A little unconventional I know, but I figured I'd toss out the invite to come over to Military.com's Election Center blog to discuss the speeches tonight at the Republican convention, including the keynote address from John McCain.
We'll be doing it live from the press stand at the event. So if you wanna get all riled up, come on over.
-- Christian
Liquid-cooled Underwear and Other Micro-climates
According to Walter Teal, an engineer in Natick's micro-climate lab, throughout the U.S. Army in 2005 there were six heat-related deaths, 1,400 cases of heat exhaustion, and 2,500 cases of heat stroke. It's bad enough if a Soldier collapses on the ground, but the consequences can be even worse for Soldiers behind the controls of the Army's helicopters.
Natick engineers listened to the feedback from pilots operating in the hot evironments of Iraq and Afghanistan and, with the assistance of private contractors, designed and produced "liquid-cooled underwear." Basically, the garment is a vest the pilots wear that hooks into a cooling system integrated into the helicopter. The system is comprised of a lunchbox-sized black box that houses the liquid cooling components, a series of tubes routed to each pilot's seat, a quick-disconnect fitting that allows the pilot to egress without worrying about reaching down to detach the vest, and the vest itself.
As with any airplane that has systems added to it as it continues its service life, finding the real estate to house the black box (one for each crew member) and tubing was an issue. The Blackhawk has six feet of tubing between the cooling unit and the respective seat; the Chinook has twenty-two feet of tubing. But whatever the design challenges have been along the way, the helicopter pilots have seemed happy with the results. One went so far as to proclaim the liquid cooled underwear system as "the best thing to happen to helicopters since the rotor."
And Natick isn't forgetting the guys on the ground either. They're in the process of testing two different types of individual cooling units. One is a single 1.5 liter cylinder that weighs four pounds, the other is a pair of brick-sized devices, one housing the compressor, the other housing the fan and condenser - not unlike the HVAC system in many homes. The units are designed to be worn at the hip. Both units are hoping to meet Military Standard 810 (duh . . .), which of course states that these sorts of devices have to provide 120 BTUs/hour of cooling. Both units provide about four hours of cooling.
The Navy's approach to the overheated personnel issue is a bit more basic. Blessed with the luxury of freezers on ships, they simply use Steele vests, which are nothing more than vests with pouches that hold ice packs.
I spent some time at the U.S. Army Soldier Systems Center in Natick, Mass. (about 20 miles due west of Boston) this week, and like any government organization worth its salt they have their own set of acronyms. So if you were not wise in the ways of Natick and I walked into a room and said, "HRV," you would say?
Exactly.
Well, an HRV is a "Human Resource Volunteer." According to the HRV handbook "Soldiers are the key element in research efforts. The results from test conducted by these volunteers determine which items the Army will adopt and how much energy a Soldier will use under various climatic conditions."
Private Grant Huffman had just finished advanced infantry training and was cooling his heels around Fort Knox waiting to start learning how to drive a tank when the Natick team headed by Richard Walunas, who is an Army vet and former HRV, approached him with their HRV pitch. Huffman was looking for a change of scenery and the idea of participating in studies that might help other Soldiers appealed to him.
Soon enough Huffman found himself walking on a treadmill in a climate chamber in full combat gear with a next-generation pack strapped to his back. Durning the course of testing, the Natick staff might make the treadmill go faster. They might make the chamber hotter . . . then colder. They could pelt Huffman with wind and rain . . . all in the name of making Soldiers safer, more effective, or more lethal.
Courtesy of the USAF, an AC-130 deploys anti-missile flares near Hurlburt Field, FL. The flares distract incoming enemy surface-to-air missiles presumably by making the AC-130 appear totally effin' radical.
I've been wondering why my GPS has been a little off.
"We've had an anomoly..." That's the understatement of the year!
(Gouge: CM)
-- Christian
Sikorsky Debuts Fly-by-Wire UH-60M
[Editor's note:Just a quick note folks...I'll be attending the Republican Convention this week and will be posting entries on Military.com's Election Center blog. Ward, John, Kevin and the rest of the gang will be backing me up here while I'm wading through all the politics and hot air in Minniapolis-St. Paul.]
Sikorsky has begun flight testing the UH-60M Upgrade, the latest version of the Black Hawk and the first fly-by-wire helicopter for the U.S. Army.
The first flight at the company’s West Palm Beach, Fla, test center lasted around 60 minutes and included hover, forward flight and a hover turn, Sikorsky says.
The M Upgrade introduces a digital fly-by-wire (FBW) system with triple-redundant Hamilton Sundstrand dual-channel flight control computers and actuators, and BAE Systems active control sticks.
Sikorsky says FBW, coupled with Rockwell Collins’ Common Aviation Architecture System (CAAS) glass cockpit, reduces pilot workload, improves aircraft handling qualities and increases pilot situational awareness.
Eliminating mechanical control linkages also saves weight and reduces maintenance, the company says. At the same time, the engines are upgraded to General Electric T700-701Es with fully authority digital engine control.
Protecting the Information Infrastructure of the United States
The security of the United States depends on secure, reliable and resilient information systems. In light of this need the national security community came together to address traditional and emerging information security issues. Increasing security in cyber space is a very complex undertaking. Cyber security cuts across so many lines in the executive branch of government it creates a maze that is difficult to navigate. When you look at responding to and investigating cyber attacks, the Department of Homeland Security oversees protection of government networks.
What we need is a holistic approach that focuses on securing the physical and information infrastructure that is critical for our nation to function. In order for this to happen the government must form a tighter relationship with the private sector. This is primarily due to the fact that most of the Internet's infrastructure is owned and operated by private business. This is not a new issue. For nearly a decade now, the government has called for greater cooperation between the public and private sectors on this issue. So far the response from the private sector has been a cold shoulder. Increasing security around our information infrastructure to the level now required due to the threats by cyber war and organized criminal activity requires a huge and ambitious initiative. Cyber security has to become a top issue for the 44th president of the United States. Both candidates have very little to say about cyber security thus far. This month, the McCain campaign released a document that outlines his technology policy vision. A review of the document yielded very little insight into the issue of cyber security. In fact, it was barely mentioned. Obama's position is not much different. That being said, Obama has stated his intention to create a new White House position of the Federal Chief Technology Officer.
I'm always reluctant to post these stories and I always get a lot of flak from them, but I think it's important for folks who might not have access to them that are involved in some way with aviation to see what happened and get some "lessons learned" data that can maybe help them down the road.
A Harrier crash on Feb. 13 near Cherry Point (the second in a series of four so far this fiscal year) was initially thought to have been caused by engine failure. But according to the Judge Advocate General Manual investigation I got my hand on through FOIA the cause was a far simpler -- and more correctable one.
According to an official investigation report released after a Freedom of Information Act Request from Military.com, the pilot, Capt. Ian Stevens, failed to move the jet nozzles of his Harrier to the position required for conventional flight during a Feb. 13 mission to practice aerial refueling and ground attack runs near Cherry Point Marine Air Station, causing the plane to drop from the sky.
That's from a story we're posting today on Military.com (there've been some technical snags so publishing is delayed). Here's a bit more:
"This mishap was caused by the mishap pilot not positioning the nozzles back to the aft position after positioning them ... to the hoverstop position in order to ... stabilize in a proper formation position with is lead," the investigating officer stated in the report. "The thrust remained vectored below the aircraft until the aircraft impacted the ground." ...
Stevens executed several successful aerial refueling runs on a KC-10 Extender tanker, the report said, before peeling away with the other two Harriers to practice using his targeting pod during mock ground attacks. As he was trying to slow down and join up with the lead pilot of the flight, whose name is redacted from the report, things started to go wrong.
"The engine sounded like it was spooling up ... but the lead [pilot] continued to pull away from me," Stevens -- whose name was removed from the report but released to local media at the time of the crash -- told investigators in a statement. "I ... increased power to 'mil' but did not feel a corresponding acceleration. I decided that I had a problem."
The U.S. Navy's leadership has shown unprecedented ineptitude in the handling of surface ship programs. The previous (and ongoing) mass of problems with the amphibious ships of the LPD 17 class and the littoral combat ships (LCS) seem to pale in comparison to the handling of the DDG 1000 "destroyer" program.
For eight years the Congress and public have heard the Navy's leadership -- civilian and uniformed -- declare that they wanted no more ships of the Arleigh Burke (DDG 51) class. Sixty-two of these destroyers are in service or under construction.
Chiefs of Naval Operations Vern Clark (July 2000 -- July 2005), Michael Mullen (July 2005 -- September 2007), and Gary Roughead (since September 2007) had been adamant that the DDG 1000 was the surface combatant of the future. All three admirals are surface warfare specialists, giving credibility to their statements.
Furthermore, the 30-year shipbuilding plan, which the Navy Department presented to Congress in February 2008 (covering the period fiscal years 2009-2038) still indicated a total of 32 DDG 1000s.
The DDG 1000 program -- assigned the class name Zumwalt -- dates to the early 1990s and a Mission Needs Statement that evolved from the Navy's post-Cold War strategy paper …from the Sea (1992). The strategy postulated that future Navy emphasis should be oriented toward supporting joint/coalition operations against the shore. The "land-attack destroyer" and DD-21 concepts followed, evolving into the DDG 1000.
But this spring the Navy's leadership essentially stopped supporting the DDG 1000 within weeks of contracts being awarded to construct the first two ships. At the same time, the Navy's leaders began advocating for eight or nine additional Burke-class destroyers. Now, at congressional instigation, the third DDG 1000, which is in the president's fiscal year 2009 budget, is also being supported by the Navy leadership.
