doing God's work. All because of religious wars in far off places.


In Europe, many Christians see Moslem migrants as poor, ignorant refugees in need of help. Many of those migrants see Christians as eventual converts to Islam. Many Moslem clerics openly preach of this. And some of these sermons remind the faithful that violence can be used to make the infidels see the errors of their Christian ways.


So it's ironic that so many Moslems back in the old country seek refuge in Christianity, often at great risk to themselves and their families.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htterr/articles/20080527.aspx

Secret Weapon Identified

The secret weapon has a name and it's 1Lt Tom "Wheels" Wheeler, Al Dhafra AB, United Arab Emirates. The F-16C (84-1223) in the picture flew 49 combat missions.

http://www.strategypage.com/humor/articles/military_jokes_2004617.asp

Landing Accident

New Digital Cockpit

New Terrorist Weapon

Fully Accessorized Rifle

Osprey Night Mission

CENTRAL IRAQ (Feb. 2, 2008) An MV-22 Osprey vertical-lift aircraft is refueled before a night mission in central Iraq. U.S. Navy photo by Chief Mass Communication Specialist Joe Kane

http://www.strategypage.com/military_photos/military_photos_200826234832.aspx

Foward Operating Base Salerno

An M777 howitzer fires off rounds during a training exercise on Forward Operating Base Salerno, Feb. 28. The howitzer is manned by artillermen from the 3rd Battalion, 321st Field Artillery Regiment, 18th Fires Brigade. Photo by Spc. Micah Clare 4th Brigade Combat Team, 82nd Airborne Division Public Affairs

http://www.strategypage.com/military_photos/military_photos_200831615212.aspx

F-117 Last Refueling

A pair of specially painted F-117 Nighthawks fly off from their last refueling by the Ohio National Guard's 121st Air Refueling Wing. The F-117s were retired March 11 in a farewell ceremony at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio. (U.S. Air Force photo/Senior Master Sgt. Kim Frey)

http://www.strategypage.com/military_photos/military_photos_200804132219.aspx

F/A-18 Escorts Bear

PACIFIC (Feb. 2, 2008) An F/A-18 Hornet from Carrier Air Wing (CVW) 11, embarked aboard the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz (CVN 68) escorts a Russian Tu-95 Bear, long rang bomber aircraft on Feb. 9, 2008 south of Japan. The bomber neared the vicinity of the carrier resulting in the fighter intercept. Nimitz was transiting through the Western Pacific on a regularly scheduled deployment when the incident occurred. U.S. Navy Photo

http://www.strategypage.com/military_photos/military_photos_200821223417.aspx

Rapid-Reaction Force Afghanistan

March 05, 2008 Soldiers from the 82nd Airborne Division, Task Force Gladius, wait for another CH-47 Chinook helicopter at Forward Operating Base Morales-Frasier, Afghanistan. The Soldiers will fly to Surobi District to protect a CH-47 that made a hard landing there, until mechanics can certify it safe to fly. Photo by Sgt. Johnny R. Aragon

http://www.strategypage.com/military_photos/military_photos_200838231733.aspx

North Korean Runway

North Korea is building a 6,000 foot runway, that is partially inside a mountain, just north of the DMZ. Google Earth shows that construction of the runway is still underway.

http://www.strategypage.com/military_photos/20080429233050.aspx

Aggressors on the Prowl

Two F-15 Eagles fly in formation with an F-22 Raptor April 24 during a support mission near Nellis Air Force Base, Nev. The F-15s act as "aggressors" to replicate potential adversary air force capabilities, tactics, training and equipment. (U.S. Air Force photo by Master Sgt. Scott Reed)

http://www.strategypage.com/military_photos/2008050304013.aspx

Australian Defence Budget Not Enough to Sustain Asia-Pacific Operations

02 May 2008 14:44

The Australian Government's defence budget is not large enough to sustain the country's current commitments in the Asia-Pacific, a former senior advisor says.

Professor Hugh White, who advised the government in the 1980s and is now at thinktank the Lowy Institute, told Radio Australia the government needs to spend more wisely on air and sea weaponry so it can keep launching independent operations in the Asia-Pacific.

"Air and maritime capabilities will be the heart of Australia's strategic weight in Asia," he says.

"To my mind, in particular, that will require large-scale investments in combat aircraft and the systems that support them and in submarines."

The Australian Government is writing the first defence whitepaper in eight years on what military operations the armed forces will undertake in the future.

By Elizabeth Clifford-Marsh

http://www.army-technology.com/news/news4694.html

WATCHKEEPER UAV Completes First Flight

07 May 2008 14:19

Thales UK says its WATCHKEEPER unmanned air vehicle (UAV), developed for the UK Ministry of Defence, has completed its first flight.

WATCHKEEPER will provide the UK armed forces with an essential intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition and reconnaissance (ISTAR) capability, and will be a key component of the UK's network enabled capability.

Thales will deliver equipment, training and facilities, with the capability coming into service from 2010.

Managing Director of Thales UK's aerospace business Richard Deakin says 2008 is an important year for the programme as it will also see the testing and integration of the automatic take-off and landing system, the I-Master radar and EO/IR/LTD payloads.

"The I-Master radar flight trials have been extremely encouraging," he says.

"The SAR imagery seen in the initial trials is outstanding and testing the GMTI functionality has just commenced.

"The combination of these sensors operating in a networked manner will certainly provide a transformational step in ISTAR capability for the UK armed forces."

By Elizabeth Clifford-Marsh

http://www.army-technology.com/news/news4725.html

G36 Rifles

It has often been said by weapons experts that there are very few new developments on the small arms horizon that are truly revolutionary; that we have reached a plateau. Though the G11 project is dead, and was certainly a harbinger of what is possible over the horizon, the G36 is a combination of old and new, tried and true that when combined makes for the further refinement of the small arms maker's art. Instead of starting from scratch with totally new design, the engineers at HK, led by the young and rising star Ernst Mauch, through the early years of the 1990s made what was internally called the HK50. It now carries the Bundeswehr designation G36.

A first departure from the signature HK operating system, roller delayed blowback, the G36 is gas operated.

They borrowed from other tried and proven designs. There is the short gas system reminiscent of the Kalashnikov and FAL designs. The rotating bolt of the M16 series. The bolt carrier of the AR18. The folding stock of the FAL and SIG 550 series. But in the newest refinement of the gunmaker's art with respect to military rifles, the extensive use of polymer throughout the rifle makes it lighter and more corrosion resistant; two qualities essential to the soldier.

The G36 is a reliable rifle, much more so than the M16 series. Though hard core M16 and AR-15 aficionados will have a difficult time accepting what they might describe derisively as 'Euro-Trash,' there is no denying the fact that the G36 rarely, if ever, jams. The most desirable departure from the M16 design is the fact that the gas used to operate the action is vented in the forearm, and not blown back into the action like the 'exhaust pipe' of the M16 gas tube. The G36 jams so rarely that HK has said that they have a G36K that has been fired more than 25,000 rounds without cleaning and no failures. I defy an M16 to duplicate that.

Though it would be doubtful that the G36 would ever replace the M16 for the U.S. military, it is taking off in the U.S. law enforcement community. Why not? Quality is in high demand.

MP5 The standard by which all others are judged. Cal. 9mm x 19 NATO

It is simply an opinion, but one shared by the majority of tactical teams at all levels in the United States. You can sense it the first time that you fire one. The MP5 is the culmination of countless efforts to blend reliability, controllability and firepower into a small package. With the MP5, that design objective has been achieved. The MP5 is that by which all other designs are judged.

Appearing in countless movies of late, it does not have the catchy name of some guns that have been demonized by the press and some politicians, who quake in fear at the mere mention of names like 'Uzi' or 'Tec 9' or 'MAC 10.' Your average street criminal might not know what to call the greatest submachine gun ever designed. Chances are, if you laid one down next to a Tec 9 and asked the criminal to choose one, he might opt for the Tec. So much for good taste. There are many photographs of the MP5. I will share some of my favorites with you here. Just for the record, many published articles designate the MP5 as thus: "MP-5." Not correct. There is no hyphen.

MP5 Timeline From "Project 64" by Frank W. James

1964: HK designer Tilo Möller, Manfred Guhring, Georg Seidl and Helmut Baureuter start design work on "Project 64" --the beginning of the MP5.
1966: The first production MP5 is officially introduced, but by mid-1966, the German Border Police adopt the MP5. Also the first foreign sale was to the Swiss Procurement Department for Arms when the Swiss Police adopt the MP5.

1968: The first blank-firing attachments made for the MP5.
1971: First series of modifications and improvements made to the MP5:

* Serrations removed from bolt group.
* Trigger pull lightened for improved accuracy
* Bolt carrier shortened from previous long extension carrier
* Ejection port lengthened (front to back) and a piece riveted to the rear portion to lower the profile and improve case ejection.

1972: Radius changed on chamber from 2mm to 2.5 mm for improved feeding.

1973: The synthetic trigger housing was strengthened with glass fiber.

* The pistol grip changed from the closed, glued on end cap to the hollow open design extant even today.
* The shape of the buttplate is changed from convex to concave
* The scope mounting points are added to the top of the stamped steel receiver for use with the HK quick-detach scope mounting system.
* The R3/3 sling system is introduced.

1974: The first prototype for the MP5SD is designed and built

1975: A new cocking lever is designed for the MP5
1976: The MP5K or Kurz model is developed at the request of a South American sales representative of HK.

1977: A special lacquer coating is developed for increased corrosion resistance on guns sold for export.
1978: Testing begins on the special MP5K firing briefcase.

1978: The rubber buffer is added to the retractable sliding buttstock.
1978: Extensive environmental testing iis completed on the new retractable buttstock.

1978: The tropical or "Export" forearm is tested.
1978: Testing of the new MP5 extractor spring completed.

1979: New MP5 Extractor spring introduced. For identity purposes, it is copper colored.
1980: Bushings in the rear of the MP5 receiver are strengthened by a different welding process.

1982: A new three round burst trigger group with four settings and a polymer housing is introduced.

1983: A special locked bolt version of the MP5SD is tested.

1984: The MP5PT is introduced. Designed specifically for use solely with Dynamit Nobel's plastic training ammo, it cannot fire live ammunition.

1985: Comparison testing conducted between the standard MP5SD and different versions of the SMGI, SMGII and MP2000.

1988: The "Maritim" MP5 is introduced. The Maritim is a special MP5 designed for a saltwater environment. It features special corrosion resistant coatings and finishes.

1988: Chamber flutes are installed by an EDM process, instead of broaching. Additionally, the number of chamber flutes is increased from 12 to 16.

1989: The height of the ejector is raised by .5 mm.

1989: The SP89 is introduced.

1989: Manufacture of the retractable buttstock is changed, with the buttplate being molded onto the buttstock metal.

1990: A special "SEF" trigger group is introduced that "locks out" the full auto function. Full auto fire is achieved when the right end of the safety lever is depressed, to allow the safety/selector lever to the full auto setting.

1991: Improvements made to the bolt head and chamber face. Also the contact moment was changed on the ejector in relation to the bolt group.

1991: The roller holder is changed from the flat plate to a spring or wire type holder previously seen on the HK23E.

1991: Angle on the locking piece for the MP5SD is changed from 120 degrees to 115 degrees.

1991: The PDW folding stock is developed by HK Inc. in the U.S. for personal defense and VIP protection details. When fitted to the MP5K, it allows the short MP5K to be fired from the shoulder, greatly enhancing accuracy.

1992: The MP5 in 10mm Auto and .40 S&W is introduced.

1999: The MP5F is developed and introduced.
2000: The MP5/10 and MP5/40 are discontinued.

Iran Ejected from Defence Trade Show

25 April 2008 14:07

Iranian defence firms have been ejected from the Defence Services Asia trade show in Malaysia for exhibiting "lethal and offensive equipment" in violation of UN Security Council sanctions.

Deputy Prime Minister Najib Razak says the Iranian firms had been informed they could take part provided they did not contravene UN resolutions, which includes a ban on arms exports, AFP reports.

"Unfortunately ... they displayed equipment that clearly contravenes the UN resolution such as missiles and missile systems," Najib says.

"We were left in a situation that we did not have any option - since Malaysia is committed to respecting and adhering to the UN resolution - but to terminate their participation."

By Elizabeth Clifford-Marsh

http://www.army-technology.com/news/news4624.html

M1A1 / M1A2 Abrams Main Battle Tank, USA

The M1A1/2 Abrams main battle tank is manufactured by General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS). The first M1 tank was produced in 1978, the M1A1 in 1985 and the M1A2 in 1986.
"An M1 tank's main armament is the 120mm M256 smoothbore gun."

3,273 M1 tanks were produced for the US Army. 4,796 M1A1 tanks were built for the US Army, 221 for the US Marines and 880 co-produced with Egypt.

77 M1A2 tanks have been built for the US Army, 315 for Saudi Arabia and 218 for Kuwait. For the M1A2 upgrade programme, over 600 M1 Abrams tanks are being upgraded to M1A2 configuration. Deliveries began in 1998.

In March 2004, the Australian Army announced the purchase of 59 US Army M1A1 tanks to enter service from 2007. The contract was signed in November 2005 and the first five were handed over in February 2006 at GDLS in Lima, Ohio. The first 18 tanks were delivered to the Australian Army at the School of Armour in Victoria in September 2006. The remaining 41, to be based in Darwin, were delivered in March 2007.

In June 2006, Saudi Arabia requested the foreign military sale of 58 M1A1 tanks and the upgrade of these and the 315 M1A2 already in the Saudi inventory to M1A2S configuration. The upgrade involves rebuilding to a 'like new' condition, similar to the US Army Abrams Integrated Management Program (AIM).

In August 2007, Egypt requested the foreign military sale of an additional 125 M1A1 tanks, which would bring the country’s fleet to 1,005 M1A1 tanks.
M1A2 SYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PACKAGE (SEP)

In February 2001, GDLS were contracted to supply 240 M1A2 tanks with a System Enhancement Package (SEP) by 2004. The M1A2 SEP contains an embedded version of the US Army's Force XXI command and control architecture; new Raytheon Commander's Independent Thermal Viewer (CITV) with second generation thermal imager; commander's display for digital colour terrain maps; DRS Techologies second generation GEN II TIS thermal imaging gunner's sight with increased range; driver's integrated display and thermal management system.

The US Army decided to cancel future production of the M1A2 SEP from FY2004, but in June 2005 ordered the upgraded of a further 60 M1A2 tanks to SEP configuration. A further 60 were ordered in August 2006, and 180 in November 2006.

Under the Firepower Enhancement Package (FEP), DRS Techologies has also been awarded a contract for the GEN II TIS to upgrade US Marine Corps M1A1 tanks. GEN II TIS is based on the 480 x 4 SADA (Standard Advanced Dewar Assembly) detector.

The FEP also includes an eyesafe laser rangefinder, north-finding module and precision lightweight global positioning receiver which provide targeting solutions for the new Far Target Locate (FTL) function. FTL gives accurate targeting data to a range of 8,000m with a CEP (Circular Error of Probability) of less than 35m.

In November 2007, General Dynamics was awarded a contract for the upgrade of 240 M1A2 SEP version one tanks to the version two configuration which has improved sights, displays and a tank-infantry phone. Work is to be completed by September 2009.

In February 2008, General Dynamics was awarded a multi-year contract to upgrade to SEP Version Two (V2) configuration the remaining 435 M1A1 tanks in the US Army inventory.

FBCB2

In June 2004, DRS Technologies was awarded a contract to provide systems including rugged appliqué computers for the M1A2 Abrams tanks (and M2A3 Bradley fighting vehicles) as part of the US Army's Force XXI Battle Command, Brigade and Below (FBCB2) program.

FBCB2 is a digital battle command information system which provides enhanced interoperability and situation awareness from brigade to individual soldier that will be used in conjunction with the Army's Tactical Internet.
M1 ABRAMS ARMAMENT

The main armament is the 120mm M256 smoothbore gun, developed by Rheinmetall Waffe Munition GmbH of Germany. The 120mm gun fires the following ammunition: the M865 TPCSDS-T and M831 TP-T training rounds, the M8300 HEAT-MP-T and the M829 APFSDS-T which includes a depleted uranium penetrator. Textron Systems provides the Cadillac Gage gun turret drive stabilisation system.

The commander has a 12.7mm Browning M2 machine gun and the loader has a 7.62mm M240 machine gun. A 7.62mm M240 machine gun is also mounted coaxially on the right hand side of the main armament.
DEPLETED URANIUM ARMOUR
"The M1A1 tank incorporates steel-encased depleted uranium armour."

The M1A1 tank incorporates steel-encased depleted uranium armour. Armour bulkheads separate the crew compartment from the fuel tanks.

The top panels of the tank are designed to blow outwards in the event of penetration by a HEAT projectile. The tank is protected against Nuclear, Biological and Chemical (NBC) warfare.

One L8A1 six-barrelled smoke grenade discharger is fitted on each side of the turret. A smoke screen can also be laid by an engine-operated system.

In August 2006, General Dynamics Land Systems was awarded a contract to produce 505 Tank Urban Survivability Kits (TUSK) for the US Army Abrams tanks. TUSK includes add-on reactive armour tiles, a Loader's Armour Gun Shield (LAGS), a Tank Infantry Phone (TIP), remote thermal sight and BAE Systems thermal Drivers Rear-View Camera (DRVC). TUSK entered service on M1A1/M1A2 tanks in late 2007 and has been deployed in Iraq.

FIRE CONTROL AND OBSERVATION

The commander's station is equipped with six periscopes, providing a 360° view. The Raytheon Commander's Independent Thermal Viewer (CITV) provides the commander with independent stabilised day and night vision with a 360° view, automatic sector scanning, automatic target cueing of the gunner's sight and back-up fire control.

The M1A2 Abrams tank has a two-axis Raytheon Gunner's Primary Sight- Line of Sight (GPS-LOS) which increases the first round hit probability by providing faster target acquisition and improved gun pointing. The Thermal Imaging System (TIS) has magnification x10 narrow field of view and x3 wide field of view. The thermal image is displayed in the eyepiece of the gunner's sight together with the range measurement from a laser rangefinder.

The Northrop Grumman (formerly Litton) Laser Systems Eyesafe Laser Rangefinder (ELRF) has a range accuracy to within 10m and target discrimination of 20m. The gunner also has a Kollmorgen Model 939 auxiliary sight with magnification x8 and field of view 8°.
"The commander's station is equipped with six periscopes, providing a 360° view."

The digital fire control computer is supplied by General Dynamics - Canada (formerly Computing Devices Canada). The fire control computer automatically calculates the fire control solution based on: lead angle measurement; bend of the gun measured by the muzzle reference system; velocity measurement from a wind sensor on the roof of the turret; data from a pendulum static cant sensor located at the centre of the turret roof. The operator manually inputs data on ammunition type, temperature, and barometric pressure.

The driver has either three observation periscopes or two periscopes on either side and a central image intensifying periscope for night vision. The periscopes provide 120° field of view. The DRS Technologies Driver's Vision Enhancer (DVE), AN/VSS-5, is based on a 328 x 245 element uncooled infrared detector array, operating in the 7.5 to 13 micron waveband. A Raytheon Driver's Thermal Viewer, AN/VAS-3, is installed on the M1A2 Abrams tanks for Kuwait.

PROPULSION

The M1 is equipped with a Honeywell AGT 1500 gas turbine engine. The Allison X-1100-3B transmission provides four forward and two reverse gears.

The US Army has selected Honeywell International Engines and Systems and General Electric to develop a new LV100-5 gas turbine engine for the M1A2. The new engine is lighter and smaller with rapid acceleration, quieter running and no visible exhaust.

Mullen: Nuclear Project Reaffirms Proliferation Dangers

By Donna Miles
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, April 25, 2008 – Syria’s building of a secret nuclear facility with North Korean help reinforces the need to prevent the spread of weapons of mass destruction, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said today.

“It should serve as a reminder to us all of the very real dangers of proliferation and need to rededicate ourselves to prevent the spread of weapons of mass destruction, particularly into the hands of a state or a group with terrorist connections,” Navy Adm. Mike Mullen said during a Pentagon briefing.

The reactor, destroyed by Israel in September before it became operational, was being built to produce plutonium for nuclear weapons, and “not intended for peaceful purposes,” White House Press Secretary Dana Perino said in a statement issued yesterday.

The reactor was “carefully hidden from view,” in the eastern Syrian desert and not configured for peaceful uses, the statement noted. In addition, it was being built in defiance of international obligations, without notification to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

But even more damning, the statement noted, was the fact that Syria scrambled to “bury evidence of its existence” after Israeli aircraft bombed it Sept. 6. “This cover-up only served to reinforce our confidence that this reactor was not intended for peaceful activities,” the statement said.

The White House pointed a finger directly at North Korea for helping Syria build the facility. “We are convinced, based on a variety of information, that North Korea assisted Syria's covert nuclear activities,” the statement said.

“We have long been seriously concerned about North Korea's nuclear weapons program and its proliferation activities,” it continued. “North Korea's clandestine nuclear cooperation with Syria is a dangerous manifestation of those activities.”

The White House called the construction of the reactor “a dangerous and potentially destabilizing development for the region and the world.” It also shows that often “the same regimes that sponsor proliferation also sponsor terrorism and foster instability, and cooperate with one another in doing so,” the statement said.

The United States will continue working with its partners in the Six Party framework to ensure North Korea stops its nuclear activities, the White House said.

It also pressed Syria to “come clean before the world” about its illicit nuclear activities.

“The Syrian regime supports terrorism, takes action that destabilizes Lebanon, allows the transit of some foreign fighters into Iraq and represses its own people,” it said. “If Syria wants better relations with the international community, it should put an end to these activities.”

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=49692

U.S. May Send More Troops to Afghanistan in 2009, Gates Says

By Fred W. Baker III
American Forces Press Service

EN ROUTE TO MUSCAT, Oman, April 4, 2008 – The United States may send more troops to Afghanistan in 2009, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates confirmed today.

President Bush said during the NATO summit conference that ended today that he expects the United States would make a significant additional contribution to the Afghanistan mission next year, Gates said.

But Gates backed off any specific commitment, saying the United States first wants to see how much support comes from other allies and how security efforts progress in 2008.

“I don’t want to make significant long-term commitments of additional U.S. forces before giving the allies the opportunity to see what they’re going to do,” Gates said.

The French announced a battalion’s worth of troops -- about 700 -- would take on part of the mission. Gates also said other nations made commitments for troops and special teams. A U.S. official at the summit said about a dozen or so countries have made commitments, but it would be a few weeks before final numbers could be tallied.

Gates said the 3,500 U.S. Marines deploying to Afghanistan this month through November will be able handle the 2008 fighting season, and that there is no reason to push sending more U.S. troops.

“Given explicit recognition by the alliance that this is a long-term project, I think waiting a while before committing additional forces of any consequence from the United States makes sense in a number of different areas,” Gates said.

Also, because the mission there is an alliance undertaking, one of the considerations is how large a role the United States should play, as opposed to other allies being involved up front as well, he said.

The secretary did not say how many troops would be sent, but it likely will not be the 3,500 additional combat troops commanders on the ground have requested. He also did not say where the troops would be deployed, saying that decision likely would be made by the new International Security Assistance Force commander scheduled to be selected this summer.

Gates said progress in 2007 showed the Taliban they cannot win a conventional fight against NATO troops. The Taliban also now control no territory in the country, leading them to resort to terrorist tactics.

Successes in the country in 2008 will determine how many, if any, and what types of troops would be deployed, Gates said. Still, because of the importance of the mission there, Gates said, the United States is prepared to commit “substantial” troops. But he added that no specific plans to send additional troops are in the works.

Even with the war in Iraq extending troop deployments there and dwindling “dwell time” at home for troops between deployments, there is strong political and public support for sending additional troops to Afghanistan, Gates said.

The secretary said a “big piece” of any decision on troop levels in Afghanistan depends on whether deployments to Iraq can be shortened. Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of Multinational Force Iraq, is slated to report to Bush and Congress next week on progress and the way ahead in Iraq.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=49475

German Scientist Exposes Chemtrails As Military Operations

(NaturalNews) A TV news report from Germany available at: (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVc9GX5K_As) confirmed that the German Military is manipulating the climate in Germany. As a result scientists have filed a lawsuit against the government for climate manipulation.

The video concludes, “We can state with a 97% certainty that we have on our hands chemical trails (chemtrails) comprised by fine dust containing polymers and metals, used to disrupt radar signals.”

The purpose of chemtrails, which are well documented over the United State and other parts of the world, according to researchers, is to manipulate the weather. Karsten Brandt, German meteorologist states, "The Federal Army is Manipulating the Meteorological maps."

The disruption of radar signals is the main purpose theorizes Mr. Brandt in the interview. “I was surprised that this artificial cloud was so wide-spread. The radar images are stunning considering the needed tons of dispersed elements - although, the federal army claims that only small amounts of material were propagated. The military heads claim that the substances used are not harmful.”

Johannes Remmel, German Green party representative states, "The government must provide explanations to the unsuspecting population." While radar is tracking suspicious aircraft, the Germany Military then uses counterfeit satellite imagery to hide their operations.

In Germany, weather manipulation is prohibited, and I would likewise believe that it is prohibited in the U.S. as well.

Since Chemtrails are so widespread, I would rule out the idea that this is just military performing operations to disrupt radar signals as part of some sort of drill.

The forefront of these operations in the United States appears to be the US Navy, as detailed in “Death in the Air: Globalism, Terrorism & Toxic Warfare,” by Dr. Len Horowitz. Many government watchdogs claim global depopulation, the targeted reduction of the world’s population by two-thirds, is secretly the reason behind chemtrail spraying.

An alternative theory to explain Chemtrails, would be that a new weapon related to controlling the weather is being deployed. By creating droughts and thus famines, large populations could be easily controlled or eliminated. Other countries could be easily controlled and brought to their knees by a global power if the weather could be controlled or altered.

For a while I was confused between chemtrails, and contrails. Contrails are the exhaust of an air craft, it leaves a trail in the sky and the trail rapidly dissipates. With chemtrails, they initially look identical to contrails, but rather than the trail dissipating, the trail expands and then starts to look like a cloud. Over the Silicon Valley where I live, I daily witness these chemtrails starting and stopping from airplanes. In other words, the plane has control over the chemicals it is releasing. Also, I have noticed on some days the area is filled with a gray hazy muck, and the mountains almost disappear. This is highly unusual especially when just one day before, the mountains were totally clear.

Part of the undercurrents, at least in the United States, is the concept being marketing through radio, television and schools, that the earth is overpopulated. The idea of overpopulation, as the cause of our problems, was something that I had believed in for a time.

I believed in that idea until I realized the abundance of nature. Just seeing the amount of food produced by one healthy tree, and the millions of acres of unused land in central California, helped me understand Nature's abundance.

The creator did not put humans on earth to suffer, to starve and to die. The creator of life gave us vast resources from which to be healthy. Humans are grossly misusing earth's delicate resources, and thus we have created an experience of lack and deprivation. The lack we experience is not natural, but a reflection of our disconnection from the source of life.

Every action, thought, and feeling has a cause and an effect. Evil never will win, it cannot. But we all need to work together to bring more awareness to the dreaded reality - that our government seems bent on making this planet a military war zone.

http://www.naturalnews.com/022838.html

THAAD Theatre High Altitude Area Defense Missile System, USA

The THAAD (Theatre High Altitude Area Defense) missile system is an easily transportable defensive weapon system to protect against hostile incoming threats such as tactical and theatre ballistic missiles at ranges of 200km and at altitudes up to 150km.The THAAD system provides the upper tier of a 'layered defensive shield' to protect high value strategic or tactical sites such as airfields or populations centres. The THAAD missile intercepts exo-atmospheric and endo-atmospheric threats.

The sites would also be protected with lower- and medium-tier defensive shield systems such as the Patriot PAC-3 which intercepts hostile incoming missiles at 20 to 100 times lower altitudes.

THAAD PROGRAMME

The US Army is expected to acquire 80 to 99 THAAD launchers, 18 ground-based radars and a total of 1,422 THAAD missiles. Two THAAD battalions are planned, each with four batteries.

In 1992 Lockheed Martin Missiles and Space and other industrial team partners were awarded a $689m contract to develop the THAAD system. Raytheon was selected as sub-contractor to develop the ground-based radar. Raytheon is responsible for the solid-state receiver / transmitter modules. TRW is responsible for software development. The other main contractors are Raytheon for the traveling wave tubes, Datatape for the data recorders and EBCO for radar turrets.

The THAAD programme entered the engineering and manufacturing development (EMD) phase in 2000. In May 2004, production of 16 flight test missiles began at Lockheed Martin's new production facilities in Pike County, Alabama.

Flight testing, at White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico, of the EMD system began in 2005. The first flight test of the entire system including missile, launcher, radar and fire control system took place in May 2006. Flight testing began at Pacific Missile Range, Kauai, Hawaii in January 2007 with a successful intercept test in the high endo-atmosphere.

A second successful test took place in April 2007 with intercept in the mid endo-atmosphere. The final White Sands test took place in June 2007, with a low endo-atmosphere test. In October 2007, THAAD performed a successful intercept of a unitary target outside the atmosphere (exo-atmospheric). Tests will continue at PMR till 2009.

In January 2007, Lockheed Martin was awarded a contract for the first two production THAAD systems, to include six launchers, 48 missiles, two radars and two tactical operations centers. Initial Operating Capability (IOC) is expected in 2009.

In August 2007, Lockheed Martin announced that THAAD will be built at its Camden, Arkansas facility.

BATTERY

The THAAD battery will typically operate nine launch vehicles each carrying eight missiles, with two mobile Tactical Operations Centres (TOCs) and a Ground-Based Radar (GBR).

THAAD MISSILE INFORMATION

The target object data and the predicted intercept point are downloaded to the missile prior to launch. The updated target and intercept data are also transmitted to the missile in flight.

The missile is 6.17m in length and is equipped with a single stage solid fuel rocket motor with thrust vectoring. The rocket motor is supplied by Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne. The launch weight is 900kg.

A separation motor is installed at the interstage at the forward end of the booster section. The separation motor assists in the separation of the Kinetic Kill Vehicle (KKV) and the spent boost motor.The shroud separates from the KV before impact. The KV is equipped with a liquid-fuelled Divert and Attitude Control System (DACS), developed by Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne, for the terminal maneuvering towards the target intercept point.

A gimbal-mounted infrared seeker module in the nose section provides terminal homing to close in on the target missile in the terminal phase of approach.

During the initial fly-out phase of flight, the seeker window is covered with a two-piece clamshell protection shroud. Metal bladders installed in the shroud are inflated to eject the protective shroud before the seeker initiates target acquisition. The infrared seeker head, developed by BAe Systems, is an indium antimonide (InSb) staring focal plane array operating in the mid infrared 3 to 5 micron wavelength band.
M1075 TRUCK MOUNTED LAUNCHER

There are nine M1075 truck mounted launchers in a typical THAAD battery. Launch vehicle is a modified Oshkosh Truck Corporation Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck with Load Handling System (HEMTT-LHS). The 12m-long by 3.25m-wide launch vehicle carries ten missile launch containers. While on the launcher, lead acid batteries provide the primary power. The batteries are recharged with a low-noise generator.

After firing, reloading the launch vehicle takes 30 minutes.

GROUND-BASED RADAR

The cueing for the THAAD system is provided by the Raytheon Systems AN/TPY-2 Ground-Based Radar (GBR) for surveillance, threat classification and threat identification. THAAD can also be cued by military surveillance satellites such as Brilliant Eyes.

The ground based radar units are C-130 air transportable. The AN/TPY-2 radar uses a 9.2m² aperture full field of view antenna phased array operating at I and J bands (X band) and containing 25,344 solid-state microwave transmit and receive modules. The radar has the capability to acquire missile threats at ranges up to 1,000km.

The first production radar is being tested at the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico. In September 2004, the THAAD radar tracked a tactical ballistic missile, cueing a successful intercept by a Patriot PAC-3 missile. A second radar was delivered to White Sands in June 2007.

TACTICAL OPERATIONS CENTRE

Each THAAD battery has two Tactical Operations Centres (TOC). The TOC has been developed by Northrop Grumman, formerly Litton Data Systems Division. The TOC accommodates two operator stations and is equipped with three Hewlett-Packard HP-735 data processors.MOBILE BMC3I UNITS

The THAAD system is able to 'hand over' targets to other defence systems and can cue the targets to other weapons. THAAD is able to interface to other US or allied air defence data information networks and to the battle management and command control and communications centre.

Northrop Grumman has been contracted to develop the THAAD BMC3I. The Battle Management and Command, Control, Computers and Intelligence (BMC3I) units are installed in hardened shelters mounted on High-Mobility Multi-Wheeled Vehicles (HMMWVs).

The THAAD communications system can use JTIDS, mobile subscriber equipment, SINCGARS and the joint tactical terminal for voice and data communications and for intelligence data transfer.

http://www.army-technology.com/projects/thaad/