DTN News - DEFENSE NEWS: U.S. DoD Awarded Contract $31,073,677 To General Dynamics Land Systems Related To U.S. Army For The Procurement Of 46 Abrams M1A2 System Enhancement Package V2 Vehicles

Asian Defense News: DTN News - DEFENSE NEWS:  U.S. DoD Awarded Contract $31,073,677 To General Dynamics Land Systems Related To U.S. Army For The Procurement Of 46 Abrams M1A2 System Enhancement Package V2 Vehicles

Source: DTN News - - This article compiled by Roger Smith from reliable sources DTN News / U.S. DoD issued No. 307-12 April 25, 2012
(NSI News Source Info) TORONTO, Canada - April 26, 2012: General Dynamics Land Systems, Sterling Heights, Mich., was awarded a $31,073,677 firm-fixed-price contract.  The award will provide for the procurement of 46 Abrams M1A2 system enhancement package V2 vehicles. 

Work will be performed in Lima, Ohio, Scranton, Pa., Anniston, Ala., and Tallahassee, Fla., with an estimated completion date of Nov. 30, 2014. 

One bid was solicited, with one bid received. The U.S. Army Contracting Command, Warren, Mich., is the contracting activity (W56HZV-12-C-0198).

The M1 Abrams entered U.S. service in 1980, replacing the M60 tank. It served for over a decade alongside the improved M60A3, which had entered service in 1978. The M1 remains the principal main battle tank of the United States Army and Marine Corps, and the armies of Egypt, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Australia, and Iraq in 2010.

Three main versions of the M1 Abrams have been deployed, the M1, M1A1, and M1A2, incorporating improved armament, protection and electronics. These improvements, as well as periodic upgrades to older tanks, have allowed this long-serving vehicle to remain in front-line service. The M1A3 is currently under development.

The M1A2 was a further improvement of the M1A1 with a commander's independent thermal viewer, weapon station, position navigation equipment, and a full set of controls and displays linked by a digital data bus. These upgrades also provided the M1A2 with an improved fire control system. The M1A2 System Enhancement Package (SEP) added digital maps, FBCB2 capabilities, and an improved cooling system to compensate for heat generated by the additional computer systems. The M1A2 SEP also serves as the basis for the M104 Wolverine heavy assault bridge.

Further upgrades included depleted uranium armor for all variants, a system overhaul that returns all A1s to like-new condition (M1A1 AIM), a digital enhancement package for the A1 (M1A1D), and a commonality program to standardize parts between the U.S. Army and the Marine Corps (M1A1HC).

The M1A2 SEP TUSK Abrams and a modernized M1 Abrams were included in the Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV) Analysis of Alternatives (AOA). Vehicles included in the AOA were determined to be inferior to the planned GCV. The U.S. Army Vice Chief of Staff Gen. Peter Chiarelli commended the M1 Abrams program and recommended a similar approach for the GCV program. The Ground Combat Vehicle family of vehicles is the planned successor to the M1 as well as many other U.S. Army vehicles. However, the Army anticipates that the M1A1 will remain in U.S. service until at least 2021, and the M1A2 to beyond 2050.

M1 Abrams ~ Operators (Source - Wikipedia)

•  Australia – Australian Army: 59 M1A1SAs (hybrids with a mix of equipment used by US Army and Marine Corps tanks, without depleted uranium layers in armor) tanks were bought from the United States in 2006, to replace the Leopard AS1 in 2007.

•  Egypt – Egyptian Army: 1,005 M1A1s. Tanks co-produced by the US and Egypt for the Egyptian army. Another 125 Tanks have been ordered.

•  Greece - Hellenic Army: 400 ex-U.S. Army M1 tanks offered to Greece.

•  Iraq – Iraqi Army: 140 M1A1Ms (downgraded, without depleted uranium layers in armor) on order, to be delivered by 2011. Iraq was leasing 22 US Army M1A1s for training in 2008. The first 11 tanks were delivered to the Iraqi Army in August 2010.

•  Kuwait – Kuwaiti Army: 218 M1A2s (downgraded, without depleted uranium layers in armor)

•  Saudi Arabia – Saudi Arabian Army: 373 To be upgraded to M1A2S configuration in Saudi Arabia.

•  United States – United States Army and United States Marine Corps have approximately 8,725 M1, M1A1 and M1A2 variants combined in inventory.

US Army 1,547 M1A2 and M1A2SEP variants 4,393 M1A1 variants 2,385 M1 (reserve storage)

US Marine Corps 403 M1A1

*Link for This article compiled by Roger Smith from reliable sources DTN News / U.S. DoD issued No. 307-12 April 25, 2012
*Speaking Image - Creation of DTN News ~ Defense Technology News 
*This article is being posted from Toronto, Canada By DTN News ~ Defense-Technology News Contact:dtnnews@ymail.com 
©COPYRIGHT (C) DTN NEWS DEFENSE-TECHNOLOGY NEWS 

DTN News - LOCKHEED MARTIN DEFENSE NEWS: Eleventh C-5B Inducted To Become Super Galaxy

Asian Defense News: DTN News - LOCKHEED MARTIN DEFENSE NEWS: Eleventh C-5B Inducted To Become Super Galaxy
Source: DTN News - - This article compiled by Roger Smith from reliable sources Lockheed Martin
 (NSI News Source Info) TORONTO, Canada - February 7, 2012: Lockheed Martin inducted the 11th aircraft to the C-5M Super Galaxy production line on Feb. 1, 2012. 

Based at Dover Air Force Base, Del., this aircraft has supported the warfighter’s operations across the globe. It has delivered cargo in locations such as Iraq, Italy, Germany, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Qatar, Spain and Turkey. 

Aircraft 86-0017 has accumulated more than 18,000 flight hours and more than 4,300 full-stop landings

Mission The C-5 Galaxy is one of the largest aircraft in the world and the largest airlifter in the Air Force inventory. The aircraft can carry a fully equipped combat-ready military unit to any point in the world on short notice and then provide the supplies required to help sustain the fighting force. 

Features 
The C-5 has a greater capacity than any other airlifter. It has the ability to carry 36 standard pallets and 81 troops simultaneously. The Galaxy is also capable of carrying any of the Army's air-transportable combat equipment, including such bulky items as the 74-ton mobile scissors bridge. It can also carry outsize and oversize cargo over intercontinental ranges and can take off or land in relatively short distances. Ground crews are able to load and off-load the C-5 simultaneously at the front and rear cargo openings, reducing cargo transfer times. Other features of the C-5 are: 
   · Able to operate on runways 6,000 feet long (1,829 meters).
   · Five landing gear totaling 28 wheels to distribute the weight. 
   · Nose and aft doors that open the full width and height of the cargo    
     compartment to permit faster and easier loading. 
   · A "kneeling" landing gear system that permits lowering the parked 
     aircraft to facilitate drive-on/drive-off vehicle loading and adjusts the 
     cargo floor to standard truck-bed height. 
   · Full width drive-on ramps at each end for loading double rows of 
     vehicles. 
   · A system that records and analyzes information and detects 
     malfunctions in more than 800 test points. 

The C-5 has the distinctive high T-tail, 25-degree wing sweep, and four TF39 turbofan engines (C-5A and B) mounted on pylons beneath the wings. These engines are each rated at 43,000 pounds of thrust and weigh 7,900 pounds (3,555 kilograms) a piece. They have an air intake diameter of more than 8.5 feet (2.6 meters). Each engine pod is nearly 27 feet long (8.2 meters).

The Galaxy has 12 internal wing tanks with a total capacity of 51,150 gallons (194,370 liters) of fuel -- enough to fill 6 1/2 regular size railroad tank cars. A full fuel load weighs 332,500 pounds (150,820 kilograms). A C-5 with a cargo load of 270,000 pounds (122,472 kilograms) can fly 2,150 nautical miles, offload, and fly to a second base 500 nautical miles away from the original destination -- all without aerial refueling. With aerial refueling, the aircraft's range is limited only by crew endurance.

BackgroundLockheed-Georgia Co. delivered the first operational Galaxy to the 437th Airlift Wing, Charleston Air Force Base, now known as Joint Base Charleston, S.C., in June l970. C-5s are operated by active-duty, Reserve, and Air National Guard crews. They are currently stationed at Dover AFB, Del.; Travis AFB, Calif.; Lackland AFB, Texas; Martinsburg ANGB, W.V.; Memphis ANGB, Tenn. and Westover Air Reserve Base, Mass.

In March 1989, the last of 50 C-5Bs was added to the 76 C-5As in the Air Force's airlift force structure. The C-5B includes all C-5A improvements as well as more than 100 additional system modifications to improve reliability and maintainability. 

Based on a study showing 80 percent of the C-5 airframe service life remaining, AMC began an aggressive program to modernize the C-5 in 1998. The C-5 Avionics Modernization Program included upgrading the avionics to improve communications, navigation and surveillance/air traffic management compliance. The upgrade also added new safety equipment and installed a new autopilot system.

Another part of the C-5 modernization plan is a comprehensive Reliability Enhancement and Re-engining Program. The centerpiece of this program is the General Electric CF6-80C2 (F-138) commercial engine. This engine delivers a 22 percent increase in thrust, a 30 percent shorter take-off roll, has a 58 percent faster climb rate and will allow significantly more cargo to be carried over longer distances. With its new engine and upgrades, the C-5 becomes the C-5M Super Galaxy. This modernization program will enhance aircraft reliability and maintainability, maintain structural and system integrity, reduce cost of ownership and increase operational capability well into the 21st century.

Media Contact:

Chad E. Gibson
Office:             770-494-3847      
Mobile:             678-761-4623      

*Link for This article compiled by Roger Smith from reliable sources Lockheed Martin
*Speaking Image - Creation of DTN News ~ Defense Technology News 
*This article is being posted from Toronto, Canada By DTN News ~ Defense-Technology News Contact:dtnnews@ymail.com 
©COPYRIGHT (C) DTN NEWS DEFENSE-TECHNOLOGY NEWS

DTN News ~ US-NATO-ISRAEL WAR PLANS TO ATTACK IRAN: Will US Go To War With Iran?

Asian Defense News: DTN News ~ US-NATO-ISRAEL WAR PLANS TO ATTACK IRAN: Will US Go To War With Iran?

Source: DTN News - - This article compiled by Roger Smith from reliable sources By Katerina Azarova is a news reporter for RT/Global Research.ca
 (NSI News Source Info) TORONTO, Canada - January 14, 2012: As sparks fly dangerously close to the powder keg of US-Iranian relations, speculations are rife and rumors spread like wildfire. Will there be a war? Who wants it? And what will happen to this very lucrative region?

Google the words “Iran”, “USA” and “war” and you get over 140 million hits. Many believe the possibility of a military conflict between the two is not even a question of “if”but a question of “when”. And there is definitely enough evidence around to lend support to these beliefs.

Let’s break it down. Will there be a war? According to Israeli military analysts quoted by Global Research, an independent research and media organization, that possibility is “dangerously close”. But let’s say analysts, especially military ones, are of the boy-scout-always-be-prepared disposition by nature. What other evidence is there?

Occam’s razor states that the simplest explanation is the most plausible. Logic tells us to follow the money – and in this case, the cases of weapons shipped out by the US. So where are they headed to?

In October 2010, the US negotiated a $67 billion deal with Saudi Arabia to supply the latter with bunker-buster bombs, F-15 fighter jets, Black Hawk and Apache helicopters, Patriot-2 missiles and warships. It is, in simple terms, the LARGEST bilateral weapons deal in US history.

One month later, in November, the Wall Street Journal revealed that the United States will proved the United Arab Emirates with “thousands of advanced ‘bunker-buster’ bombs and other munitions, part of a stepped-up US effort to build a regional coalition to counter Iran.”

Washington also plans to supply Stinger and other missiles to Oman. Kuwait is in for $900 million worth of Patriot missiles. And a $53 billion arms deal with Bahrain is still on the agenda – delayed only because of pressure from international lawmakers and human rights groups.

So the United States is increasing military ties with its allies, one might claim. And it is true, but all those allies are conveniently located in the Persian Gulf…right next to Iran. 

It’s not just weapons, either. Israel, Bahrain, Kuwait and Oman all have US military bases on their territory. And with the US most likely asking NATO in for a piece of the action, alliance members like Turkey are perfectly positioned to lend a helping hand. Besides being conveniently close geographically, Ankara has also been holding on to a lot of US nuclear weapons, including a large number of B61 bombs. 

But all this does, effectively, is highlight the military capabilities of the US in the region. Categorically stating all this is being done by the Department of Defense as part of a preparation for war with Iran would be irresponsible – until the Pentagon men say so themselves.

Oh wait…they have been. For years.

In late 2005, then CIA director Porter Goss, who was visiting Ankara, requested that the Turkish prime minister “provide political and logistical support for air strikes against Iranian nuclear and military targets."

In 2006, the Israeli prime minister green lights a military strike against Iran. Various staged war games always focused on the possibility of military conflict with Iran. And all these years later, Secretary of State Clinton’s former advisor on Iran still says Obama is more than willing to launch a pre-emptive strike.

Michel Chossudovsky, economist and director of the Centre for Research on Globalization, says there have been specific, detailed military plans for war with Iran since 2003.

"These war plans go back to the 1990s or even before that. If you look at active war plans, you can say May 2003, when the Department of Defense came up with the strategic concept plan CON8022, dubbed “Global Strike”. The framework of attacking Iran and the scenarios and the war plans have been going on for the last 8 years. We have so much evidence of covert operations, of scenarios, of drone attacks, of regime change scenarios. And its not only the United States that are preparing. The Iranians have been preparing for this war for years. They have the S-300 missile defense system, very extensive ground forces – enough to overrun the remaining US forces in Iraq. Our estimates are that Iran can mobilize two million troops overnight." 

Preparations, strong allies in the region, huge defense budget for 2012 – all the signs point to the Americans getting ready for a potential war. But when – and how – does it start?

According to the editor-in-chief of Russia’s ‘National Defense’ magazine Igor Korotchenko, anything can trigger the triggers. “If the US pushes through more sanctions and Iran closes off the Strait of Hormuz in return, that could easily be enough. Basically, Washington will use any convenient reason that appears legitimate cause for the international community to attack.”

And with the upcoming US-Israeli war games in the Strait of Hormuz, analysts like Chossudovsky say a convenient reason will be very easy to come by. “The Strait is very narrow. There’s not a lot of space before Iran’s territorial waters begin. And they would have to respond to a violation of its territorial waters.” He goes on to speculate that faced with such a violation, Iran would have no choice but to send an ultimatum the 5th Fleet commanders there, which will be ignored for some reason. Then, according to international law, a second ultimatum. If that’s ignored, Iran has no choice but to act – leaving America in its preferred position of reacting.”

History does support this notion of provocation being a favored US military tactic. Richard Sanders of the Coalition Against the Arms Trade looked at US war history in detail and came out with a rather disturbing conclusion: starting from the Mexican-American war in 1846, pretext incidents have been used every time; incidents that were later disproved, or re-interpreted by historians, journalists and political committees; incidents that have become a military trademark for one of the world’s youngest, but most war-hungry nations.

Sanders’ statement is echoed by many – including www.infowars.com associate editor Patrick Henningsen. Examples he highlights are historical facts that show just how manipulative the US Department of Defense can be. “This is how the US was able to fake their way into the Vietnam War, via the infamous Gulf of Tonkin Incident. Likewise, Israel's slaughter of the USS Liberty naval crew in 1967 was designed as a false flag event, but luckily Russia intervened at the last minute before Israel could sink the American ship.”

It wouldn’t be the first time the US has tried to push Iran’s buttons. As revealed by a senior British officer a few years ago, there were times in Iraq when the US military commanders ordered British troops to prepare a full-scale ground offensive against Iranian forces that had crossed the border and grabbed disputed territory. “If we had attacked the Iranian positions, all hell would have broken loose," the unnamed officer said.

Unfortunately, “all hell breaking loose” is a scenario that is still not off the table. Iran, while not having many allies willing to go to bat for it in the region, can still put up a fight.

Iran plays a critical role in the Persian Gulf and with its strategic geography not only dominates the Northern Gulf but the shipping lines both inside and outside the Strait of Hormuz. Iran’s leadership adheres to a "no first strike doctrine” and thus Iran has launched no wars of choice in modern history. The Iranian constitution bans the establishment of any foreign military bases in the country, even for peaceful purposes.

Following the Islamic revolution in 1979 Iran also divided its armed forces into regular and revolutionary components. The Iran’s Revolutionary Guards is separated from the regular army and has its own Navy, Aerospace and Ground Forces, as well as Special Forces.

And past experiences have also shown that for the American Armed Forces, a war with Iran, a country that in population is larger than the four countries recently invaded by the US put together, will not be a walk in the park. The Pentagon’s own war games in 2002 showed that in the event of an armed conflict, the United States would be overwhelmed by Iran in the Persian Gulf.

As speculated by researcher and sociologist Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, “despite its might and shear strength, geography literally works against US naval power in the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf. The relative narrowness of the Persian Gulf makes it like a channel, at least in a strategic and military context. Figuratively speaking, the aircraft carriers and warships of the US are confined to narrow waters or are closed in within the coastal waters of the Persian Gulf. This is where the Iranian military’s advanced missile capabilities come into play. The Iranian missile and torpedo arsenal would make short work of US naval assets in the waters of the Persian Gulf where U. vessels are constricted.”

Allies-wise, Iran is more or less on its own. Syria, its closest ally, is too caught up in the almost year-long violence that has been shaking the country, Armenia is a possible and Lebanon’s Hezbollah could shift their allegiance either way. The Shanghai Cooperation Council is a regional organization that has a few powerful friends, namely China and Russia, but whether they will want to get involved in an all-out military conflict is doubtful.

A statement made by Konstantin Kosachev, chairman of the Russian Duma Committee for International Affairs, said that “a military operation against Iran could have grave consequences. And Russia should make every effort to control emotions, bring negotiations back into the field of political and expert discussion, and not allow any such action against Iran.”

As for China, it is showing Tehran some support by refusing to fold under US pressure and halt oil imports from Iran. But it has never been one to show its hand before it had to, so the extent of China’s potential involvement in the conflict is also open to debate.

Some analysts, like Patrick Henningsen, believe that should other countries get drawn into the conflict, it could signify the beginning of a new, economical Cold War-era. Henningsen says that “we have the ideal set of conditions for a New Cold War to emerge in the early 21st Century – one where the Western Axis powers of the US, Europe, Israel and GCC countries sit on one side, and with Iran, Syria, Pakistan, China, and perhaps Russia sitting on the opposite side. This New Cold War will be more about sub-regional dominance in terms of economics – natural gas, mineral and trade relationships, as well as petroleum – than it will about the political ideologies that seemed to dominate the previous 20th Century Cold War.”

As sparks fly and tensions reach critical points, experts and analysts argue over who will start the war, why they will start the war, how the war will develop, whether it will spill out into World War III and what will happen in the end. Opinions are varied, detailed and range from the simplistic and obvious to the complex and conspiratorial.

And the only one thing they all agree on? That it isn’t a matter of IF the war between the United States and Iran will happen. It’s a matter of WHEN. 

*Link for This article compiled by Roger Smith from reliable sources By Katerina Azarova is a news reporter for RT/Global Research.ca
*Speaking Image - Creation of DTN News ~ Defense Technology News 
*This article is being posted from Toronto, Canada By DTN News ~ Defense-Technology News Contact:dtnnews@ymail.com 
©COPYRIGHT (C) DTN NEWS DEFENSE-TECHNOLOGY NEWS 

DTN News - DEFENSE NEWS: Raytheon Awarded $145 Million For Patriot GEM-T Missiles For State Of Kuwait

Asian Defense News: DTN News - DEFENSE NEWS: Raytheon Awarded $145 Million For Patriot GEM-T Missiles For State Of Kuwait

Source: DTN News - - This article compiled by Roger Smith from reliable sources Raytheon

(NSI News Source Info) TEWKSBURY, Mass., - January 26, 2011: Raytheon Company (NYSE: RTN) has received a $145 million Foreign Military Sales production contract for Patriot Guidance Enhanced Missiles – Tactical (GEM-T) to augment Kuwait's air and missile defense.

The U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command, Redstone Arsenal, Ala., issued the contract to complement Kuwait's Configuration-3 radar system upgrade work already underway at Raytheon.

"This new GEM-T missile production contract highlights the efforts by Kuwait Air Defense to maintain readiness and effectiveness of the Patriot Air and Missile System to counter evolving regional threats," said Sanjay Kapoor, vice president of Patriot Programs at Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems (IDS). "We continue to modernize the Patriot system and are committed to providing Kuwait and our 11 other partner nations globally with increased system reliability and reduced life-cycle costs."

Work under this contract will be performed by Raytheon IDS at the Integrated Air Defense Center in Andover, Mass.

Raytheon IDS is the prime contractor for both domestic and international Patriot Air and Missile Defense Systems and is the system integrator for Patriot Advanced Capability-3 missiles.

Raytheon Company, with 2009 sales of $25 billion, is a technology and innovation leader specializing in defense, homeland security and other government markets throughout the world. With a history of innovation spanning 88 years, Raytheon provides state-of-the-art electronics, mission systems integration and other capabilities in the areas of sensing; effects; and command, control, communications and intelligence systems, as well as a broad range of mission support services. With headquarters in Waltham, Mass., Raytheon employs 75,000 people worldwide.

Contact:
Roopa Bhide
978.858.9304

*This article is being posted from Toronto, Canada By DTN News ~ Defense-Technology News, contact: dtnnews@ymail.com

© COPYRIGHT (C) DTN NEWS DEFENSE-TECHNOLOGY NEWS

DTN NEWS ON TWITTER (30 SUBJECTS)