Mission Success Starts With CLEAR VISION VisionEdge ™ DVE Solution To learn more about maximizing your situational awareness in degraded visual environments, visit www.telephonics.com. Vol. 30 No. 39 $4.50 PERIODICALS-NEWSPAPER HANDLING October 26, 2015 www.defensenews.com WASHINGTON — The US Navy’s push to increase the lethality of the littoral combat ship (LCS) is get- ting a major and somewhat unex- pected boost with word that an over-the-horizon (OTH) surface- to-surface missile will be installed on-board the next LCSs to deploy. Rear Adm. Pete Fanta, director of surface warfare at the Pentagon, issued a directive on Sept. 17 call- ing for the installation of an un- specified OTH missile aboard the Freedom and the Coronado, the next two LCSs scheduled for de- ployment. The Freedom is to de- ploy to the Western Pacific during the first quarter of calendar year 2016, while the Coronado is to fol- low in the second or third quarter. “The objective is to install the See LCS MISSILES, Page 6 US Littoral Combat Ships To Get Missiles for Next Deployment By CHRISTOPHER P. CAVAS MC2 ZACHARY BELL/US NAVY More Lethal LCS: A Kongsberg Naval Strike Missile launches from the LCS Coronado in a simple test demonstration. Operational installations of the NSM and the Boeing Harpoon are expected to be made on the LCSs that will deploy in 2016. WASHINGTON — Adm. John Rich- ardson, in office as the US Navy’s chief of naval operations (CNO) for just over a month, has spent nearly half of that time on a world tour, traveling to Hawaii, Japan, South Korea, the Arabian Gulf and Italy to gauge the state of global seapower and meet his interna- tional counterparts. He’s also been assessing the ac- tivities of the Russian and Chinese navies, both of which are challeng- ing the international scene in nu- merous ways. Richardson was asked about a Chinese admiral’s claim in early September about one tension point, the South China Sea, where China has been build- ing island bases and where territo- rial disputes involve several nations. In those remarks, Vice Adm. Yuan Yubai, commander of the Chinese Navy’s northern fleet, said, “the South China Sea, as the name indicated, is a sea area that belongs to China. And since the Tang Dynasty a long time ago, the Chinese people have been work- ing and producing around the sea area.” In that Sept. 14 address, Yuan also spoke of China’s efforts to be- come a guarantor of safe passage over international waters — a role long embraced by the US. Richardson isn’t buying it. “What is coming into clear focus is that the defendant of the guaran- S. China Sea Is ‘Everybody’s Sea,’ New US CNO Says By CHRISTOPHER P. CAVAS See RICHARDSON, Page 6 WASHINGTON, VICTORIA, British Co- lumbia, LONDON, PARIS and TEL AVIV — In a move that promises to shake up the fighter jet market, Canada’s new Liberal Party gov- ernment is widely expected to pull out of the Pentagon’s F-35 pro- gram. Although the remaining interna- tional partners are standing by their commitment to the Joint Strike Fighter, Ottawa’s potential exit is not exactly a vote of confi- dence in the fifth-generation fight- er jet. If Justin Trudeau, the newly elected prime minister, follows through on his pledge to cancel the country’s planned 65-plane pur- chase, Canada would become the first country to reject the fifth-gen- eration fighter – and, potentially, the first industrial partner to with- draw participation in the program. Such a move would reverberate across the globe, with all remain- ing partners forced to pay higher prices for F-35s. For Canada’s supply base, the stakes are high. Many Canadian companies have spent years build- ing components for the new plane and stand to lose as much as CDN$11 billion (US $8.3 billion) in work over the life of the jet. On the other hand, the new Liber- al government argues that an open competition for Canada’s fighter- jet replacement would more than make up for the loss of the F-35 business. Trudeau does not become prime minister until Nov. 4, and details about how he will proceed with the withdrawal from the F-35 program are still unclear. See CANADA F-35, Page 7 Canada’s F-35 Pullout Would Shake Up Fighter Jet Market STAFF REPORTS EUROPE A New Cold War? The growing presence of Russian and NATO forces in the Mediter- ranean and Black Sea regions recalls earlier East-West confron- tations. Page 4 NORTH AMERICA Studying the Structure The National Commission on the Future of the Army is peering deeply into operational and struc- tural issues. Page 10 11 US: Global naval activity surges. ASIA & PACIFIC RIM Eyeing Radar Upgrade South Korea seeks global help to develop active electronically scanned array radar. Page 16 MIDDLE EAST Future Armor Israeli company is producing the first prototype of a future fighting vehicle. Page 4 INTERVIEW Maj. Gen. Guy Zur The commander, Israel Ground Forces Com- mand, discusses his Ground Horizon concept for the IDF, lessons learned from the Gaza War and joint force combat. Page 22 USAF MOBILITY REQUIREMENTS 9 FOCUS
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
WASHINGTON — The US Navy’spush to increase the lethality of the
littoral combat ship (LCS) is get-ting a major and somewhat unex-pected boost with word that an
over-the-horizon (OTH) surface-to-surface missile will be installedon-board the next LCSs to deploy.
Rear Adm. Pete Fanta, directorof surface warfare at the Pentagon,issued a directive on Sept. 17 call-
ing for the installation of an un-specified OTH missile aboard theFreedom and the Coronado, the
next two LCSs scheduled for de-ployment. The Freedom is to de-
ploy to the Western Pacific duringthe first quarter of calendar year2016, while the Coronado is to fol-
low in the second or third quarter.“The objective is to install the
See LCS MISSILES, Page 6
US Littoral Combat Ships To GetMissiles for Next Deployment
By CHRISTOPHER P. CAVAS
MC2 ZACHARY BELL/US NAVY
More Lethal LCS: A Kongsberg Naval Strike Missile launches from the LCS Coronado ina simple test demonstration. Operational installations of the NSM and the BoeingHarpoon are expected to be made on the LCSs that will deploy in 2016.
WASHINGTON — Adm. John Rich-
ardson, in office as the US Navy’schief of naval operations (CNO)for just over a month, has spent
nearly half of that time on a worldtour, traveling to Hawaii, Japan,South Korea, the Arabian Gulf and
Italy to gauge the state of globalseapower and meet his interna-tional counterparts.
He’s also been assessing the ac-tivities of the Russian and Chinese
navies, both of which are challeng-ing the international scene in nu-merous ways. Richardson was
asked about a Chinese admiral’sclaim in early September aboutone tension point, the South China
Sea, where China has been build-ing island bases and where territo-rial disputes involve several
nations.In those remarks, Vice Adm.
Yuan Yubai, commander of the
Chinese Navy’s northern fleet,said, “the South China Sea, as thename indicated, is a sea area that
belongs to China. And since theTang Dynasty a long time ago, theChinese people have been work-
ing and producing around the seaarea.”
In that Sept. 14 address, Yuan
also spoke of China’s efforts to be-come a guarantor of safe passageover international waters — a role
long embraced by the US.
Richardson isn’t buying it.“What is coming into clear focus
is that the defendant of the guaran-
S. China SeaIs ‘Everybody’sSea,’ New US CNO Says
By CHRISTOPHER P. CAVAS
See RICHARDSON, Page 6
WASHINGTON, VICTORIA, British Co-lumbia, LONDON, PARIS and TEL AVIV— In a move that promises toshake up the fighter jet market,
Canada’s new Liberal Party gov-ernment is widely expected to pullout of the Pentagon’s F-35 pro-
gram.
Although the remaining interna-tional partners are standing by
their commitment to the Joint
Strike Fighter, Ottawa’s potential
exit is not exactly a vote of confi-dence in the fifth-generation fight-er jet.
If Justin Trudeau, the newlyelected prime minister, follows
through on his pledge to cancel the
country’s planned 65-plane pur-chase, Canada would become thefirst country to reject the fifth-gen-
eration fighter – and, potentially,the first industrial partner to with-draw participation in the program.
Such a move would reverberateacross the globe, with all remain-
ing partners forced to pay higher
prices for F-35s.For Canada’s supply base, the
stakes are high. Many Canadian
companies have spent years build-ing components for the new planeand stand to lose as much as
CDN$11 billion (US $8.3 billion) inwork over the life of the jet.
On the other hand, the new Liber-
al government argues that an opencompetition for Canada’s fighter-jet replacement would more than
make up for the loss of the F-35business.
Trudeau does not become prime
minister until Nov. 4, and details
about how he will proceed with thewithdrawal from the F-35 program
are still unclear.
See CANADA F-35, Page 7
Canada’s F-35 Pullout WouldShake Up Fighter Jet Market
STAFF REPORTS
EUROPE
A New Cold War?The growing presence of Russianand NATO forces in the Mediter-
ranean and Black Sea regionsrecalls earlier East-West confron-tations. Page 4
NORTH AMERICA
Studying the StructureThe National Commission on theFuture of the Army is peering
deeply into operational and struc-tural issues. Page 10
11 US: Global naval activity surges.
ASIA & PACIFIC RIM
Eyeing Radar UpgradeSouth Korea seeks global help to
develop active electronicallyscanned array radar. Page 16
MIDDLE EAST
Future ArmorIsraeli company is producing thefirst prototype of a future fightingvehicle. Page 4
INTERVIEW
Maj. Gen.Guy ZurThe commander,
Israel GroundForces Com-mand, discusses
his Ground Horizon concept forthe IDF, lessons learned from the
Gaza War and joint force combat.
Page 22
USAF MOBILITY
REQUIREMENTS 9
FOCUS
THE MOST INTRICATE MISSIONS DEMAND
THE MOST DEPENDABLE COMMUNICATIONS
When the success of the mission hinges on communications, L-3 answers the call by providing a wide array of next-generation SATCOM and intelligence-gathering capabilities, from man-portable systems to fly-away VSAT terminals. Even in the harshest environments, when warfighters need to be connected with secure, reliable, lifesaving data, L-3 is there with an unrivaled commitment to communications technology.
INNOVATION: AT THE CORE OF EVERYTHING WE DO. L-3COM.COM
www.defensenews.com October 26, 2015 DefenseNews 3
International Publications Mail (Canada Distribution) Sales Agreement No. 546054.Telephone numbers: Editorial: (703) 642-7330; Circulation: (703) 750-7400; Fax: (703) 658-8314; Advertising: (703) 642-7330; Fax: (703) 642-7386.Subscriptions: Call (800) 368-5718 (domestic) or (703) 750-7400 (international), e-mail [email protected], or write to Defense News,Subscriber Service, Springfield, VA 22159-0400. For change of address, attach address label from a recent issue. All content within thispublication is copyrighted and requires proper authorization for reuse. Photocopies: To request photocopies, order online from the CopyrightClearance Center at www.copyright.com, specifying ISSN 0884-139X. The fee is $3.50 per photocopy per article, limited to 500 copies. Reprints & Permissions: To reprint or license content including text, images, graphics and logos please submit your request atwww.gannettreprints.com or contact PARS International via email: [email protected] or by phone: 212-221-9595, x431.
Defense News is published weekly, except for one week in April, one week in July, two weeks in August, two weeks inNovember and the last two weeks of the year, by Sightline Media Group, 6883 Commercial Drive, Springfield, VA 22159-0400.Annual subscription rates: (print and digital) $169 U.S. domestic mail; (digital only) $99 worldwide. Defense News is not a publication of theDepartment of Defense. Periodicals postage is paid at Springfield, Va., and at additional mailing offices. Postmaster: Send all UAA to CFS. (See DMM 707.4.12.5); NON-POSTAL AND MILITARY FACILITIES: send address corrections to DefenseNews, 6883 Commercial Drive, Springfield, VA 22159-0400. Defense News is registered with the British Postal System and Canadian Post
InBrief
WASHINGTON — Despite concernsover the safety of lightweight pi-
lots flying the F-35, the vast major-ity of pilots do not face excessiverisk of neck damage during an
ejection, the chief of the Penta-gon’s Joint Program Office (JPO)argued in front of Congress.
In response to questioning fromRep. Jackie Speier, D-CA, rankingmember of the House Armed Ser-
vices oversight and investigationssubcommittee, JPO chief Lt. Gen.
Christopher Bogdan said there isno elevated risk of injury for F-35pilots “in the heart” of the weight
range during an ejection.“We have done the risk analysis
on the test points that we have had
on the ejection seat, and what wehave found is the only area wherewe have a problem today is with
the lightweight pilot below 136pounds,” Bogdan said during anOct. 21 hearing of the House
Armed Services tactical air andland forces subcommittee. “Butthe areas that we have tested indi-
cate that, in the heart of the enve-
lope, for the heart of the pilot
population, there is not any in-creased risk of injury at all.”
Bogdan’s remarks appear to con-
flict with a recent Air Force state-ment that acknowledged an“elevated level of risk” for pilots
between 136 and 165 pounds. Thestatement noted that the risk ofcritical injury during an ejection is
higher for the F-35 seat than legacyfighter ejection seats.
“While the probability of an ejec-
tion in this slow speed regime re-mains very low, estimated at one in
100,000 flight hours, the risk of acritical injury in that circumstanceis currently higher than legacy
fighter ejection seats,” accordingto the Oct. 16 statement. “The AirForce has accepted risk of similar
magnitude in previous ejectionseats.”
Based on the remote probability
of an ejection, the airworthinessauthorities recommended — andthe Air Force accepted — allowing
pilots between 136 and 165 poundsto continue operating the F-35, thestatement notes.
That same statement officially
announced that Air Force leadersrecently decided to restrict pilots
weighing less than 136 poundsfrom flying the plane due to con-cerns about ejection safety, a deci-
sion first reported by DefenseNews on Oct. 1.
During the hearing, Speier re-
ferred to reports that an internalPentagon assessment found a 23
percent chance of major injury ordeath for F-35 pilots between 136and 165 pounds during ejection.
Bogdan refuted those reports be-fore the panel.
“Ma’am, that is incorrect. The da-
ta that you have came from a re-porter who got a copy of anofficial-use-only internal DoD doc-
ument that my team put togetherto assess the risks of a lightweightpilot and a pilot between 136 and
165 pounds. That document shouldhave never been publicly re-leased,” Bogdan said, referring to a
recent Congressional Quarterly ar-
ticle.Bogdan went on to lay out the
probability of neck injury for F-35pilots in different weight classes. Apilot who weighs less than 136
pounds has a one in 50,000 chanceof neck injury from an ejection,whereas one between 136 and 165
pounds has a one in 200,000chance of incurring the same dam-
age, he told the House panel.But after the hearing, Bogdan
said these figures account for the
low probability that a pilot willhave to eject at all and not the like-lihood of injury in the event of an
ejection.“So the 23 percent is when he
ejects, but the probability of that
[pilot ejecting] is one in 200,000,”Bogdan said, adding that the latterfigure “is no different than the risk
No Excessive Risk: The chief of the Pentagon’s Joint Program Office argued in front of
Congress last week that most pilots do not face excessive risk of neck damage during an
ejection.
$784M Radar ContractLockheed Martin has beaten out
Raytheon and Northrop Grumman
to build a new long-range discrimi-nation radar (LRDR) for the Mis-
sile Defense Agency, a vital
component to intercepting possi-ble intercontinental ballistic mis-
siles from North Korea and Iran.
The Missile Defense Agency(MDA) awarded a $784 millioncontract to build the radar.
MDA leaders have called the ra-dar one of their biggest priorities inbeefing up homeland ballistic-
missile defense, along with im-proving the Exoatmospheric Kill
Vehicle, a key part of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense Systemin California and Alaska.
The radar is expected to be posi-
tioned in Alaska.
A Pitch for the RafaleDassault Aviation Chairman Eric
Trappier said he had written a let-ter of congratulations to JustinTrudeau, the expected new elected
Canadian prime minister, andpitched an offer of the Rafale fight-er if Ottawa pulled out of the US
F-35 program.
“We have to wait and see what hedecides now he is in office,” Trap-
pier told the association of aero-
space journalists. “I wrote a letterto congratulate him and to remind
him that if the F-35 were canceled,the Rafale would be potentiallyproposed.”
Dassault sees India as the nextexport client for the Rafale, he
said.The French aircraft builder
hopes a deal for 36 Rafales will be
sealed with India by the end of the
calendar rather than the financial
year.
NATO Official: ‘Arc of Instability’ A senior NATO figure has con-
ceded that “more could be done” toimprove cooperation between the
alliance and the European Union.Gen. Petr Pavel, chairman of
NATO’s influential Military Com-
mittee, said during a hearing in theEuropean Parliament that EU ca-
pabilities could better comple-
ment NATO’s military efforts. TheCzech official also said that the se-curity environment has changed to
the “most complex, unpredictable,and challenging security situationEurope has seen in decades.”
“It is not a moment, but an era,”Pavel said. “For us at NATO and for
the European region, this situationmaterializes through two distinctsecurity challenges, the East and
the South. There is an arc of insta-
bility surrounding much of
Europe.”
Dispute Over Iran Missile TestRussia’s UN envoy questioned
US and European claims that Iran’srecent missile test violated UN res-
olutions, saying the test-launchshould not be treated as a “sensa-
tional” issue, according to Agence
France-Presse.Britain, France, Germany and
the United States asked a UN Secu-
rity Council sanctions committeeto investigate an Oct. 10 test-launch of a medium-range missile,
calling it a serious violation. ButRussian Ambassador Vitaly Chur-kin indicated that Moscow had
made no such determination.US Ambassador Samantha Pow-
er told the council that the medi-um-range ballistic missile wascapable of delivering a nuclear
weapon. N
FOR THE RECORD
n Heidi Shyu, US Army assistant secre-tary for acquisition, logistics and technology,discusses budgets, development of newtechnology, equipment modernization andsupplying troops worldwide.n Mackenzie Eaglen of the AmericanEnterprise Institute and Todd Harrison ofthe Center for Strategic and InternationalStudies discuss what’s next for the budget,debt limit and new house leadership.TV.DefenseNews.com
MOST POPULAR
On the WebRussia Shows Early Success, New
Capabilities in Syria
After a week of heavy ops over Syria, Russia’sAir Force is scaling back efforts to so it cananalyze progress and identify new targets.DefenseNews.com
On VideoDefense News TV: Russia and Europe
Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges, commanding general ofUS Army Europe, discusses Russian military ca-pabilities and the needs of US Army Europe.DefenseNews.com
On TwitterUS Carries Out First Live BMD Inter-
cept in Europe
Follow our reporters on Twitter
at @AaronMehta @reporterjoe
@CavasShips @andclev @OpallRome
@awadz @laraseligman @JenJudson
SIGN UP ONLINE
iOS, Android Apps:
static.defensenews.com/apps
Newsletters:
defensenews.com/newsletters/
n Daily News Roundup
n Early Bird Brief
n Arabic e-newsletter
n Defense News TV With Vago
Muradian
n Training & Simulation Report
n Breaking News
n Digital Show Dailies
RSS feeds:
static.defensenews.com/rss/
ON DEFENSENEWS.COM
4 DefenseNews October 26, 2015 www.defensenews.com
WorldNews
TEL AVIV — Israel’s Tank Produc-
tion Authority is producing its firstprototype of Eitan, an eight-wheel-drive armored fighting vehicle de-
signed to weigh nearly half asmuch as the new Namer heavy car-rier.
The locally developed Eitan —Hebrew for “steadfast” — will bedeployed alongside new Namers
and will replace old M113s that stillsupport the bulk of Israeli infantry.
Sources here said it will weighno more than 35 tons and will in-corporate a new generation of ac-
tive protection, an advanced turretand a full complement of muni-tions and sensors.
Field demonstrations are slatedto begin by the end of next year,
with initial serial production ex-pected to begin by 2020.
“It will be a lot lighter [than Nam-
er] and will be designed to cost,”said Maj. Gen. Guy Zur, command-er of the Israel Defense Forces
(IDF) Ground Forces Command.“It may be less good [than the Nam-er], but it will be affordable and al-
low us to equip a large part of ourforce.”
Defense and industry sources
said the MoD-owned Tank Produc-tion Authority has one prototype in
production and another in its ad-vanced planning phase.
In parallel, MoD’s MAFAT Re-
search and Development Bureau isworking on a demonstrator pro-gram called Carmel aimed at driv-
ing the design of Israel’s futuretank, a follow-on to the 65-ton Mer-
kava Mk4.Sources say Carmel — a Hebrew
acronym for Advanced Ground
Combat Vehicle — will not be aMerkava Mk5, nor will it replacethe Mk4, which is expected to re-
main in production through 2020.Rather, it is a research-and-de-
velopment program aimed at a
state-of-the-art, medium-weightcombat vehicle. It will most likelybe treaded, not wheeled, and de-
signed to weigh around 32 tons. “It won’t be Merkava Mk5. The
operational requirement will besomething entirely different,” onesource said of the envisioned fu-
ture tank.Defense and industry sources
anticipate development and dem-
onstration testing will extend overthe coming decade or more, de-
pending on the maturation of light-weight materials, advancedtechnologies and a spectrum of
planned subsystems.“Carmel is much longer-range. It
will not compete with the ongoing
production program [of Eitan] orwith the Merkava Mk4,” a defensesource told Defense News.
Sources noted that just as Eitanwill be deployed alongside the
heavier Namer in future groundmaneuvering scenarios, the fruitsof the Carmel demonstrator pro-
gram will eventually be deployedalongside Merkava Mk4s.
Both new vehicles are intended
to be integrated with existingheavy armor into the same digi-
tized command-and-control net-work, providing war planners withmore scenario-tailored options for
maneuvering war, they added.Zur said both vehicles are part of
his Ground Horizon plan, a strate-
gic blueprint for designing Israel’sfuture ground force up to 20 yearsfrom now.
In a recent interview, he saidPlan Horizon anticipates initial
fielding of the wheeled Eitan “inmuch less than 10 years, perhapseven five.” In contrast, the Carmel
future tank demonstrator is not ex-pected to enter service until 2025or 2027, Zur said. N
A-29 Super Tucano.Proven excellence in attack and training missions.
The A-29 Super Tucano is the perfect combination of attack and training capacity in a single aircraft. It was designed according to the Brazilian Air Force operational requirements. Persistence and survivability in a counter-insurgency scenario and in day and night missions make the A-29 Super Tucano the best attack platform in its category. Produced in Brazil and in the United States, the A-29 Super Tucano has been proven in combat and is used by several air forces around the world. It was selected and certified by the United States Air Force in the Light Air Support (LAS) Program. The A-29 Super Tucano is an innovative project, designed to protect people, territories and assets.
6 DefenseNews October 26, 2015 www.defensenews.com
WORLD NEWS
OTH missile system aboard all in-service
LCS deploying to forward operating stationsstarting in fiscal year 2016,” Fanta wrote inthe directive, “as well as on all under-con-
struction LCS prior to their commissioningceremonies.”
The LCS has been without a surface-to-
surface missile since the cancellation in 2010of the Non-Line-of-Sight (NLOS) missile, aprogram managed by the US Army that
would have provided LCS with a significantweapon. The service has been searching fora suitable replacement, and a shipboard
launch system for the Hellfire missile is be-
ing developed for smaller targets. Thatweapon, however, is unable to inflict signifi-
cant damage on larger ships -- a role the OTH
is meant to fill.An OTH weapon is to be included in the
LCS frigate variant now under development.The Navy has issued a request for informa-tion to industry for the frigate missile, and a
request for proposals is expected later thisyear, but no missile has yet been chosen.
Fanta’s directive does not mention a spe-
cific missile, but it’s understood from sourc-es that the missiles for the initialinstallations will be the Boeing Harpoon and
Kongsberg Naval Strike Missile (NSM).The idea, sources confirmed, is to try out
both kinds of missile on both LCS variants,
each ship deploying with only one model of
missile installed.The Harpoon is a tried-and-true weapon
that has armed most US warships since thelate 1970s. The missile is mounted in launchcanisters, usually grouped in a quad pack.
Most ships carry two quad packs, for a totalof eight weapons — the maximum numberof weapons per ship specified in Fanta’s di-
rective. Boeing has been at work to improvethe weapon, in particular to give it longerrange.
The Norwegian-built NSM, by contrast, isnot a US program of record and is not in ser-vice with any US platforms, although it is in
service with the Norwegian Navy. It is theonly naval strike missile to be fired from anLCS, however. In a simple demonstration
test, a single missile box launcher was load-
ed aboard the Coronado and fired on Sept.23, 2014. The launcher sat on a rudimentary
platform exhausting over the ship’s flight
deck, and the missile was not integrated intothe Coronado’s combat system.
Fanta’s directive, in fact, notes that “full in-tegration with the LCS combat system is notrequired. A stand-alone console or comput-
er terminal capable of consummating an en-gagement is sufficient for initial fielding.”
The directive, to the Program Executive
Officer for Littoral Combat Ships (PEO LCS)and Program Executive Officer for Integrat-ed Warfare Systems (PEO IWS) at the Naval
Sea Systems Command, calls for the instal-lation of “the maximum number of missilespossible within the space, weight, power
and cooling margins available. The initial de-
sign should be able to spiral to an eventualgoal of eight missiles per ship.”
The missile system chosen, Fanta stipulat-ed, “must be technologically mature with ademonstrated range.”
Fanta acknowledged in the directive thatthe missile installation on ships about to de-ploy is ahead of previous guidance, but not-
ed the action is in line with moves toincrease the lethality and survivability of theNavy’s small combatants.
The first priority for the new LCS frigate,he noted, is for an OTH surface-to-surfacemissile capability.
Numerous proposals have been providedby industry on how to fit missiles into theLCS designs. Lockheed Martin has offered
vertical launch systems (VLS), usually in
eight-cell groups, for the LCS 1 Freedomclass, and such an installation is being pro-
vided on versions of the design approved for
sale to Saudi Arabia.Austal USA, builder of the LCS 2 Independ-
ence class all-aluminum variant, has also of-fered designs that include VLS.
Fanta, however, is said to prefer box
launchers for LCS -- simpler, less costly andwith less of an impact on a ship’s design.Drawbacks include the general inability to
modify box launchers to accommodate im-proved or different missiles over the courseof a ship’s service life.
The Freedom — the oldest LCS in service— is preparing for its second deployment tothe western Pacific, where it will relieve the
Fort Worth. The Coronado will be making
the first deployment for the Independenceclass, which has been focusing on develop-
ing the mine-countermeasure mission mod-ule.
One element of the missile installation yet
to be determined is how the shipboard sys-tem will be managed — either by the crew orthe mission detachment that comes aboard
to operate the modules.The OTH system will be considered part of
the surface warfare package, a Navy source
said, and might also be carried when the shipis fitted with the anti-submarine warfarepackage. Out of the question, however, is its
use when the mine countermeasure moduleis embarked. The greater weight of the minemodule, the source said, precludes carrying
the missiles.
It is also not clear what effect the directivewill have on ships now under construction
or set to enter service.
The Milwaukee, third ship of the Freedomclass, was accepted by the Navy on Oct. 16
and is to be formally commissioned Nov. 21in a ceremony in her namesake city. The
Jackson, third ship of the Independence
class, was delivered to the Navy on Aug. 11and is to be commissioned Dec. 5 in Gulf-port, Mississippi.
More ships are nearing completion both atFincantieri Marinette Marine, which buildsthe Freedom-class ships in Marinette, Wis-
consin, and at Austal USA, building Inde-pendence-class ships in Mobile, Alabama. N
International Waters: Adm. John Richardson, the US Navy’s new chief of naval operations, speaks with sailors on the Manamawaterfront in Bahrain on Oct. 18. Richardson has been on a round-the-world tour to visit sailors and meet with foreign counterparts.
www.defensenews.com October 26, 2015 DefenseNews 7WORLD NEWS
Asked about the impact on Cana-dian firms, a Liberal spokesmanpointed to the party’s election plat-
form, which argues that such com-panies stand to gain more workfrom an open competition for Can-
ada’s fighter jet replacement. Theplatform noted that, under a Cana-da-run competition, Canadian
firms would be guaranteed work –unlike under the F-35 program.
Impact to F-35 PartnersIn 2010, Canada committed to
buying 65 F-35s on a sole-source
basis as the replacement for itsfleet of CF-18s. Two years later,then-Prime Minister Stephen Har-
per paused that purchase amid ac-cusations that his government hadlied about the true cost of the fight-
er program.Trudeau has promised to pull out
of the F-35 program and to move
quickly on replacing Canada’s ag-ing CF-18s with another plane
through a competition. He has saidthat Canada does not need astealth fighter for its defense needs
and that the F-35 is too expensive.In Washington last week, US Lt.
Gen. Christopher Bogdan, F-35
Joint Program Office chief, saidthe remaining international part-ners can blame Canada for a $1mil-
lion price increase per jet if Ottawascraps its 65-plane buy.
“If any partner or any service
moves airplanes to the right ortakes airplanes out, the price of theairplane” will rise, Bogdan told
lawmakers Oct. 21. “We have esti-mated that the increase in price toeveryone else is about 0.7 to one
percent [or] about $1 million acopy for everybody else.”
If Canada pulls out, there would
be no impact to the current devel-opment program, which ends in2017, Bogdan stressed. However,
the international partners wouldbe forced to absorb Canada’s 2.1percent share in the cost of future
sustainment and follow-on mod-ernization, he said.
But what would happen to the
Canadian supply base, which has
spent millions to help developtechnology and components for
the plane?
Bogdan said the JPO does nothave a “set rule” to deal with this
scenario, but said the internationaland industry partners should havea “discussion” about what to do
with the Canadian companiesbuilding parts for the F-35.
Global ReactionDespite a potential price in-
crease, the other international
partners remain committed to theF-35 program.
An Israeli defense source said he
was “certainly not happy” about
prospective cost growth as a result
of Canada’s presumptive with-drawal, but insisted that such ascenario would not affect Israel’s
interest in pursuing follow-on or-ders for the F-35I.
The Israeli source noted that
additional squadrons of F-35Is —and the US military grant aid to payfor them — will be high on the
agenda of Defense Minister MosheYaalon when he visits Washingtonthis week to discuss Israel’s en-
hanced security needs. Yaalon’s discussions with US De-
fense Secretary Ash Carter and
other top Pentagon officials pre-cedes a scheduled Nov. 9 meetingfor Israeli Prime Minister Benja-
min Netanyahu and US PresidentBarack Obama – their first talkssince conclusion of the so-called
P5+1 Joint Comprehensive Plan ofAction.
Israel has 33 F-35Is on order,
with a contractual option for an-other 17. The first aircraft is ex-pected in December 2016, with
initial operational capabilityplanned by the end of 2017. Even-
tually, the Israeli Air Force expectsa full force strength of 75 F-35Is.
Italy, which is planning to buy 90
JSFs, stands to fork out $90 millionextra should Canada leave the pro-gram.
“We’ll negotiate on the price,”said a senior Italian defense sourcewhen asked about the possibility.
But one fighter-industry execu-tive in the UK, who asked not to benamed, said the F-35’s problems
went deeper than a possible pricehike caused by any Canadian with-drawal.
“If the only problem the F-35 hadwas that the aircraft was $1 millionmore expensive, they wouldn’t
have a problem,” he said. “Theproblem is the aircraft is tens ofmillions of dollars more than they
originally told people it would be,and that’s just the acquisitionprice. It’s the sustainment cost that
will destroy air forces.”Norway’s government is show-
ing no deep anxiety that costs re-
lating to acquisition will spiral to alevel where it may want to re-nego-tiate on price or reduce its agree-
ment to buy 52 aircraft. Maj Gen.
Morten Klever, director of Nor-way’s Fighter Replacement Pro-
gram, said that Norway would
conduct its own analysis on costand the overall development of the
F-35 program. However, the latest wrinkle in
the F-35 development has been
greeted with interest next door inSweden where Saab is expected tore-establish contact with Canada
about the single-engine Gripen NGfighter, which has notched up sev-eral export successes lately, most
notably in Brazil, where a contractfor 36 aircraft became effectivelast month. Sweden is also certain
to try and garner advantage from
the F-35 project’s woes in efforts tosell the Gripen to Finland, whichhas started its fighter replacement
program.A Saab spokesman would not
say whether the company would
bid the Gripen NG for a Canadianrequirement if Ottawa bails out ofthe F-35. However, he emphasized
the low cost of the aircraft as a rea-son for Canada to look more close-ly at the Swedish fighter.
In Denmark, which is due toreach a decision on its multirole
aircraft by the end of 2015, the Min-istry of Defense last week suggest-ed that Canada’s departure might
add $50 million more to the overallF-35 acquisition cost, but the com-petition’s short-listed candidates
also include Boeing’s F/A-18 E/FSuper Hornet, Dassault’s Rafaleand the Eurofighter Typhoon. The
MoD has asked the office in chargeof the competition to conduct adeeper cost assessment.
Doug Barrie, the senior air ana-lyst at the International Institutefor Strategic Studies think tank in
London, said the potential impactof a price rise caused by a Canadi-an withdrawal from the program is
a bit of a red herring. Virtually all ofthe F-35 price escalation is downto US issues, he said.
The biggest danger posed byCanada’s presumptive exit is thepressure it puts on potential cus-
tomers to look at other solutions,he said.
“It’s the precedent, not the price,
that is the bigger danger for F-35exports,” he said. “If I was in a rival
fighter company, I’d be thinking
this development gives me a littlemore market leverage.”
What’s Next for Canada?Canada’s expected decision to
drop the F-35 was mixed with poli-
tics, as the cost for the fifth-genera-tion fighter had dogged Harper’sgovernment. But Trudeau has posi-
tioned the argument as one of ne-cessity, emphasizing that Canadashould focus more on homeland
defense than power projectionwith its new fighter buy.
Richard Aboulafia, an analyst
with the Teal Group, points to Tru-deau signaling he’ll withdraw Can-ada from military operations
against the Islamic State group as
proof that the new government isfocusing inward, rather than out-ward, with its security decisions.
“It was form fitting function – it’snot about if it’s a good fighter, but,rather, if this is a role Canada
should have,” Aboulafia said. “TheF-35 is the perfect plane if Canadais going to be part of coalition war-
fare. If they just want somethingthat provides air protection forsovereignty, something else fits
just fine.”Gene Colabatistto, group presi-
dent for defense and security atCAE, the largest Canadian-owneddefense company, agrees that the
primary mission set Canada needsto fulfill is the sovereignty mission.
The question now becomes what
jet will fill that mission.Trudeau has previously suggest-
ed that the F-35 would not be con-
sidered in any competition, buteven if it were invited back in, itseems an unlikely winner. Any new
competition immediately becomesa plum prize for jet producers, asthere are few large-scale fighter
procurements expected in thenext few years.
The obvious choice to replace
the Boeing-made CF-18 fleet wouldbe the procurement of Boeing’s F/A-18 Super Hornets, said Aboula-
fia. The familiarity of pilots withthe jet, interoperability with theolder fleet, and the military ties be-
tween the US and Canada make itan easy choice.
And, while it seems unlikely Can-
ada would pick a non-Americansupplier, Aboulafia says not to besurprised if the Dassault Rafale,
Eurofighter Typhoon and Saab’s
Gripen NG enter any competition.Rafale and Eurofighter have
mounted strong marketing cam-
paigns in the last six months as un-certainty over the F-35 grew.
Dassault aviation chairman EricTrappier said Oct. 22 he wrote a let-ter of congratulations to Trudeau
that included a pitch for Rafale.A spokesman for Eurofighter Ty-
phoon declined to comment, other
than to say that officials are closelymonitoring the political develop-ments in Canada.
If Canada selects the Super Hor-net over the European fighters, itwould be a huge win for Boeing,
which has sought to extend the life
of its manufacturing facility in St.Louis.
“That buys Boeing three more
years,” Aboulafia said, while not-ing it could also have an impact onUS procurement. The Navy has ar-
gued for the procurement of moreF/A-18s, and having the Canadianjets on the line could make the eco-
nomic case that helps the Navy dojust that.
A Boeing win “works out very
well for the carrier part of the Na-vy,” Aboulafia said.
But the decision to have a fullcompetition instead of the sole-source selection of F-35 will result
in a delay in getting the new fleetsonline, CAE’s Colabatistto said.
That, in turn, means the existing
training infrastructure – includingthe CAE-run NATO Flying Trainingin Canada (NFTC) program which
trains pilots for the Canadian mil-itary – will likely need to be ex-tended.
“The net is that [the competition]will delay the acquisition of a newfighter program,” he told Defense
News on Oct. 22. “It’s not going tostart in a year or two, which meansthat the fleet will start to be re-
placed in the early mid-2020s.Therefore, the training enterprise[will] extend the current training
programs to get ready for that.”And, while Canadian firms tied
to the F-35 base released a Sept. 25
statement warning a cancellationwould cost “current and futurejobs,” Colabatistto does not see
reason to panic.He sees more of a “reallocation”
of defense funds than a major cut
coming under Trudeau’s govern-ment. Funding that may have gone
in the short term to fighters will
now instead be shifted to maritimeassets, he said.
“It’s all one budget, and they will
have to accommodate that,” Cola-
batistto said. “But I think the mostvisible part will be the delay, or the
stretching, of the fighter pro-grams.” N
By Lara Seligman and Aaron Mehta in
Washington; David Pugliese in Victoria,
British Columbia; Andrew Chuter in
London; Pierre Tran in Paris; Barbara
Opall-Rome in Tel Aviv; Gerard
O’Dwyer in Helsinki; and Tom Kington
in Rome.
CANADA F-35From Page 1
LOCKHEED MARTIN
Fighter Competition: Is the sun setting on F-35 in Canada? The newly elected Liberal government plans to open up competition to
replace its CF-18s.
SIGN UP FOR THE DEFENSE NEWSBREAKING NEWS ALERT
15_143
Be informed the instant vital news happens!
SIGN UP HERE: defensenews.com/newsletters
Sponsored by:BREAKING NEWS ALERT
www.defensenews.com October 26, 2015 DefenseNews 9
W ASHINGTON — After yearsof declining investments in
maintaining military trans-port fleets around the world, ex-perts now expect the global airlift
and mobility sustainment marketto grow for the first time since2011.
The global military mainte-
nance, repair and overhaul (MRO)market, which supports aircraft
from the Air Force’s C-130s to un-
manned helicopters, is set to risesteadily from now until 2020, ac-
cording to Hal Chrisman, vicepresident with services firm ICFInternational.
The forecast market growth isdue to strengthening defense bud-gets across the world, healthier
economies in Europe and a spikein global conflicts — particularlyin the Middle East and Ukraine,
Chrisman said. A growing threatfrom China is also driving US mil-itary spending in the Pacific, he
added.
The MRO sector peaked in 2011
at $66 billion, while casualtieswere declining in Afghanistan andthe US was pulling out of Iraq,
Chrisman said. Themarket has sharplydeclined each year
since and bottomedout at $55.6 billionin 2015, he said.
The US draw-
down in Iraq, aswell as budget
crunches across
Europe, primarilydrove the market’s steep decline
in past years, Chrisman said, not-ing that the US makes up almosthalf of the MRO market.
“What was happening was thatutilization was dropping prettyfast,” Chrisman said. “Now we be-
lieve that has leveled off.”Experts now believe the market
will grow to $59.4 billion in 2020,
according to ICF International’slatest forecast. Some of that ex-pected growth is due to aging
fleets, like the C-130 and C-17
transport jets, Chrisman said.
“[Depots are] going to find morework to do. They do their inspec-tions, they are going to find more
corrosion,” Chris-man said. “So youget a couple per-
centage points in-crease in the costof maintenance ev-
ery year – not from
inflation, but justby the fact that
they find more un-
scheduled workthat needs to be done.”
One potential area of growth forthe MRO market is the Air Force’slegacy C-17 transport fleet, built
by Boeing. Current contracts onthe C-17 ended in the third quarterof 2014, and Boeing delivered the
last plane in September.Although right now the Air
Force does not anticipate the need
for a full C-17 service life exten-sion program, the service may re-evaluate based on future need, ac-
cording to one top general.
“Tomorrow may change the sto-
ry, because we may be — whoknows what’s going on in theworld,” Gen. Carlton Everhart,
commander of Air Mobility Com-mand, said last month. “We willcontinue to do continuous studies
on that to make sure we got thisright.”
Conversations the Air Force has
had with Boeing engineers indi-cate the C-17s may be able to safe-ly fly more than 45,000 hours, well
past initial estimates for the fleet’s
service life, according to one AirForce official.
The C-17 was originally deliv-
ered with a service life of 30,000flight hours, which equates to
1,000 flight hours per year for 30years, according to Col. MarkMacDonald, chief of the require-
ments division at HeadquartersAir Mobility Command. In 2013,the Air Force extended the C-17’s
service life limit to 42,750 hours,he added.
“Right now, we don’t anticipate
the need for a C-17 full service lifeextension program,” MacDonaldtold Defense News in an email last
week.
However, the Air Force does an-
ticipate the need to address spe-cific structural issues in the mid-to late-2020s, for example with up-
per wing and aft fuselage re-skinproblems, MacDonald said.
“Other targeted fleet programs
can eventually be used to refreshaging components, but we’ll makesure the C-17 continues to operate
safely and reliably,” MacDonaldsaid. “It’s been a workhorse for thepast 22 years and continues to ex-
cel in a wide range of scenarios.”In the meantime, major airlift
suppliers, like Lockheed Martin,
Boeing and Airbus, will also look
to capture international sustain-ment opportunities, Chrisman
said.“[Original equipment manufac-
turers] at Lockheed, Boeing, Air-
bus are looking at what can we doto capture more of this interna-tional sustainment opportunity
and what value proposition canwe put out there,” Chrisman said,
noting that in many countries, a
large percentage of the fleet is un-available as aircraft wait for main-
tenance.
“A lot of places around the globedon’t do a great job with sustain-ment.”
Still, Chrisman cautioned thatexperts had anticipated the mar-ket would stop falling in 2013 – a
prediction that turned out to befalse.
“In 2013, we thought it had bot-
tomed out at about $60 billion, andturned out that it didn’t,” Chris-man said. “It kept going down an-
New Leaders: Mauro Moretti is finalizing his new Finmeccanica management team.
Moretti Puts Stamp on NewFinmeccanica Leadership Team
By TOM KINGTON
Defense News has partnered withHarvey Research to offer our advertisersa F R E E customized advertising analysisprogram. This research will analyze yourad’s performance against your competitionand measure its effectiveness among thosewith buying involvement –the advertiser’starget audience – a key element in provingROI to advertisers.
Don’t miss this opportunity to have youradvertising evaluated!
Bonus: A limited number of proprietaryquestions are available to the first fiveadvertisers to commit to the study!
Issue date: December 7Close: November 27Contact: JimWay
I/TSEC 2015Orange County Convention CenterOrlando, FLwww.iitsec.org
I/ITSEC is the world's largest conferenceand display of training systems capabilitiesin the world. Over 500 exhibitors join topresent leading edge technology andinnovative concepts related to the Training,Modeling and Simulation industries for over14,000 visitors. Key government organiza-tions and key industry partners from acrossall training domains are present to include,transportation, health care, gaming, andeducation. The venue is host to numerouscollateral meetings and discussion oppor-tunities take advantage of the large numberof government and industry leadersbrought together in one venue. This repre-sents a huge offset to separate meetingsrequiring separate travel and logisticalsupport. In many cases, cross functionalmeetings between government, industryand academia would be impossible outsidethis venue.
November 2-5, 2015
DEFENSE AND SECURITYBangkok, Thailand
November 3, 2015
NDIA EMBASSY/DEFENSE ATTACHELUNCHEON SERIES - UNITED KINGDOMWashington, DCwww.ndia.org/meetings/647B
ICBM Still Within Iran’s ReachGreg Thielmann expresses a
highly optimistic view of Iranianbehavior in his commentary piece
“Iran Nuclear ICBM Threat not onHorizon” (Commentary, Oct. 12).
Many commentators have noted
that the Joint ComprehensivePlan of Action (JCOPA), as theagreement of the P5+1 with Iran
has been named, is not the gooddeal claimed by President Obama.The agreement falls well short of
the objectives outlined by thepresident prior to the completionof the agreement. Even the name
JCOPA adds to the confusionsince no reference was made inthe agreement to restricting Irani-
an development of intercontinen-tal ballistic missiles (ICBMs). No,Mr. Thielman, the threat of Irani-
an nuclear-tipped ICBMs remainsvery much on the horizon.
Turning to the Iranian existen-
tial threat to Israel, even yourown commentary piece notes thatthe Rouhani regime has focused
on the shorter- to medium-rangemissiles. These are well advancedand can threaten our only demo-
cratic ally in the region.Even if Iran abides by the agree-
ment, and judging from past
behavior that is a very large “if,”the agreement certainly leavesIran free to become a member of
the nuclear warhead club within15 years. In national security, 15
years is not a long period.I have been involved in missile
defense activities since President
Reagan made his famous speechin March 1983. That was 32 yearsago, and despite the expenditure
of more than $160 billion, thenational missile defense is still anunproven entity and at best is
only capable of intercepting alimited raid of 10 to 20 relativelyunsophisticated missiles.
A claim that an ICBM threat is
not on the horizon takes too littleaccount of the well-established
behavior of the radical Iranianregime. Fifteen years is certainlywithin their horizon, and judging
by our current rate of progressleaves us too little time to en-hance our defenses.
STANLEY ORMAN
Rockville, Md.
Making the Case for F-35CIn your Oct. 19 issue, Jerry
Hendrix published a detailedhistory on carrier-based aviation
and the US Navy’s current rangeand anti-access challenges. Hedid not mention the F-35C, but his
article makes the best possiblecase for the navalized joint strike
fighter, on both range and surviv-ability grounds.
The F-35C offers a big improve-
ment over current carrier-basedstrike aircraft in range, payload,situational awareness and surviv-
ability. It is the Navy’s first stealthaircraft. But it is range that Capt.Hendrix mainly hangs his hat on.
Fully loaded and on internal fuelonly, the F-35C’s 700-mile combatradius is a significant improve-
ment over current carrier-basedstrike assets.
MERRICK “MAC” CAREY
CEO, Lexington InstituteArlington, Va.
LETTERS
US NAVY
An F-35C approaches the carrier Nimitz
n Email letters to [email protected]. Please includephone number. Letters may be edited. Submissions to Defense Newsmay be published or distributed inprint, electronic or other forms.
P resident Barack Obama’s veto of the 2016defense authorization bill is no surprise, butsome say it’s hypocritical.
For months, he has made clear that he wouldreject any measure that breaks budget caps fordefense spending alone – as does the current bill –
yet his original defense budget request was alsohigher than spending caps would allow.
Political gamesmanship continues as Congress
and the administration gear up for a battle overraising a debt limit that will be reached in a fewweeks. Leading the charge will be a band of zealous
anti-debt lawmakers who forced sequestration toavoid a first-ever US debt default. There are fewer ofthem in Congress now but they wield enormous
influence, as they recently demonstrated by gettingthe House speaker fired.
With a presidential election underway and the
administration in its last year, politicians won’t riskthe tough calls and messy deal-making needed toaddress the nation’s fiscal challenges. Quite simply,
they’re shirking the duties they were elected toperform. That the world’s most important nationcan’t get its budget act together even as its economy
improves is an obscenity.For seven years, the Pentagon has been forced to
live with fiscal uncertainty and budgetary half mea-
sures. That sends the wrong signal to friends andenemies while actually forcing the Pentagon tospend more to get less.
EDITORIALS
Lawmakers’ Dereliction of Duty
J ustin Trudeau promised that if elected Canada’sprime minister, he would withdraw Ottawafrom the US-led Joint Strike Fighter project.
And that’s exactly what he’s expected to do nowthat he’s set to assume office and on the recordsaying that Canada could get new fighters for less, a
bigger industrial role in the new program and applythe savings to shipbuilding programs.
Canada has long been partnered on the Lockheed
Martin program with plans to buy 65 of the stealthyjets, initially projected to cost $9 billion, to replace80 CF-18 fighters now in service. Trudeau has said
that replacing Canada’s version of America’s F/A-18swould be done through competition, but it’s nosecret that some in Ottawa favor the new version of
the Boeing jet that is in US Navy service, affordingautomatic interoperability with its closest ally.
The F/A-18E/F is a formidable aircraft. Though
cheaper than the F-35, it is not as advanced. Trudeauclaims that Canada doesn’t need such a sophisti-cated jet, but potent Russian air defenses being
deployed suggest demand for stealthy planes like
the F-35 will only grow, a key consideration forCanada that prides itself on engaging globally.
Canada’s departure would raise the unit price for
other partner nations by about $1 million per plane.Cost control on JSF depends on volume, so cuttingnumbers is problematic.
In dropping JSF, Canada would trade a productionand sustainment role on each of several thousandaircraft in the hopes of a bigger role on a far smaller
number. It’s like saying that a bird in the bush isbetter than one in the hand. Canadian industry has$750 million in JSF production contracts. Support
could total billions more over the coming decades.And changing course now would delay replace-
ment of aging fighters, increasing support costs.
Every nation determines its defense needs, even ifdecisions are based on political posturing ratherthan fact. But its former partners are also within
their rights to prune the program of Canadian con-tent, especially lucrative decades-long sustainmentwork. Ottawa can’t dynamite its JSF buy and still
expect to double dip on the new fighter.
Canada’s Risky JSF Gambit
www.defensenews.com October 26, 2015 DefenseNews 21
I t has become fashionable to
critique the US Army as nothaving a clear sense of pur-
pose as the Iraq and Afghanistan
operations wind down. I disagree.The Army, or at least the leaders I
know best
within it,know full wellthat they must
be ready for awide range ofpossible mis-
sions — somepossibly re-sembling the
conflicts andmajor opera-tions of the
last 25 years,others per-haps quite
different. Rather, it is
political lead-
ership that is confused and whichhas been trying mistakenly topredict and circumscribe the
range of plausible future Armymissions with overconfidence inthe accuracy of its crystal ball.
In my view, the Obama admini-
stration has kept the US Army infairly good shape over the lastseven years, in terms of budget
and readiness and force struc-ture. But in its 2012 Defense Stra-tegic Guidance as well as its 2014
Quadrennial Defense Review, ithas introduced incorrect ideasabout how the Army should size,
shape and train its future forces. If allowed to persist, these ideas
could cause real damage down
the road, leaving the nation seri-ously unprepared for missionsthat could be needed to address
very serious threats to the nation.We have made similar mistakes inour history, especially after major
wars, and we are at risk of doingit again.
Specifically, the 2012 Defense
Strategic Guidance dismissed theplausibility of large-scale counter-insurgency campaigns or other
stability operations. It stated, “USforces will retain and continue torefine the lessons learned, ex-
pertise, and specialized capa-bilities that have been developedover the past ten years of coun-
terinsurgency and stability opera-
tions in Iraq and Afghanistan.However, US forces will no long-er be sized to conduct large-scale,
22 DefenseNews October 26, 2015 www.defensenews.com
Interview
Q. What major factors have you taken
into account in your proposed blue-
print for the IDF’s future ground force?
A. We needed to look at the ene-my and the changes he’s un-dergone, anticipate changes we’re
likely to face in the future anddetermine the best way to applyall the lessons we’re learning.
Based on all this, we have anunderstanding of what materiel,technologies and operational
concepts are needed for a verystrong and effective maneuveringforce across a spectrum of sce-
narios.
Q. Plan Gideon is for five years, but
your blueprint, what you call Ground
Horizon, extends further into the
future, correct?
A. Gideon will start from 2016 andrun through 2020, but we’re alllooking at least 10 years, some-
times 20 years ahead. My portion,which we call Ground Horizon, is
a process that took about a year.
With major modernization plans,like tanks, big guns and troopcarriers, we need to think how
they’ll develop over 20 yearssince such a huge investment isrequired.
Q. Considering all the above, what is
the goal for fortifying and crafting the
future ground force?
A. To be decisive over what wecall disappearing enemies; forces
that are often invisible and havelargely learned to counter ourmethods of operations.
The fact is that today, there isno enemy around us that canachieve his objectives against us.
At the end of the day, when theIDF is required to achieve victoryover the enemy, we will know
how to do it through maneuvers
and every situation.
Q. Critics would say 75 Israelis killed
in 50 days of fighting in the summer
2014 Gaza war was unreasonable.
What’s your view?
A. You always need to ask whatyou want to achieve and how. InProtective Edge, we wanted to
achieve a certain end-state with-out vanquishing Hamas. … Every-one knew the game plan, and it
required us to achieve this in a
different way (by directly con-fronting the tunnels). In the end,
Hamas is extremely weakenedand won’t be ready for anotherround for a long time, and that
was the objective we set forourselves. But this question is amajor lesson of Protective Edge,
and a major driver of our GroundHorizon plan.
Q. Would 50 days be considered rea-
sonable for the next ground war in
Lebanon?
A. That’s too open a question. Itmust be considered in political,diplomatic and international
context. It depends on whatwould motivate our government
to go for this action in the first
place. Imagine if the alternativewas huge sustained casualties to
the homefront. Under those cir-
cumstances, our government maybe willing to pay costs associatedwith fully maximized, high-in-
tensity ground maneuvering, andnot just pinpoint, tactical ob-jectives.
Q. So what have you learned?
A. We have to develop proper
commanders at all echelons, fromthe smallest squad to corps com-manders, and we cannot compro-
mise on our training regime. It
must be consistent and not besubjected to budgetary-drivenhalts and restarts as we’ve done
in the past. And we must tailorforce training to specific chal-lenges.
Q. Are you referring to the tunnel
threat, which I assume was a major
lesson of the last Gaza campaign?
A. The gaps we discovered withregard to the subterranean threat
were pretty much across theboard in terms of technology,operational concept and training.
We underestimated the magni-tude of the threat. Our trainingwas a matter of too little, too late.
When we asked ourselves whatwas our certified capability forthis mission, we realized we were
deficient, but we didn’t realize towhat extent. We didn’t see that it
was at the heart of the enemy’sCONOP. Gaza is an entire city ontop of a city.
Q. But capabilities exist in other indus-
tries, for example, the energy explora-
tion industry, no? Couldn’t they be
adapted for the sands of Gaza, or the
mountains along the Lebanese and
Syrian borders?
A. In the Gaza context, we suf-fered from the fact that the tech-
nology is not yet developed forthreats 20-30 meters deep. Itdoesn’t really interest the indus-
try. We looked at what we couldtake from other industrial sec-tors, but the truth is, they are not
readily adaptable for our partic-ular threat. And anyone whoclaims otherwise is being mis-
leading.During Protective Edge, we
were able to improvise; to take
things that weren’t developed forthis purpose and adapt them forthe mission.
Q. So where are you today? We’ve seen
an MoD program called Snake Pit,
growing proficiency of your Combat
Engineering Corps, use of robotics,
canines, etc.
A. We’ve advanced a lot, but still,
the subterranean threat demandssolutions. We have answers for
part of the problems, but I can’t
elaborate. Suffice it to say there isno magic solution. But the most
important progress is that we’veadopted a certain technique thatwe can use to fight this threat. We
now have a validated, formalCONOP that was codified intomanuals immediately after Pro-
tective Edge.
Q. What’s next with regard to the
tunnel threat?
A. We understand that it’s not
enough to have a unique capa-bility entrusted with a small num-ber of forces. We need to give
these means and methods to allof our forces, and to train accord-ingly. Now we’re building the
infrastructure to train in, and aswe train, we’re discovering we
have very creative and resource-ful commanders who have beenable to improve on operational
methods. The best thing to hap-pen to us will be to turn thesetunnels into death traps. Once we
know how to do this, we’ll be in avery different place.
Q. What other lessons inspired your
future force blueprint?
A. With regard to combined arms
battle, we are emphasizing theneed for every battalion to trans-form itself into a hybrid unit
when necessary. We decided notto do this organically, since ourforces are busy with routine
operations and we need to pre-serve the traditional, professionalchain of command. But our train-
ing is such that our combat mis-sions are no longer single service.There’s no longer armor without
infantry, combat engineering,intel and artillery capabilities,which is something we couldn’t
say about the second Lebanonwar or even Cast Lead [the De-cember 2008-January 2009 opera-
tion in Gaza]. And it’s all
connected through the net.
Q. Your people often speak of cross-
service interoperability and joint force
combat. This has been a priority for
several years now, no?
A. Absolutely. When I look a dec-ade or two ahead, I don’t know if
the term interoperability with airand sea forces will still be rele-vant. That’s because it’s clear
there needs to be a single forcefighting in the same domain, all ofwhich must be supported by a
robust integrated C4I network.We understand that even if
we’re not organized like this in
routine operations, the need to
operate in wartime against dis-
appearing enemies is a basicneed.
Q. Lt. Gen. Gadi Eisenkot, IDF chief of
staff, recently announced his decision
to stand up a commando brigade.
What was the rationale?
A. Because we’re not a rich Army,
we needed to prioritize in a waythat the improved capabilities,and lethality of a few can influ-
ence larger combat goals. Weneed to entrust a good part of ourqualitative edge to those units
that can rapidly deliver addedvalue in complex operations,whether they are in the urban
theater, against subterraneanthreats or in other conditions. Weunderstood that once we opti-
mize special forces for thesemissions and give them every-thing they need in terms of weap-
onry, resources and training, wecan strengthen ourselves with acertain center of gravity that was
previously diffused.So we’re merging elite units
from infantry, combat engineer-
ing, artillery and technologicalspecialists and grooming them forhigh-end, elite missions.
Q. What about active protection sys-
tems (APS)? Are these prerequisites
not only for tanks, but for troop carri-
ers and other ground vehicles as well?
A. Even before Protective Edge,
the [Rafael-developed Trophy]APS deployed on Merkava Mk4shas proven to be an enormous
success. Now we’re equippingNamer heavy APCs with thiscapability, the first of which will
probably go to our Golani in-
fantry brigade. Our APS is per-forming beyond expectations. It
will be the Iron Dome for our
infantry.But it’s expensive. Every plat-
form must be equipped. So we’llhave to prioritize and outfit onlythose units facing more complex
threats such as the disappearing
enemy I’ve spoken about. N
By Barbara Opall-Rome in Tel Aviv.
MAJ. GEN. GUY ZURCommander, Israel Ground Forces Command
Next month, the Israel Defense Forces General Staff will hold aseries of closed-door deliberations to finalize its proposed Plan
Gideon, an estimated 82 billion shekel (US $21 billion) modern-ization plan through 2020. Compared to previous plans, a larger shareof funding — nearly 40 percent — is slated for upgrading combined
arms maneuvering capabilities and combat readiness of ground forces.As the man responsible for organizing, training and equipping the
Israeli Army, Zur is designing the future force for at least a decade to
come. He shared highlights from his strategic blueprint, dubbedGround Horizon, which aims to render ground forces much more deci-sive than they were in the 2006 Lebanon war or in the most recent
Protective Edge campaign in Gaza.
ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES
End strength (including reserves):513,000
Formations (including reserves)n Three territorial commands
n 16 divisions
n 21 independent brigades/groups
2014 data from Tel Aviv University’s Institute forNational Security Studies
SERVICEPROFILE
Help shape
Take our 3 minute survey!
bit.ly/DefenseNewsSurvey
15_397
Find out more at www.acibc.org
BUYING MATERIAL FOR TWO AIRCRAFT CARRIERS WILL SAVE TAXPAYERS $500 MILLION AND KEEP THE INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIER BASE STRONG.