Defence`s Feeds

Geez!  Did you watch the vid?  This guy is basically waving a red flag in front of Law Enforcement to kick down his door for roid use. Dirty Secret?  LEO's really don't give a fuck...

[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]

I hope you moved fast on your AR-15 purchases. Luckily I'm a bit of a night owl and while watching the new coverage of the terrorist attack in Orlando, I made two moves.  I ordered an upper to...

[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]

Watching the President's speech and one thing is apparent. They're obviously taking a hit in public opinion polls with their handling of the Orlando terrorist attacks. This is awesome.  I told...

[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]

via Fox News. The shocking attack in Magnanville, 35 miles north of Paris, ended after a three-hour standoff, when French commandoes stormed the home, rescuing the boy and killing Larossi Abballa,...

[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]

Many thanks to Thiago for the link! via Brietbart London’s first ever Muslim Mayor is set to ban images of ‘unrealistic’ scantily clad women from ads on public transport, which could see the city...

[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]

Simple question. Do you trust the Federal Govt to do the right thing? I don't. I don't trust them to tie their own shoes in the morning much less become "deciders" on whether or not I can exercise...

[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]

The European Defence Agency (EDA) in cooperation with the European Commission (EC), and the Electronic Components and Systems for European Leadership Joint Undertaking (ECSEL JU) is organising the first “Opportunities for Dual-Use Technologies – Components” Workshop on June 28, 2016.

The criticality of electronic components is reflected in a growing need for EU non-dependence. Securing supply in areas such as sensors, new materials and digital systems is grabbing the attention of both governments and industry. The most relevant European research projects in these areas will be presented in the workshop, highlighting the past and present developments as well as future opportunities. 

The event is expected to bring together experts from the entire range of stakeholders involved in European dual-use technology research. EDA, EC and ECSEL JU directors will be opening the event, while the panel discussion will involve representatives from the UK Ministry of Defence, STMicroelectronics, the European Commission (DG GROW) and the European Space Agency. 

For more information and to express your interest to attend follow this link. 

 

Defense Technology Review stepped up hard and has this special on the "Lynx" Infantry Fighting Vehicle. Click here to get your copy!

[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]

Thanks to Ευστάθιος for the pic!!! Interesting.  So we're looking at another Marder "variant".  I guess they see the upgrade market as being bigger than I thought. But that's a side...

[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]

via Free Beacon. “Fifty Americans are dead, the FBI had the killer in their sights and let him go, and the FBI director is okay with this,” he said. “Not knowing something that is a requirement of...

[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]

via UPI Engineering and design company Supacat has launched its new light reconnaissance vehicle at the Eurosatory exhibition in France. The LRV400 Mk2 light reconnaissance vehicle is designed for...

[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]

via Jennyhoelzer Tumblr Page. It's said that the military has a guide on how to conduct every aspect of your life. I never believed it till now.  Time to do a deep dive and see if they have...

[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]

Thanks to 61Mech for the link! Info on the ship here. This is what the LCS should have been!  The XO-131A would have been a combat multiplier for the fleet.  How could Damen get it...

[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]

Much has been reported about how Afghan men, mostly young Shias, are being incentivised or coerced by Iran into fighting on the side of the Assad regime in Syria. There has been little study, however, of how exactly they end up in Syria. Said Reza Kazemi (*) has been tracking a 22 year-old Shia Afghan called Musa and discovered a story of going to fight in Syria that is far more complex. Musa’s case highlights how young men, failing to be integrated into their local communities, are becoming more connected to the outside world. It also shows how such dislocated youths can believe that by fighting in Syria they can become men.

This dispatch follows previous fieldwork and AAN publications by Said Reza Kazemi on the problematic behaviour of young people in Herat. The names of people and places in this dispatch have been changed or withheld at the request of interviewees.

It was a pleasant spring afternoon in a shahrak, or informal settlement, on the tree-clad outskirts of Herat city on 3 April 2016 when 21-year-old Jawid received a message from his close friend Musa on his Chinese-made smartphone while chatting to this author. After the ritual of greetings and catching up, Musa and Jawideengaged in what turned out to be a serious conversation:

Musa [online from Tehran, Iran]: Forgive me [halal konen] but I’m no longer going to be around.

Jawid [online from Herat, Afghanistan]: What do you mean? Where will you be?

M: Don’t tell anyone: I’ll be in Syria.

J: Why?

M: Just going there.

J: I don’t know what to say. As you wish… But I beg you: don’t go.

M: Isn’t it good if I become a shahid [a martyr]?

J: You could have continued your schooling and taken your kankur [university entrance test] here. At least you could have tried to get into university here. You could have gone there [to Syria] if you hadn’t succeed with kankur. Or you could have eventually found some work here. So many people go on living here. Of course, it’s good to become a shahid. Not everyone can become a shahid. Of course, I can’t tell you what to do and I can’t stop you going either.

M: That [continuing school] was certainly possible, Jawid. My problem comes from another place, and I can’t talk about it.

J: What problem?

M: The problem lies in my heart.

J: Because of your dad?

M: No.

J: What problem do you have with your heart?

M: Leave it. Bye for now.

J: Well, you must do whatever feels right for you.

M: You know, Jawid, we all die. It has nothing to do with going to Syria. We die wherever we are, once our ’ajal [final hour] comes.

J: Are you serious about your decision?

M: Yes.

J: Are your mum and dad aware of it?

M: No.

J: Nobody’s aware of it! Why don’t you talk to your mum and dad about it? Tell them, or it’ll be very sad for them.

M: I’m going tomorrow. To Yazd [the centre of Iran’s Yazd province, around 270 km southeast of Isfahan], for training. One month of training in Iran and two months of fighting in Syria. Just pray that all will be fine for me at the end.

This conversation between the two young Afghans both reveals and conceals a number of issues. To understand it, it needs to be placed in its context. It highlights, for example, the growing awareness of the outside world among segments of Afghanistan’s younger population, their increased connectivity to worlds both virtual and real and their increasing mobility, both locally and abroad. Following Musa intermittently over the last three years (see previous research here), the author has been amazed at how fascinated Musa has always been with the connectivity provided to him by information and communication technologies, primarily via mobile phone and the Internet.

The socioeconomic circumstances of both Musa’s family and the 8,000 or so inhabitants of his shahrak (a Dari diminutive of shahr, city) are generally low. Most of the residents – where Musa has spent most of his life and which is inhabited mostly by Shia Hazaras and Sayyeds – are daily-wage labourers employed in piecemeal construction work. Musa’s father is a local shopkeeper. Youths like Musa have, nevertheless, managed to purchase Chinese-made smartphones and stay connected via the Internet (see previous AAN research on the growth of new media in Afghanistan here). Many of these young people put pressure on their parents to buy them smartphones.

Like many of his peers, Musa spends much of his time on his phone, either messaging his friends in Afghanistan and abroad, or checking Facebook and other social networking websites. He watches video clips, listens to music and generally surfs the net. It is this connectivity that has made young people like Musa aware of regional and global developments, such as the war in Syria and, more importantly, how to take part in it. However, their use of information and communication technologies continues to be largely uncritical, partly because of the generally low standards of education and upbringing in society (home, school and the broader community). However, even in countries with much higher standards of education and upbringing, young people have been radicalised through the media and joined the Syrian conflict. (1)  Therefore, there is more to youth radicalisation than the use of information and communication technologies. In Musa’s case, he was not radicalised, but his use of such technologies made him increasingly aware about developments outside Afghanistan, including how other young men were fighting in Syria.

The failure of local Afghan communities to integrate their youths

Musa’s connectivity to the outside world eventually led to his desire to travel abroad. His sense of dislocation did not happen overnight, however; it took a while for Musa to gradually become alienated from his local community in the shahrak, particularly from his school and his family.

It began with a life-changing incident at school. The shahrak where Musa has lived most of his life has one public school, and two private schools which compete with each other to attract fee-paying students. Musa used to attend one of these private schools, but was expelled. He came to blows with one of his teachers, following a reprimand for failing to do his homework, which had suffered increasingly due to time spent with his friends late into the night, and on his smartphone.

Despite his father’s pleas, the school stood by their decision and Musa lost a year of studies. In the following academic year, 2014-15, Musa attended a public school outside the shahrak in downtown Herat. He dropped out, however, while in his last year.

Musa’s father, who has four children (two girls aged 24 and 20 and two boys aged 22 and 5), then tried to get Musa involved in life in their local community, but these efforts were also in vain. He tried to engage Musa in the small grocery shop he had been running in the locality for over a decade. Musa was, however, not interested in helping his father there or in a subsequent shop his father wanted to set up for him to run. Musa’s father, relatives and some of his school friends, including Jawid, then tried to draw Musa into one of the few local educational centres that have been providing, among other things, English language and computer literacy courses. Musa attended an English language course for a short while, but soon dropped out. His father’s last move was to draw Musa into local life through marriage, but this effort backfired.

He had gone to a neighbour’s home, asking their daughter – a girl Musa had come to appreciate – for his son. As the author later found out through female relatives, the girl had previously turned Musa down. One reason was that the girl, who studies medicine at Herat University, rejected Musa because he did not have higher education. Furthermore, marriage is an expensive and complicated process of traditions and rituals, making it difficult for parents to settle their restless sons. In fact, many young Afghan men whose parents are not financially secure see migration abroad (such as Iran, Europe or Australia) as a way to find the money for getting settled in life. (2) In Musa’s case, his father had saved and put aside the necessary money, but his son had already been turned down by the girl he loved – one of the reasons for him wanting to pursue a different life path. Musa’s father eventually learned all this from his wife.

The failure of Afghan communities to integrate their young people needs to be placed in a larger historical and cultural context. Figures of authority in a community – parents, educational leaders, religious figures, etc – face a new generation of young men (and women) who often do not share their historical, social or cultural experiences. Most parents in the shahrak have lived most of their lives in Afghanistan’s central highlands region, as well as in intermittent migration in neighbouring countries, such as Iran and Pakistan, with far less connectivity or mobility than their children today have or can appreciate. Youths such as Musa wish to have ‘modern sociability’. This lies in stark contrast to traditional ways of life in Afghanistan in which people, particularly their parents and older generations, prefer to be content with whatever they have in life and living where their ancestors have lived or where they are currently settled, that is on the outskirts of Herat city. Additionally, young people like Musa have lived most of their lives in Herat – an ancient, politically and economically important urban centre with historical and rapidly broadening ties both inside and outside of Afghanistan, particularly with neighbouring Iran and Turkmenistan,  far from their ancestral central highlands, a region that many of them, including Musa, have never even been to. (3)

Handling these generational clashes is difficult for local figures of authority and parents such as Musa’s. In his father’s words:

I tried everything I could to keep him here. I didn’t make him work, besides his studies, as many parents in the shahrak do. I encouraged him to attend an English language course, in addition to his school. But he used to say, even if he studied, he wouldn’t be able to find a job that suited his education because of corruption and nepotism in the country. I told him I would open a shop for him, bring him a wife and help him build a family and a house of his own on a plot of land that I own in the shahrak. But he used to say he didn’t see a future for himself and his family in Afghanistan even if he got married. He was of a different mind. I could never understand him or know what he was constantly doing with his mobile phone. I neither know English nor am I knowledgeable about the internet and things like that. Musa wanted to go, and he did go. The night he was smuggled out of Herat for Tehran about ten months ago, we had our last conversation, but I ultimately failed to convince him, to give him hope of a future in order to make him stay here. He went without my or his mother’s consent.

Getting out of Afghanistan: failed attempt to get to Germany via Iran

In chats with the author before he left, it was clear Musa had not initially intended to go to Syria. He ended up in the war there or, as he told his friend Jawid, he happened to “just be going there.” Musa was connected, through Facebook and other social networking websites, with friends from the shahrak who had managed to get as far away as Austria and Germany, particularly from 2013 onwards. He was also regularly in touch with one of his paternal uncles who had previously got himself and his family smuggled to Augsburg in southern Germany in 2010. The atmosphere of ‘raftan, raftan’ (going, going), as ordinary people say on the streets of Herat, had clearly impacted youths such as Musa, who aspire to achieve a modern lifestyle (see also AAN research on ongoing but recently reduced ‘exodus’ from Afghanistan here, here  and here).

Initially, Musa had to get himself smuggled to Iran via Pakistan and then on to Turkey. From Turkey, he planned, like most other asylum-seekers, to try the Aegean Sea route to Greece and then all the way to Augsburg to his uncle.

It was in the middle of the night in July 2015 when Musa left the shahrak with one of his other paternal uncles and his paternal aunt’s husband for Iran via Pakistan. His companions were going to Iran to find construction work there. Following his return from Iran after about six months, during which he had missed his wife and children, Musa’s other paternal uncle told the author about the hardship and numerous risks they went through along the smugglers’ route to Iran. Remarkably, he said, they were lucky not to have been captured and killed by what he described as “Sunni Daesh [ISIS] supporters” along the Pakistani route via Taftan in Pakistan’s Baluchistan province. “The Daeshis suspect that Shia Afghans who go to Iran go on to fight for Assad in Syria. They send their own men to fight for the opposition in Syria; so, they kill any Shia Afghans they catch along the Pakistani route to Iran,” he said (for mobilisation of Sunnis in Pakistan to fight for the opposition in Syria, see here). AAN’s earlier research on Afghan fighters in Syria has also shown how the Syrian conflict has turned into an “odd meeting place” for Afghans fighting on the side of the Assad regime and those fighting for the opposition (see here). Even if Musa only saw Daesh in video clips on his Facebook account on his smartphone before he left, he felt how his journey to Iran could involve threats from Daesh mobilisers and supporters.

Musa and his two companions arrived safely in Tehran after almost a week. They had agreed to pay the smuggler after their arrival (around 30,000 Afghanis each, equivalent to 460 US dollars) through working and earning money in Iran. Many smugglers travel to Iran after obtaining visas from Iran’s consulate in Herat and then take their money from the people they have smuggled to that country, as one Herati in the smuggling business confided to the author in mid-2015. Musa found work as an apprentice in a carpentry shop on the outskirts of Tehran. He wanted to leave Iran for Europe as soon as he could, but could not for lack of money. (4) Musa’s work at the carpentry shop only just enabled him to get by in Tehran. His father would call him and Musa complained to him and his mother about his difficult living conditions in the carpentry shop, which also included household chores such as preparing and cooking food, washing and cleaning – things his mother and sisters had done for him at home and that he had taken for granted until then.

Musa put pressure on his parents to help him get out of Iran as soon as possible, particularly because European states were tightening their laws and considering closing their borders to asylum-seekers, especially those from Afghanistan (see a previous AAN dispatch here). He was keeping abreast of developments regarding asylum-seekers in Europe through his friends as well as by following the media. In particular, he asked his father to provide him with the money by selling his plot of land in the shahrak. However, because his father had not given Musa the permission to leave, he insisted that Musa had to work himself to raise the money if he wanted to go to Europe. (5) His Augsburg-based paternal uncle also refused to support Musa’s trip financially, for the same reason – because his brother (Musa’s father) had not given his blessing to Musa’s departure. The result was that Musa was stuck in Tehran.

Ending up in the Syrian war

Musa ended up in the war in Syria when he felt all other doors – to Europe, Iran and Afghanistan – were closed to him. He could not go to Europe as he was unable to make enough money to do so. Even if he had had the money, by early 2016, a move to Europe would most likely have been futile, as European states had closed their borders to asylum-seekers, especially those from Afghanistan. At best, he would have ended up in Turkey.

Secondly, he had lost face and felt he could no longer return to Afghanistan. That would have demonstrated his leaving had been a mistake and, worse, that he had failed himself. Recent research on Afghan migration has brought up the role of stigma in causing people who have failed in their migration efforts and been deported to try to migrate again. (6) Thirdly, Musa found life in Iran unbearable, as he briefly wrote in another message to his friend Jawid in mid-March 2016:

J: So, you enjoy living in a modern and developed city like Tehran?

M: It’s not like mum and dad’s home. I work hard in the carpentry shop. I feel I’m getting respiratory problems because of the wood dust in the shop. What’s more, my hair has started falling out and I’m beginning to go bald.

There have been increasing numbers of think-thank and media reports about Iran incentivising or coercing thousands of Afghan men to fight for the Assad regime in Syria. (7) Although the role of the Iranian state certainly contributes to young Afghans joining the conflict in Syria (see AAN research here, here and this media report here), it does not tell the whole story about how Afghan youths such as Musa end up there. When young people feel that other doors have been closed to them, they can see participation in the Syrian conflict as their last chance to demonstrate their masculinity or build some form of identity or social status for themselves as fighters. Even if they die, they will be shahids (martyrs). In this way at least they will be celebrated and remembered (see their glorification as fighters and, after their deaths, as martyrs on one of the Facebook pages of the Fatemiyun Brigade here). Musa alluded to this in his conversation with his friend Jawid. Youths such as Musa who end up in Syria should not be seen as passive, powerless or ‘mercenary’, to be dispatched, manipulated and exploited by the Iranian and Assad regimes. Rather they are active agents shaping the circumstances of their lives and their destinies. In-depth, informal conversations with Musa’s family and friends made it clear it was almost entirely Musa’s own decision to go to fight in Syria. He wanted to shape his own life and go his own way.

This does not mean that these young men are immune to incentives offered by Iran to fight for the Assad regime. They receive monthly salaries ranging between 2.5 and 3.5 million Toman (around 50,000-70,000 Afghanis, or 769 – 1,076 US dollars) and residence permits for themselves and their families. The Iranian parliament is also discussing granting Iranian citizenship to the families of Afghans who are dispatched by the Iranian government and ‘martyred’ fighting in Syria (see here). Religion also has an impact on young people such as Musa. According to the author’s conversation with a well-placed member of Sadeqia, the major Shia mosque and religious centre in Herat, Grand Ayatollah Sayyed Ali al-Sistani, whom the majority of Shias in Herat and the wider western region of Afghanistan follow, has declared going to Syria to defend Shia shrines as wajeb-e kefa’i (mandatory within one’s capacity). In fact, Afghans fighting for the Assad regime in Syria are described by Iran as well as by themselves as “the defenders of the shrine and the domain of the guardianship of the Islamic jurist” (modafe’an-e haram wa harim-e welayat). The ‘shrine’ refers to that of Sayyeda Zainab’s shrine, the Prophet Muhammad’s granddaughter, which is located in southern Damascus; the ‘jurist’ is Iran’s highest authority, namely supreme leader Grand Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei; here, it is implied, his authority extends outside Iran’s borders. All in all, joining the war in Syria is a highly complicated decision-making process, in which young men themselves play a significant role, in addition to various structural factors.

Musa’s story also shows the extent of the involvement of Afghans in the Syrian war. Several of Musa’s friends have taken part in (some have died there) or are seriously considering going to fight there. Importantly, his friends have, to a large extent, influenced his decision to go. Two, Rauf and Mohsen (featured in the author’s previous research here), who have also got themselves smuggled to Iran, are contemplating going, but so have far been dissuaded by their families, particularly by their mothers and sisters.

The author has identified three of Musa’s friends and twelve of his near and distant kin and acquaintances who have fought or died in Syria:

– Haidar, Musa’s friend, killed in action in Syria: a large funeral was organised to commemorate his death in Iran. He was buried in the martyrs’ area of a graveyard in Iran thanks to the Iranian residence permit his father Asghar was able to obtain for himself and his family. They subsequently moved from the shahrak, where they are now celebrated, to Iran. This has greatly contributed to the socioeconomic enhancement of his family.

– Asghar, Haidar’s father, was dispatched several times to fight in Syria though he was prevented by his wife from going back to fight in Syria on his last attempt, as the family has already lost its son. He has developed symptoms that could be characterised as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). He is currently living with his family in Iran.

– Gholam, Musa’s friend, is currently fighting in Syria and influenced Musa in his decision to go. He has started making a contribution to the economic wellbeing of his family.

– Zaman, Musa’s friend, was killed in action in Syria. A large funeral was organised for him in Iran and he was buried in the martyrs’ area of a graveyard in Iran. His family moved from the shahrak to Iran as they were granted residency permits by the Iranian government. They are now celebrated by his family as well as by the wider community in the shahrak and in Iran.

– Two maternal uncles, reportedly prominent members and commanders in the Fatemiyun Brigade that is composed of Afghan Shias (for more on the Fatemiyun, see here). One of the uncles had deserted the Afghan National Army a few years ago and went back to Iran. They were already members of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. They have previous experience of fighting for Iran in the Iran-Iraq war (1980-1988).

– Three more relatives on Musa’s mother’s side (who are married to sisters of Musa’s mother) are currently fighting in Syria.

– Two brothers of Musa’s eldest sister’s husband, who are religiously oriented, are following the fatwa of Grand Ayatollah al-Sistani and are fighting to defend Shia shrines in Syria. They are said, by their Herat-based brother, to believe in either killing or dying fighting the Daeshis. Musa’s eldest sister’s husband is also considering joining the Syrian war.

– The brother of another distant relative of Musa’s, who is also religiously oriented, believes in fighting to defend Shia shrines in Syria.

– Another distant relative of Musa’s is currently fighting in Syria and has reportedly saved the life of a major Iranian commander. He was reportedly honoured by Iran’s political and religious leadership, including Iran’s supreme leader Ali Khamenei (see here  on Khamenei’s meeting with families of Afghans killed in Syria). He is a member of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and had previously fought on Iran’s side in the Iran-Iraq war (1980-1988).

– Another distant relative of Musa’s, killed in action in Syria, was as old as Musa and also a poor student at school. He had a big funeral and was buried in the martyrs’ area of a graveyard in Iran. His family is now celebrated and this has made an important contribution to the socioeconomic enhancement of his family.

– A close relative who previously fought in Syria is currently in Herat and is planning to go back.

Syria stories

The participation of a growing number of young men in the Syrian conflict has given rise to difficult questions and controversies in the shahrak, and probably elsewhere in Afghanistan, about fundamental concepts such as jihad (holy war), namus (honour), watan (homeland) and shahid/shahadat (martyr/martyrdom). Tensions can be particularly high when families, friends and acquaintances get together and recount what can be called ‘Syria stories’ – stories they have heard either from people they know who are presently fighting in Syria or from those who have returned home from Iran or Syria.

The father of Musa’s friend, Rauf, who is seriously thinking of joining the battlefield in Syria, told the author on 5 May 2016:

Rauf didn’t inform us when he left the shahrak to be smuggled to Iran. We didn’t know where he was for several days until we received his call from Tehran. Then his mother and I became calmer, especially because he went to stay with his brother who is in Iran with his family. After a while, Rauf said he was going to fight in Syria for jihad to defend our religion and our namus. Even if he dies, he says he’ll die as a shahid. I strongly disagreed and shouted at him down the mobile phone. I told him jihad takes place in a person’s watan. I told him you become a shahid fighting for your namus in your own watan. Afghanistan is itself at war. I oppose whatever the Iranians and some of our own Afghan clerics are telling young people such as my son. His mother said she wouldn’t ‘forgive her milk’ if he goes to fight in Syria. She said she would do biabi [shame, disgrace] to the family by leaving the house, running through the streets and alleys of the shahrak, barefooted and without a veil, if her son has goes to fight in Syria (8). So far, we’ve managed to keep him out of there.

Many of the stories from and about Syria are filled with terrifying descriptions of the war in that country. There are tales about young Afghan fighters who have been captured and decapitated by Daesh. Narrating what his brother told him about his experiences in Syria, one of Musa’s relatives, during a family get-together, said that, in one instance, his brother and comrades were besieged, a hellish fight took place and those who could not escape the area faced a horrible end: Daesh members reportedly used their shoe laces to behead them. His brother had, however, managed to flee the area. Several weeks ago, the beheaded body of one of the young local Afghans who had gone to Syria was returned for burial in Mashhad, the centre of Iran’s Razavi Khorasan province which neighbouring Herat. Several relatives of young Afghan fighters say many bodies (most of them decapitated) are never returned; rather they are left to rot in no man’s land in Syria.

There are also stories of how repentant some young Afghan fighters have become after seeing the Syrian war for themselves. In some cases, they have intentionally injured or disabled themselves so they no longer have to take part in armed hostilities and are dispatched back to Iran. They then leave Iran for elsewhere (back to Afghanistan or on to Europe). Additionally, there are numerous stories about how young Afghan fighters killed in the Syrian war are celebrated at funerals attended by crowds of Afghans and Iranians in various cities across Iran. Undoubtedly, part of this is political propaganda by the Iranian government to sustain fighter mobilisation to boost the manpower of the Assad regime. They are then buried in martyrs’ areas in graveyards throughout the country (see, for example, here about the burial in Mashhad and Yazd of nine Afghans who had been killed in Khan Tuman, a strategic village in the northern Syrian city of Aleppo).

There are also many positive tales about these young men. Although they were, in many ways, failures in their own society (or saw themselves as such) and seriously confused about what they were doing in life, they have come to be seen as the defenders of Shia shrines and heroes of the religion within a short time span. They are celebrated as fighters and as martyrs after their deaths. Many have become the main breadwinners and providers for their families. Some have managed to obtain Iranian residence permits for their families. More generally, they gain experience of life and are able to command some level of social respect among their families and communities. This is exactly the point missing in previous think-tank research and media coverage of young Afghan men participating in the Syrian conflict. To these, one should also add many tales of camaraderie among these young Afghan fighters as well as between them and their Iranian and Syrian comrades. Finally, there are also stories of at least a few Afghan fighters who have fallen in love with Syrian women or the women with them and who stay on, possibly to form families if they continue to survive and if the Syrian war is brought to some conclusion – pointing to the down-to-earth fact that normal life can go on even in the midst of a catastrophic war.

Musa in Syria, his family in the shahrak and what his case tells us

The night he left Yazd for Syria on 4 May 2016, Musa finally called to let his parents know that he was going to fight in Syria. In anger over his parents not helping him financially to leave Iran for Germany, he had cut off all contact with his family and friends, both via phone and the Internet, with the exception of close friends such as Jawid. That night he talked to all his family members, namely his parents, two sisters, his eldest sister’s husband and his younger brother. He asked his parents for halaliyat (forgiving him for whatever wrong he might have committed in the past), in case he never returned from the Syrian battlefield. Finally, his parents saw no other way but to give in. His mother said that, after he called, she was not able to sleep for nights and his father had been increasingly pensive. During his last conversation with his family, Musa reportedly told them that his maternal uncles, who are prominent members and commanders of the Fatemiyun Brigade, would intervene so that he would not be dispatched to the frontline, but instead to place him in a non-combat role such as providing first aid and other medical services in a hospital in Damascus. Whether or not his maternal uncles were able to do this is unknown, for there has been no more news from or about Musa since 4 May.

Musa’s story tells us how Afghan communities and government authorities have to deal with a new generation of Afghan youth who are increasingly connected to the outside world and, increasingly, have the possibility of travelling abroad. In Musa’s case, his own community failed to integrate him into local life – although not for lack of trying – and no one was able to prevent him following his own path. In particular, Musa’s father and mother certainly did all they could and acted as responsible and caring parents but they faced a changing situation that was extremely difficult to manage.

Communities should listen to their young people’s needs more and invest in their interests. Even small things can bring about changes. One of Musa and his friends’ interests was playing football. Developing this and other extra-curricular activities (that need not be expensive) can make a difference by making youths such as Musa more interested in their communities. Even organising small, local tournaments can have a big impact (see the author’s previous dispatch on grassroots football leagues and great hopes in Afghanistan here). An adult from the shahrak said he was spending more time playing and encouraging youngsters to play football, because they enjoyed it and because it tired them out so they would not have the energy to spend a lot of time on their mobile phones or the Internet.

Musa and other young people in his situation are desperately looking for ways to make their mark in life and build their own identity and social status. They want hope and a future. Unless they find this in their own neighbourhood and in their society, the temptation to go to places like Syria will remain, even under the worst circumstances imaginable, in order that they might prove themselves.

* Said Reza Kazemi is a PhD student (2013-2016) at Heidelberg University in Germany where he is writing a dissertation on an ethnographic story about the past and present of an Afghan transnational family. He has previously worked as a researcher for the Afghanistan Analysts Network (AAN).

 

(1) Jytte Klausen, “Tweeting the jihad: social media networks of western foreign fighters in Syria and Iraq,” Studies in Conflict and Terrorism 38 (1), 2015: 1-22.

(2) To many young Afghans, migration is a rite of passage to adulthood, marriage and settling in life. See Alessandro Monsutti, “Migration as rite of passage: young Afghans building masculinity and adulthood in Iran,” Iranian Studies 40 (2), 2007: 167-185.

(3) Ute Franke, “Ancient Herat revisited: new data from recent archaeological fieldwork,” in Rocco Rante (ed) Greater Khorasan: history, geography, archaeology and material culture, Berlin/Munich/Boston: Hubert & Co., Göttingen, 2015, 63-88; C.P.W. Gammell, The pearl of Khorasan: a history of Herat, London: Hurst, 2016; Jolyon Leslie, “Political and economic dynamics of Herat,” Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace (USIP), 2015.

(4) According to a local money changer in Khorasan Market in downtown Herat in late 2015, one needs around USD 10,000 to make it to a European country like Germany. This was generally the amount he was transferring to individuals who had left Herat for Europe through being smuggled.

(5) Research on migration has shown that migrants who have obtained permission to leave their families and homeland are more successful than those who do not. See, for example, Loretta Baldassar, “Transnational families and aged care: the mobility of care and the migrancy of ageing,” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 33 (2), 2007: 275-97.

(6) Lisa Schuster and Nassim Majidi, “Deportation stigma and re-migration,” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 41 (4), 2015: 635-52.

(7) Ari Heistein and James West, “Syria’s other foreign fighters: Iran’s Afghan and Pakistani mercenaries,” 20 November 2015, The National Interest; Ali Alfoneh, “Shiite combat casualties show the depth of Iran’s involvement in Syria,” 3 August 2015, The Washington Institute; Human Rights Watch, “Iran Sending Thousands of Afghans to Fight in Syria,” 29 January 2016; Saeed Kamali Dehghan, “Afghan refugees in Iran being sent to fight and die for Assad in Syria,” 5 November 2015, The Guardian; Hashmatallah Moslih, “Iran ‘foreign legion’ leans on Afghan Shia in Syria war,” Aljazeera. See also Seth G. Jones, “Syria’s growing jihad,” Survival: Global Politics and Strategy 55 (4), 2013: 53-72; and W. Andrew Terrill, “Iran’s strategy for saving Assad,” The Middle East Journal 69 (2), 2015: 222-36.

(8) This is a typical pattern of behaviour distressed women display and/or are expected to display in Afghanistan’s sociocultural context. See Benedicte Grima, The performance of emotion among Paxtun women, Austin: University of Texas Press, 1992.

 

Griffon

In 2009 France was planning to start delivering by 2015 new multirole armored vehicles to replace a variety of aging infantry vehicles starting, within a large modernization program called Scorpion. But the 2010-14 multiyear budget relied on a number of rosy assumptions that were soon disproved by reality, and the Scorpion program was one of the mismatch’s casualties, along with plans to start working on a second aircraft carrier.

Promises were made again in the next 5-year budget plan, while maintenance costs kept increasing to sustain vehicles offering an underwhelming mix of limited protection, autonomy, and mobility. French defense manufacturers also started to sound the alarm as Scorpion became increasingly vital to prevent factory closures. The French DGA defense procurement agency paid heed to their plea and issued a tender limited to national manufacturers. By the end of 2014 the ministry of defense finally initiated the 1st procurement tranche of a program expected to last beyond 2025.

On one hand, the expected turnaround from prototype to delivery in 4 to 6 years is tight and will put pressure on contractors, though they started some early conceptual work in 2010. On the other hand this still amounts to a late and light production schedule for the rest of the decade.

The Scorpion Acquisition VAB Ultima

This major program intends to rationalize a hodgepodge of aging land vehicles and systems while preserving France’s industrial base. The 2 main vehicles in this program share a common chassis and will offer protection from mines and IEDs and ballistic threats at NATO’s STANAG 4569 Level 4. There’s been no public information on engines yet.

Scorpion launch (in French)

The main components of the planned, full acquisition are:

• 1,722 véhicules blindés multi rôles (VBMR)

Dubbed “Griffon”, VBMRs will replace Véhicules de l’avant blindé (VAB) 4×4 infantry carriers acquired starting in 1976 and upgraded in the late 90s. While the ubiquitous VAB turned into 36 variations, no more than a handful of VBMR variants should be created, between troop transport, medical, command/control, and artillery observation purposes.

The 6×6 designs will weight between 20 and 24 tons, with a remotely-operated 7.62mm or 12.7mm machine gun or a 40mm grenade launcher. Deliveries should reach 780 units by 2025. The infantry transport version will carry 8 troops in addition to the crew of 2.

• 248 engins blindés de reconnaissance et de combat (EBRC)

Dubbed “Jaguar”, EBRCs will replace AMX10RC and Sagaie light tanks, as well as VABs in their HOT antitank configuration, to perform combat and reconnaissance missions. These legacy vehicles lost mobility and autonomy with upgrades, but their design remains vulnerable to current threats, and they have become expensive to maintain given their average age. VABs for instance grew from an initial 13 tons to about 16 tons in the latest Ultima configuration.

Jaguar is a 6×6 wheeled 25-ton design with a crew of 3. For armament it will be fitted with a 40mm cannon jointly developed by Nexter and BAE with a 1,500m reach, a remote-controlled 7.62mm machine gun, and MBDA’s MMP (3,500, reach). Deliveries should reach 110 units by 2025.

• 358 lightweight VBMRs

This 10-ton 4×4 design will replace 4-ton Véhicules Blindés Légers (Light armored vehicles) procured since 1990. Deliveries between 2021 and 2025 should reach 200 vehicles.

• The Système d’information du combat SCORPION (SICS)

This common communications platform will replace 6 separate legacy systems, starting in 2016.

• 200 overhauled Leclerc XL tanks

This looks somewhat like an extraneous graft in this program, so that France doesn’t give up entirely on what’s left of its battle tank fleet.

Contracts and Events

June 14/16: The French government has pledged $6.7 billion over 11 years for the Army’s Scorpion modernization program, with more being sought by both the Army and industry members involved. Aspects of the program include the delivery of 780 Griffon multirole troop carriers and 248 units of the light multirole Jaguar combat vehicle by 2020. Also included is an upgrade of the Leclerc tank, a battle management system, crew training with onboard 3D simulation, and maintenance.

Dec. 5/2014: Development contract. French Defense Minister Jean-Yves le Drian announces the phase 1 award in the Scorpion program, in line with commitments made in the 2014-19 defense budget planning law known as LPM. This 1st tranche, worth €752 million ($932M). Deliveries will start in 2018. Nexter, Thales and Renault Trucks Defense (RTD) have partnered to form a temporary consortium for the purpose of this program. Safran will provide optronics, and as noted above, CTA International (a Nexter-BAE joint venture) and MBDA will contribute the most significant weapon systems.

Phase 1

Jan. 16/2014: Préférence nationale. Les Echos reports that the DGA procurement agency restricted its tender to French manufacturers, and cited article 346 of the European Union Treaty to exclude bids from other member states.

Sources: Les Echos: Blindés : l’armée lance un appel d’offres de plus de 2 milliards d’euros | EDA: Article 346 of the TFEU.

Nov. 9/2011: industrial team. Nexter and Renault Truck Defense sign a cooperation agreement to jointly manufacture VBMRs.

Feb. 22/2010: initial decision. An inter-ministerial investment commission approves the start of Scorpion’s research and development phase.

Readings and Sources

• French MINDEF – Official Scorpion presentation [PDF, in French]

• DGA – Scorpion [in French]

• Nexter – 40mm Cased Telescoped Armament System (CTAS): Cannon (CT C).

• France’s DGA – Le canon de 40 mm à munitions télescopées CTCA (Cased Telescoped Canon and Ammunition).

Americas

• A US federal jury in Florida has convicted Wenxia “Wency” Man of attempting to export defense items to China without a license. Man, a Chinese national and naturalized US citizen was arrested in September after she conspired to illegally acquire and export a variety of defense items, including Pratt & Whitney F135-PW-100 engines for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter; Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100 turbofan engines for the F-22 Raptor fighter; General Electric F110-GE-132 engines for the F-16 fighter jet; and the General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper/Predator UAV. Sentencing is due in August where she could face up to 20 years. Her accomplice, Xinsheng Zhang, has absconded to China.

• A report by the US Armed Services Committee on the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act has revealed that the Navy is having second thoughts on whether to stick to the Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) on the Ford-class carrier or revert back to the current version. The committee says the service is reviewing the installation of the AAG on CVN-79 and CVN-80, however, since the AAG has been ordered for CVN-79, it is unlikely to switch to the arresting gear from the Nimitz-class.

Middle East North Africa

• Critical Solutions International has been contracted by the US Department of Defense to provide 464 mine rollers, 300 brackets and manuals, and training on its Humvees to the government of Afghanistan. Completion of the $32.8 million deal is expected for June 4 2017. The company’s Route Clearance Roller (RCR) features independently rotating roller banks that improve handling for vehicles that require higher-speed capability and will greatly increase Afghanistan’s route clearance capabilities.

Europe

• Thales has announced the release of its export version of its software-defined radio, Synaps. Aimed at armed forces seeking to upgrade their tactical radio systems, the system is based on the company’s earlier radio, Contact, a software-defined radio developed under a $4 billion contract awarded by France in 2012. Features of the radio include the ability to create a shared network and boost bandwidth 10 times that of present systems, allowing voice, data, video links and the delivery of blue force tracking.

• The French government has pledged $6.7 billion over 11 years for the Army’s Scorpion modernization program, with more being sought by both the Army and industry members involved. Aspects of the program include the delivery of 780 Griffon multirole troop carriers and 248 units of the light multirole Jaguar combat vehicle by 2020. Also included is an upgrade of the Leclerc tank, a battle management system, crew training with onboard 3D simulation, and maintenance.

• The Polish Air Force is to equip its new Airbus H225M attack helicopters with Rafael Spike-ER missiles, according to the Israeli company. While the Airbus deal for 50 heavy helicopters has yet to be finalized, it is understood that the air force plans to utilize the Israeli-built guided anti-tank munition on the 21 designated for the service.

Asia Pacific

• Pakistan plans for greater indigenous input of the avionics, communication systems, and other subsystems and components for its fifth generation fighter. The Vision 2030 program will see the further development of the human resources and infrastructure required over the next 10-15 years. Included in this will be its Aviation City near Pakistan Aeronautical Complex in Kamra, the home of Pakistan’s aviation industry, which will have its own higher education facilities to nurture talent for the indigenization process.

Today’s Video

• Yak-130 flying demo at KADEX 2016:

EMALS Components
(click to view full)

As the US Navy continues to build its new CVN-21 Gerald R. Ford Class carriers, few technologies are as important to their success as the next-generation EMALS (Electro-MAgnetic Launch System) catapult. The question is whether that technology will be ready in time, in order to avoid either costly delays to the program – or an even more costly redesign of the first ship of class.

Current steam catapult technology is very entertaining when it launches cars more than 100 feet off of a ship, or gives naval fighters the extra boost they need to achieve flight speed within a launch footprint of a few hundred feet. It’s also stressful for the aircraft involved, very maintenance intensive, and not really compatible with modern gas turbine propulsion systems. At present, however, steam is the only option for launching supersonic jet fighters from carrier decks. EMALS aims to leap beyond steam’s limitations, delivering significant efficiency savings, a more survivable system, and improved effectiveness. This free-to-view spotlight article covers the technology, the program, and its progress to date.

From Steam to Magnets: EMALS vs. Current Approaches Steam cat, ready
(click to view full)

Current steam catapults use about 615 kg/ 1,350 pounds of steam for each aircraft launch, which is usually delivered by piping it from the nuclear reactor. Now add the required hydraulics and oils, the water required to brake the catapult, and associated pumps, motors, and control systems. The result is a large, heavy, maintenance-intensive system that operates without feedback control; and its sudden shocks shorten airframe lifespans for carrier-based aircraft.

To date, it has been the only option available. Hence its use on all full-size carriers.

EMALS (Electro-Magnetic Aircraft Launch System) uses an approach analogous to an electro-magnetic rail gun, in order to accelerate the shuttle that holds the aircraft. That approach provides a smoother launch, while offering up to 30% more launch energy potential to cope with heavier fighters. It also has far lower space and maintenance requirements, because it dispenses with most of the steam catapult’s piping, pumps, motors, control systems, etc. Ancillary benefits include the ability to embed diagnostic systems, for ease of maintenance with fewer personnel on board.

EMALS’ problem is that it has become a potential bottleneck to the USA’s new carrier class. It opportunity is that it may become the savior of Britain’s new carrier class.

The challenge is scaling a relatively new technology to handle the required weights and power. EMALS motor generator weighs over 80,000 pounds, and is 13.5 feet long, almost 11 feet wide and almost 7 feet tall. It’s designed to deliver up to 60 megajoules of electricity, and 60 megawatts at its peak. In the 3 seconds it takes to launch a Navy aircraft, that amount of power could handle 12,000 homes. This motor generator is part of a suite of equipment called the Energy Storage Subsystem, which includes the motor generator, the generator control tower and the stored energy exciter power supply. The new Gerald R. Ford Class carriers will require 12 of each.

Ford Class Enhancements
(click to view full)

Because it’s such a big change, it’s a critical technology if the US Navy wishes to deliver its new carrier class on-time and on-budget, and fulfill the CVN-21 program’s cost-saving promises. If EMALS cannot deliver on time, or perform as advertised, the extensive redesign and additional costs involved in adding steam catapult equipment throughout the ship could easily rise to hundreds of millions of dollars.

Launches have begun, and the 2nd phase of EMALS aircraft compatibility testing is scheduled to begin in 2012. Engineers will continue reliability testing through 2013, then perform installation, checkout, and shipboard testing, with the goal of shipboard certification in 2015.

The related Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) sub-program will replace the current Mk 7 hydraulic system used to provide the requisite combination of plane-slowing firmness and necessary flexibility to the carriers’ arresting wires. The winning AAG design replaces the mechanical hydraulic ram with rotary engines, using energy-absorbing water turbines and a large induction motor to provide fine control of the arresting forces. AAG is intended to allow successful landings with heavier aircraft, reduce manning and maintenance, and add capabilities like self-diagnosis and maintenance alerts. It will eventually be fitted to all existing Nimitz class aircraft carriers, as well as the new Gerald R. Ford class.

CVF concept
(click to view full)

EMALS was also set to play a pivotal role in the British CVF Queen Elizabeth Class, until the window of opportunity shut in 2012. The F-35B’s ability to take off and land with full air-to-air armament was already a matter of some concern in Britain before the 2010 strategic defense review, which moved the heavier F-35C from “Plan B” for British naval aviation, to the Royal Navy’s preferred choice.

An F-35C requires catapults, but the Queen Elizabeth Class carrier’s CODAG (COmbined Diesel And Gas) propulsion doesn’t produce steam as a byproduct, the way nuclear-powered carriers do. Instead, it produces a lot of electricity. Adding steam would require a huge redesign in the middle of construction, and raise costs to a point that would sink the program entirely. Instead, after commissioning some research of their own with British firms, they placed a formal request to buy EMALS.

By 2012, however, the Royal Navy had discovered that adding catapults to its new carrier design was much more difficult and expensive than BAE had led them to believe. In an embarrassing climb-down, the government retreated back to the F-35B STOVL (short Take-Off, Vertical Landing) fighter, and ended efforts to add catapults to its carriers.

Program Teams Growler, EMALed

The program is managed by US NAVAIR’s PMA-251, under the Aircraft Launch and Recovery Equipment (ALRE) program manager. General Atomics’ EMALS team includes:

• GA’s Electromagnetic Systems Division – Electromagnetic System Design and Fabrication, System; Integration, Power Electronics and Controls, Software, and Logistics;
  
• Alion Science and Technology – Specialty Engineering;
  
• Kato Engineering – Energy Storage Systems Manufacture;
  
• L3 Communications’ Applied Technologies Pulse Sciences – Power Electronics;
  
• QinetiQ’s Foster Miller, Inc. – Control Systems, System Health Monitoring;
  
• STV, Inc. – Test Site Design/Integration, Naval System Logistics;
  
• University of Texas at Austin Center for Electromechanics – Energy Storage Systems Design and Analysis.

General Atomics’ related Advanced Arresting Gear team, which is part of the larger ALRE program and can be ordered under EMALS contracts, includes:

• GA’s Electromagnetic Systems Division – Systems Integration, Cable Drum and Cable Shock Absorber, Power Electronics/ Controls/ Software, Arresting Controls Software, System Health Monitoring, Test Site Design and Integration;
  
• Alion Science and Technology – Shipboard Integration, Thermal Systems, Electric Power;
  
• Curtiss-Wright Electro-Mechanical Corporation – Electric Motor;
  
• ESCO Corporation – Water Twister and Mechanical Brake Systems
  
• ITT Corporation – Naval System Logistics
  
• QinetiQ’s Foster Miller, Inc. – Control Workstations

Contracts and Key Events FY 2013 – 2015

Tests expanding to all carrier-launched manned aircraft. CVN 78 cost growth
(click to view full)

June 14/16: A report by the US Armed Services Committee on the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act has revealed that the Navy is having second thoughts on whether to stick to the Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) on the Ford-class carrier or revert back to the current version. The committee says the service is reviewing the installation of the AAG on CVN-79 and CVN-80, however, since the AAG has been ordered for CVN-79, it is unlikely to switch to the arresting gear from the Nimitz-class.

July 20/15: Details have emerged regarding the technical specifications of India’s second indigenous aircraft carrier. The Indian Navy has reportedly sent requests to four shipyards to begin a design dialogue. These include Lockheed Martin, BAE Systems, DCNS and Rosoboronexport. The new design will differ significantly from the first indigenous carrier, INS Vikrant, currently under construction at Cochin; instead of a ski-jump used to launch aircraft, the new carrier will use a catapult system. The US has offered to sell the Northrop Grumman EMALS/AAG system to India under the Defense Trade and Technology Initiative, with the two sides recently establishing terms of reference for such a potential sale, as well as a joint working group.

June 15/15: The Navy awarded a $737 million contract on Friday for one Advanced Arresting Gear and Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System shipset in support of CVN-79 (the future USS John F. Kennedy). Testing of the EMALS system aboard CVN-78 (Pre-Commissioning Unit Gerald R. Ford) has been underway for several weeks, with dead-load testing taking place last week. Manufacturer Huntington Ingalls was awarded a $3.35 billion fixed-price contract earlier in June for the construction of CVN-79. The Ford-class of carriers has recently been criticized for being overly expensive, with a Congressional cost-cap of $11.5 billion.

Apr 6/15: Export possibilities. The US would be willing to sell aircraft carrier-related technologies to India, DoD procurement chief Frank Kendall said Friday, including the EMALS catapult system. India’s aircraft carrier – the INS Vikramaditya – is not equipped with an aircraft catapult system. A joint working group has now been established to move things forward.

Aug 11/14: Testing. EMALS deck testing begin aboard CVN 78, Gerald R. Ford. The Launch Control Subsystem is the 1st below-deck testing assessment, which will try to get a handle on how all of the sub-systems work together on board. Fortunately, EMALS has personnel on hand like EMALS integrated product team lead George Sulich, who has been with the program since its inception in 1999.

The EMALS top deck components for the catapult trough are still arriving, as the last 6% of equipment to be delivered. Dead-load launches from the ship are scheduled to begin in late 2015, with manned aircraft launches to follow CVN 78’s scheduled delivery in spring 2016. Sources: US NAVAIR, “Navy’s brand new aircraft launch system embarks on below-deck testing”.

July 23/14: Recognition. PMA-251 program manager Capt. James Donnelly presents NAVAIR’s Affordability Championship Award (ACA) and Letters of Appreciation to the Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) Thermal Management Fluid Working Group at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst in Lakehurst, NJ.

The AAG Thermal Management Fluid Working Group was stood up in response to failures of the AAG water twister. The cross-organizational team consisted of representatives from the Research and Engineering Office (AIR 4.0), PMA-251, the Future Aircraft Program Carrier Office (PMS-378) and the Naval Systems Engineering Directorate (SEA 05) to identify an acceptable fluid substitute that could take the heat. The group identified NALCOOL 2000 for its unique physical and chemical properties, and NAVAIR has estimated the savings as being over $1 million. Sources: US NAVAIR, “NAVAIR team members receive recognition for improved affordability work”.

July 15/14: CVN 78. General Atomics in San Diego, CA receives a $10.3 million firm-fixed-price contract modification for CVN 78 EMALS shipboard software and support. All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2011 US Navy shipbuilding budgets.

Work will be performed in San Diego, CA (79%), and Waltham, MA (21%), and is expected to be complete in October 2015. Fiscal 2011 shipbuilding and conversion (Navy) funds in the amount of $10, 267,000 are being obligated at time of award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division, Lakehurst, New Jersey, is the contracting activity (N68335-09-C-0573).

May 8/14: CVN 79. General Atomics in San Diego, CA receives a maximum unfinalized contract for $26.6 million, to buy Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System and Advanced Arresting Gear long-lead time materials for CVN 79. $15.4 million in FY 2013 US Navy shipbuilding budgets is committed immediately.

CVN 79 is scheduled to be delivered to the U.S. Navy in 2023, so the main award doesn’t need to happen before January 2017.

GA Electromagnetic Systems Group will manufacture EMALS and AAG components at its state-of-the-art 367,000 square foot manufacturing facility in Tupelo, MS. Work will also be performed in San Diego, CA (47%); Mankato, MN (35%); Spring Grove, IL (16%), and Detroit, MI (2%), and is expected to be complete in January 2017. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to FAR 6.302-1, by US NAVAIR in Patuxent River, MD, (N00019-14-C-0037). See also: GA, “General Atomics Awarded Initial Contract for Launch & Recovery Systems for Future John F. Kennedy Aircraft Carrier”.

March 31/14: GAO Report. The US GAO tables its “Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs“. Which is actually a review for 2013, plus time to compile and publish. There’s some added information re: EMALS/ AAG:

“Deficiencies affecting water twister components—used to absorb energy when arresting aircraft—of the advanced arresting gear (AAG) technology continue to disrupt the system’s development. Recent water twister redesign proved unsuccessful in testing last year. The Navy resolved problems with the redesign and is planning for concurrent testing. Despite these steps, the Navy forecasts AAG land-based testing to be complete in August 2016 – a new delay of nearly two years—and after the Navy has accepted CVN 78 delivery…. Land based testing for EMALS and DBR has progressed enough that program officials do not anticipate significant redesign.”

March 4-11/14: FY15 Budget. The US military slowly files its budget documents, detailing planned spending from FY 2014 – 2019. For EMALS and AAG, unit costs are listed as FY08$ 762.9 million (614.7 + 148.2) for CVN 78, and FY13$ 883.1 million (713.7 + 169.4) for CVN 79.

Jan 28/14: DOT&E Testing Report. The Pentagon releases the FY 2013 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). EMALS is included, as part of the CVN-78 assessment, and EMALS/AAG remain 2 of the 4 key risks for the carrier. Both are far below expected reliability levels at this stage

“Aircraft compatibility testing continued in 2013. Approximately 400 aircraft launches are being conducted using EA-18G, F/A-18E, F/A-18C, E-2D, T-45, and C-2 aircraft. The Navy has also conducted an additional 1,200 dead-load launches (non-aircraft, weight equivalent, simulated launches). Approximately 55 percent of the EMALS government furnished equipment (GFE) has been delivered to the shipyard.

At the Lakehurst, New Jersey, test site, over 1,967 launches have been conducted and 201 chargeable failures…. approximately 240 Mean Cycles Between Critical Failure… where a cycle represents the launch of one aircraft. Based on expected reliability growth, the failure rate is presently five times higher than should be expected.

….Testing to date has demonstrated that AAG should be able to recover aircraft planned for the CVN-78 air wing, but as with EMALS, AAG’s reliability is uncertain. At the Lakehurst, New Jersey test site, 71 arrestments were conducted earlier this year and 9 chargeable failures occurred. The Program Office estimates that AAG has approximately 20 Mean Cycles Between Operational Mission Failure…. 248 times higher than should be expected.”

Sept 5/13: GAO Report. EMALS and AAG delays and cost increases have hit a point where they’re creating problems for the new Ford Class carriers, driving up costs to $12.8 billion for the 1st ship, adding risk, and impairing initial capabilities.

Costs: Since 2008, EMALS-related costs for the first-of-class Gerald R. Ford [CVN 78] have risen by 133.7%, from $317.7 – $742.6 million. AAG costs have also spiked, though its 124.8% jump is only from $75 – $168.6 million. This is so despite the Navy’s 2010 firm fixed-price contracts to produce these systems for CVN 78. Even with cost caps, however, late delivery and testing means that changes have to be made to a partially-complete ship. EMALS configuration changes have already forced electrical, wiring, and other changes within the ship; and instead of just being hoisted into place, the Advanced Arresting Gear will now have to be installed in pieces via a hole cut in the flight deck. AAG continues to undergo redesigns, most recently to its energy-absorbing “water twister,” and limited EMALS testing with the delayed F-35C risks forcing further changes after the ship has been built. The Navy says that all future changes will take place within the components’ allotted space and weight, but GAO doesn’t think they can possibly know that.

Risk: Beyond redesign risks, the Navy needs to confront larger ship delivery risks. At present, EMALS isn’t scheduled for TRL 7 level maturity until FY 2014, with AAG to follow in FY 2015. The ship is due for delivery in FY 2016. Systems are already maturing so late that comprehensive testing must wait until the ship is at sea, so further schedule delays have nowhere else to go. Launch delays would mean delays to post-launch test programs, which are closely synced with ship delivery.

Once CVN 78 is built, EMALS and AAG’s reliability will continue to hamper operations. As of March 2013, both systems are far below where they’re supposed to be, with critical failures every 2-3 cycles. Since Initial Operational Test & Evaluation requires certain reliability levels between critical failures (MTBCF), continued problems could endanger the ship’s entry into service. GAO points out that the Navy’s “Duane” model for reliability growth doesn’t match their long-standing data, and even under optimistic planned growth levels, AAG isn’t supposed to hit the ~100 cycle MTBCF minimums before 2027. EMALS will take even longer, to 2032.

Unless and until they succeed, they’ll destroy the new carriers’ key 2007 promise of generating 25% more aircraft sorties per ship than the Nimitz Class. As things stand, even meeting the USS Enterprise’s OEF wartime record of 2,970 combat missions and a 99.1% sortie completion rate seems unlikely. Sources: GAO Report #GAO-13-396 | Virginian-Pilot, “The costs and doubts keep growing for carrier Ford”.

June 25/13 Testing. NAVAIR successfully launched an EA-18G Growler for the 1st time. This starts the 2nd phase of their manned aircraft launch tests, as they intend to proceed with more than 300 launches this year to test all aircraft currently launched from carrier catapults, save for E-2C Hawkeyes. They have already launched each of the Navy’s newest planes at least once. This ramp-up comes at about the same time railguns are also seeing more tests.

April 15/13: Budget. The FY 2014 Presidential Budget adds funding and/or reprogramming to FY12 and FY14 to properly reflect pricing. At $43 million, FY14 is the final year with significant spending built over the FYDP, as FY15/16 see about $2.5 million each, and there’s nothing for FY17/18. This accelerates slightly the spending plan from the FY13 president budget. Cost to completion is now seen reaching $834.7 million.

In parallel the Navy is working on demonstrating “an automation control environment for carrier shipboard equipment,” in order to reduce manpower requirements and ongoing costs. They won’t elaborate, but EMALS System Development and Demonstration (SDD) continues to be scheduled for completion by Q2 2015. To get there, the Navy intends to conduct full system and risk mitigation testing at the System Functional Demonstration (SFD) site by completing repeated cycles with deadload testing and gap variation tests. They aim to reach 4,000 deadload launches to assess reliability. Sources: US Navy PE 0603512 [PDF].

EMALS generator
(click to view full)

March 14/13: Testing. US Navy PMA-251, the Aircraft Launch and Recovery Equipment Program Office, completes shared generator testing for EMALS at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, NJ. Launches to date have involved just 1 aircraft, but the real system will have to drive up to 4 launchers. The motor generator stores the system’s energy in the inertia of its rotor, and releases that energy for aircraft launch. Hence “shared generator” testing for multiple catapults, which was completed ahead of schedule. That should make OT&E happy.

The team also used General Atomics’ CVN 78 ship-representative controls lab in Rancho Bernardo, CA, to conduct extensive modeling and simulation of the 4-catapult system. That ensured that the software and launch controls were set up correctly, before they began experiments with weighted sleds at Lakehurst on the East Coast. Sources: US NAVAIR.

Jan 17/13: DOT&E Report. The Pentagon releases the FY 2012 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). EMALS is included parenthetically, as OT&E addresses the next-generation aircraft carrier program. They remind that “EMALS, AAG, DBR, and Integrated Warfare Systems remain pacing items for successful delivery of the ship,” and add:

“DOT&E holds moderate concern regarding the performance risk generated by the inability to test the full four-catapult electrical distribution system prior to initial trials aboard ship.”

FY 2011 – 2012

1st ever electro-magnetic aircraft launch is an F/A-18E; Other aircraft follow. UK adopts then abandons EMALS. 1st F-35C launch
(click for video)

Aug 15/12: Support. General Atomics in San Diego, CA receives a $44.5 million cost-plus-fixed-fee order for maintenance planning related to the Gerald R. Ford’s EMALS system. They’ll develop supportability analysis, repair level analysis, maintenance plans, a logistics management information database, maintenance guidance that make reliability the top priority, and create associated technical manuals and training.

Work will be performed in San Diego, CA (90%), and Lakehurst, NJ (10%), and is expected to be complete in April 2016 (N68335-11-G-0003).

May 10/12: Britain. Britain’s government confirms long-standing rumors that it would abandon the F-35C and its associated catapult modifications to 1 carrier, returning to the ski-jump deck and F-35B STOVL variant.

A DSTL report has explained some of the capabilities Britain would lose by abandoning the F-35C, but the government justifies their decision by saying that the F-35C’s improved capabilities and compatibility with American and French carriers would come at too steep a cost. Staying with the F-35C, they say, would delay Britain’s return to carrier capability from 2020 – 2023 or later, cost nearly GBP 2 billion to modify 1 of their 2 carriers, and leave the Royal Navy with no carrier capability if their converted ship needs maintenance. In contrast, the F-35B will be compatible with the US Marines and with Italy, and gives Britain the option of taking its 2nd CVF carrier out of strategic reserve when the primary carrier is out of service for long refits or maintenance dockings. UK MoD.

No EMALS for Britain

Dec 21/11: UK. General Atomics in San Diego, CA receives $17.4 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification to provide engineering support for the development of EMALS and Advanced Arresting Gear configurations for Britain’s Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carrier Program. One of Britain’s 2 new carriers is slated to receive the combination, and operate F-35C fighters.

Work will be performed in San Diego, CA, and is expected to be complete in June 2012. US Naval Air Systems Command in Patuxent River, MD manages the contract (N00019-11-C-0057).

Initial contract for Britain’s CVF

Nov 18/11: F-35C launches. The land-based EMALS at Lakehurst, NJ launches an F-35C Lightning II fighter for the 1st time. The EMALS launch of test aircraft CF-3 follows more than 50 steam catapult launches, and “also provided information for the United Kingdom’s Ministry of Defence as the UK proceeds with including EMALS in the Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carrier.”

Both EMALS and the F-35C are currently in test and evaluation, but the F-35C is especially important to the new catapult. The heavy fighter will be EMALS most significant technology companion over their life cycle together, and its 70,000 pound/ 31,800 kg maximum takeoff weight places it very close to the F-14D Tomcat. EMALS and the F-35C need to demonstrate that they can help each other with maintenance costs, or the real price of EMALS will escalate significantly. US NAVAIR.

Nov 15/11: The US DSCA announces [PDF] Britain’s official request for Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System/Advanced Arresting Gear (EMALS/AAG) long lead sub-assemblies. EMALS long-lead items include the Energy Storage System, Power Conditioning System, and Launch Control System. AAG long-lead items include Power Conditioning, Energy Absorption Subsystems, Shock Absorbers, and Drive Fairleads. The request would also cover Aircraft Launch and Recovery Equipment, spare and repair parts, support equipment, personnel training and training equipment, publications and technical documentation, software support, and other forms of U.S. Government and contractor support.

The estimated cost is up to $200 million, and the prime contractor will be General Atomics in Rancho Bernardo, CA. This is still just a potential sale, but the nature and specificity of the request strongly suggests that Britain has decided to abandon its own electro-magnetic catapult research. Now that EMALS is launching real aircraft, they can certainly reduce technical uncertainties and costs by buying it to equip one of their forthcoming Queen Elizabeth Class carriers.

British request

Sept 27/11: E-2D launches. The EMALS test site at Lakehurst launches an E-2D Advanced Hawkeye, one of the new aircraft that will accompany it onto its new carriers. EMALS has already launched an F/A-18E Super Hornet, a T-45 Goshawk jet trainer, and the Hawkeye’s C-2A Greyhound cargo cousin.

About 63 – 65 launches are planned for each aircraft type, and the 2nd phase of aircraft compatibility testing is scheduled to begin in 2012. Engineers will continue reliability testing through 2013, then perform installation, checkout, and shipboard testing, with the goal of shipboard certification in 2015. US Navy.

June 8-9/11: C-2A launches. EMALS performs 18 launches of a VX-20 Sqn. C-2A Greyhound cargo delivery aircraft, over a wide range of aircraft weights. The C-2 is also the E-2 Hawkeye AWACS plane’s base airframe. US NAVAIR.

June 1-2/11: T-45 launches. EMALS takes a new step by launching a T-45C Goshawk jet from the NAVAIR Lakehurst, NJ test site. VX-23 Sqn. made 12 successful launches with the Goshawk over this period, as part of on-going aircraft compatibility testing. US NAVAIR.

May 9/11: Delivery. General Atomics delivers the 1st set of EMALS production components to US NAVAIR, for installation in the Gerald R. Ford. NAVAIR will convey the items on to Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc., in Newport News, VA. General Atomics.

March 9/11: Testing. Gannett’s Navy Times reports that EMALS testing has been put on hold since its 1st aircraft launch. The problem involves a gap in the handoff between linear motors, as the aircraft is accelerating. General Atomics has reportedly been working on the system’s software to cure the problem, and a system functional demonstration is planned for later in March 2011.

The information emerged during a House Armed Services Seapower & Expeditionary Forces subcommittee hearing, in response to question from Rep. Todd Akin [R-MO]. Earlier testimony indicated that the CVN 78 Gerald R. Ford is 20% complete and on schedule for September 2015 delivery, which intensifies the pressure on EMALs to deliver in time. As the publication notes: “Further EMALS delays, one source said, could begin to impact the carrier’s building schedule and threaten cost increases.” See also full HASC hearing.

1st EMALS launch: F/A-18E
(click to view full)

Dec 18/10: Launch! The EMALS test catapult at Naval Air Systems Command in Lakehurst, NJ successfully performs the 1st electro-magnetic aircraft catapult launch in history.

The F/A-18E Super Hornet from Air Test and Evaluation Squadron 23 (VX-23) was piloted by Lt. Daniel Radocaj. Chief Petty Officer Brandon Barr of NAWCAD’s Test Department was the “shooter,” assisted by Petty Officers 1st Class Hunsaker and Robinson, and Petty Officers 2nd Class Williams, Wong, and Simmons.

Engineers will continue system functional demonstration testing at NAVAIR Lakehurst, with test launches set to expand to C-2 Greyhound cargo aircraft and T-45 Goshawk trainers in 2011. The ALRE program manager at this time is Capt. James Donnelly, and Cmdr. Russ McCormack of PMA-251 is deputy program manager for future systems. US NAVAIR | USN Photo release | Gannett’s Navy Times.

1st EMALS Launch

Nov 8/10: UK. Babcock Deputy Chairman Lord Hesketh tells London’s Telegraph newspaper that:

“Britain could afford to run both ships – and put aircraft on them from the start – were it not for the “vested interest” of BAE Systems, the prime contractor. “We are paying twice as much as we should to get half the capability,”… said the [GBP] 5.2 billion project was a “Loony Tunes” operation that was “about to turn into a classic British disaster”… the F35 will not be ready until 2020, and plans for a jump-jet version have been scrapped – meaning an electric catapult to launch the aircraft will have to be developed at extra cost. Lord Hesketh said a far quicker and cheaper solution was to adapt the RAF’s existing Typhoons for work at sea. But he said this was less remunerative for BAE than buying dozens of new F35s.”

Note the bit about “an electric catapult.”

Oct 29/10: UK. In an interview with BBC Scotland during a visit to the Govan shipyard, Defence Secretary Liam Fox said that estimates for the addition of catapults to the Queen Elizabeth Class ranged “upwards from GBP 500m,” with studies on going to pick a catapult system and determine likely costs.

Meanwhile, Minister for Defence Equipment, Support and Technology Peter Luff confirmed that the government had not yet been decided whether one or both carriers would be converted, what type of catapult system to use, procurement approach, or delivery dates, though the SDSR would give a planned 2020 in-service date for Britain’s lone operational carrier. Defence Management.

FY 2009 – 2010

Initial orders; Cost jumps & concurrency concerns; EMALS survives review; Testing; UK becomes interested in EM launch. CVN-74 hydraulics:
legacy system?
(click to view full)

Sept 23/10: US NAVAIR announces that EMALS has completed catapult commissioning testing for its system functional demonstration (SFD), with no-load and dead-load launches in all areas of the required performance envelope, including a 154-knot dead-load launch equivalent to the weight of an F/A-18E Super Hornet.

Cmdr. Russ McCormack, PMA-251 deputy program manager for future systems, notes that EMALS hardware production is occurring independently from the SFD, “as component operation was previously proven in the High Cycle Testing and Highly Accelerated Life Testing phases of the program.”

Moving into SFD as of Sept 12/10 marks the opening of the test program window for the F/A-18E launch and future launches. The F/A-18E is currently being instrumented and test data is being analyzed in order to obtain flight clearances and launch approval for later in 2010.

Aug 23/10: Leadership. NAVAIR PMA-251, The Aircraft Launch and Recovery Equipment (ALRE) Program Office gets a new program manager, as Rear Adm. Randy Mahr leaves PMA-251 to become NAWCAD(Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division) Commander. He is replaced by his deputy, Capt. Jim Donnelly, who became the deputy program manager for future systems – EMALS and the Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) in April 2008. Donnelly is a 1986 U.S. Naval Academy graduate and naval aviator, whose previous stints include piloting EC-130Q Hercules and E-6A/B Mercury national command aircraft, Catapult and arresting gear officer and assistant air officer on the USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN-71), Executive officer and commanding officer of the VQ-3 Ironmen squadron, and Program Executive Officer for NAVAIR Tactical Aircraft Programs. NAVAIR’s release adds that:

“The future Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) full-scale test catapult went operational for the first time at NAVAIR Lakehurst, N.J., and has since demonstrated max speed of 180 knots, or 207 miles per hour. The program is scheduled to launch its first test aircraft later this year.”

July 20/10: UK. Jane’s reports that the UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) is funding development of an electromagnetic catapult system for the Royal Navy’s Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers, in case the F-35B STOVL is abandoned. Rather than go through the involved process of joining America’s EMALS program, however, they appear to have contracted with Converteam, who was already developing an electro-magnetc launch systems for UAVs under an April 2006 EMKIT(Electro Magnetic Kinetic Integrated Technology) contract.

A GBP 650,000 (about $1 million) EMCAT (electro-magnetic catapult) contract was reportedly awarded in July 2009, as a follow-on effort to continue the design, development and demonstration of high-power electrical systems for its EMCAT system. In October 2009, a smaller-scale demonstration of both controlled acceleration and braking was performed using electromagnetic linear motors. This could lead to the same core systems being used for launch and recovery. New Low Voltage linear motors with reduced end effect coils were delivered in early 2010, paving the way for the design of medium voltage linear motors which will help Converteam scale up their design. Jane’s Naval Intelligence | Converteam project page.

May 5/10: Testing Problem. The Newport News Daily Press reports that in January 2010, a software glitch caused one of the EMALS shuttles to reverse course and slam into other equipment during one of the initial full-scale land-based tests. It caused $52,000 worth of damage, set back the testing program by about 3 months, and set back the overall EMALS program by 7 months.

“Despite the problems, the Navy’s program manager for the launch system, Capt. Randy Mahr, said the delay would not affect the delivery of the Ford… scheduled to enter the fleet in 2015. The Navy and General Atomics had planned to begin launching aircraft from the land-based system this summer, but that’s now been delayed until later this fall, Mahr said… The things that are delaying me right now are software integration issues, which can be fine-tuned after the equipment is installed in the ship.”

That particular software problem has since been fixed, and more than 750 no-load test runs of the equipment have been done, with about 250 at full speed. Dead loads with weighted sleds are the next step, aircraft trials are expected in fall 2010, and the first pieces of EMALS equipment are now scheduled to begin arriving in Newport News for installation in May and June 2011.

April 1/10: SAR. EMALS is cited in the Pentagon’s April 2010 Selected Acquisitions Report for major cost increases. The Pentagon’s own decisions are causing even larger cost increases in the carrier program, but EMALS’ contribution is still quite substantial at almost $1.3 billion in additional costs:

“Program costs [for the next-generation aircraft carrier] increased $5,426.4 million (+15.5%) from $35,119.1 million to $40,545.5 million, due primarily to the shift from a four-year to five-year build cycle (+$4,131.2 million), which placed the program on a more fiscally sustainable path while continuing to support a minimum of 11 aircraft carriers through fiscal 2040. Additional increases resulted from revised cost estimates for the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) (+$1,292.6 million)…”

See also Newport News Daily Press.

SAR increase

March 30/10: GAO Report. The US GAO audit office delivers its 8th annual “Defense Acquisitions: Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs report. For the EMALs and Advanced Arresting Gear projects:

“While CVN 21 program officials stated that the EMALS program is on schedule to deliver material to the shipyard when it is needed for construction, concurrent EMALS testing and ship construction continue to present cost and schedule risks to the program… As a result of the [2009 EMALS] tests, the program identified design changes that are necessary to improve the performance of EMALS, but add cost and schedule risk to the program… The Navy plans to test EMALS with actual aircraft in summer 2010. The Navy awarded a not-to-exceed fixed-price production contract to General Atomics for EMALS and the advanced arresting gear in 2009. At the time of award, the contract price had not been finalized. The Navy expects to finalize the price of this contract in March 2010.”

“The advanced arresting gear includes seven major subsystems. Programs officials expect that six of the subsystems will be mature after analyzing data from a recent reliability test. The remaining subsystem – control system software – will remain immature until integrated [AAR] land-based testing with actual aircraft occurs in fiscal year 2012. This testing will overlap with the first arresting gear deliveries to the shipyard.”

March 25/10: Testing. Federal Business Opportunities issues pre-solicitation #N00019-10-R-0060, “Corrosion Resistant Study Reports & Test Equipment.” Excerpt:

“NAVAIR Hwadquarters, Patuxent River, MD intends to enter into a sole source contract with McGee Industries, Inc. for one simulated Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) simulated Trough Exposure Test Rig and engineering reports on environmental effects on fatigue and fracture mechanical properties of EMALS materials. The Government intends to procure these reports and test equipment under the authority of 10 USC 2304( c)(1) as implemented by the Federal Acquisition Regulation Section 6.302-1. Award to an alternate source would result in a substantial duplication of costs that could not be recovered through competition. McGee Industries has performed start-up studies using techniques that are not commercially available at standard testing labs, and is the only source possessing the requisite background knowledge and technical data necessary to provide the required support without substantial re-work at additional program costs. Firms that believe they can satisfy this requirement are encouraged to identify themselves…”

Nov 12/09: Ready. NAVAIR’s Aircraft Launch and Recovery Equipment Program Office (PMA-251) hosts a ribbon-cutting ceremony for the EMALS full-scale catapult test site at Joint Base McGuire-Fort Dix-Lakehurst, NJ. In an interesting twist, the EMALS armature is used to cut the ribbon.

Engineers at JBMDL will begin dead-load testing this fall with the first aircraft launch scheduled for summer 2010 with an F/A-18 Hornet. US NAVAIR.

Lakehurst ready

Nov 9/09: CVN 78. General Atomics in San Diego, CA receives a $102.2 million modification to the unfinalized EMALS Ship-set contract to provide for the production of 1 counterpart advanced arresting gear system ship-set for CVN-78. While EMALS will serve as the Ford’s launch technology, the Advanced Arresting Gear will offer related improvements around carrier landings, using a system based on electric motors rather than the Mk7 hydraulic system used with current arrester wires. Unlike EMALS, AAG is also slated for refits to existing Nimitz class carriers.

Work will be performed in San Diego, CA (35%); Mt. Pleasant, PA (28%); Tupelo, MS (15%); Waltham, MA (12%); and Aston, PA (10%), and is expected to be complete in September 2015. The Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division in Lakehurst, NJ manages the contract (N68335-09-C-0573).

CVN 78 AAG

Oct 20/09: AAG testing. General Atomics Electromagnetic Systems Division (GA-EMS) announces the end of 1st phase Extended Reliability Testing (ERT) of the Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) at its Rancho Bernardo, CA facility. Phase 1 cycled the AAG hardware through more than 5,400 shipboard-representative “arrestments” to obtain reliability growth data, and to prove out the real-time control software.

Future dead-load arrestment testing will begin in spring 2010, followed by aircraft arrestment testing scheduled for late 2010. ERT Phase 2 will begin February 2011 in GA’s Tupelo, MS manufacturing and test facility, and will test the equipment over an additional 104,000 cycles. GA-EMS believes that the transfer will help reduce program costs.

Prepping EMALS

Sept 28/09: Testing. US Navy NAVAIR announces that EMALS has completed Phase 1 of Highly Accelerated Life Testing (HALT) and the 2nd phase of System Functional Demonstration (SFD) commissioning.

HALT tests look at the system’s launch motor will perform under at-sea conditions, and provides data to verify peak performance, even in extreme conditions. SFD testing replicates full-scale launching capabilities, and SFD commissioning ensures that the system is ready for upcoming test launches of dead-loads (weighted, steel-framed sleds) and aircraft.

Phase 2 of SFD commissioning integrated and tested all power components of the system with the launch controller. The upcoming 3rd phase will integrate the remainder of the system, and test the basic ability to convert electrical power to mechanical force. The testing culminates with the launch of dead-load weights and non-operational test aircraft at Naval Air Engineering Station Lakehurst, NJ; commissioning with dead loads is scheduled to begin during fall 2009.

Aug 17/09: SDD. Inside the Navy reports that:

“The Navy has added another $24 million to the budget for a revamped research, development, test and evaluation (RDT&E) effort for the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System aboard the new Gerald R. Ford class of aircraft carriers bringing FY-09 spending on developing the troubled program to more than $168 million.”

June 30/09: CVN 78. General Atomics in San Diego, CA received an unfinalized $573 million ceiling-priced contract to build the EMALS shipset for the Gerald R. Ford [CVN 78]. This is added to a $43 million long-lead contract (q.v. March 27/09), creating a total of $613 million.

Work will be performed in San Diego, CA (49%); Tupelo, MS (19%); Mankato, MN (12%); Waltham, MA (4%); and various locations across the United States (16%), and is expected to be complete in September 2015. This contract was not competitively procured, pursuant to FAR 602-1. The Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division in Lakehurst, NJ manages this contract (N68335-09-C-0573).

CVN 78 main

April 15/09: Review. Reuters reports that the U.S. Navy has completed a major review of EMALS that weighed possible technical, costs, and schedule risks. The Navy has decided to proceed, on the grounds that EMALS is the best option for keeping the program on schedule, vs. redesigning and building the ship for steam. The system’s potential cost savings are also listed as a factor by US Navy spokesman Lt. Cdr. Victor Chen.

The Navy is reportedly starting detailed, fixed-price contract negotiations with General Atomics. If that becomes the basis for a renegotiated contract, it would shift the risk of delays or additional work onto the contractor.

EMALS survives

April 3/09: Naval site Information Dissemination runs an article assessing EMALS’ current state, and the Navy’s contention that the system poses no schedule risks. The title: “Wal-Mart Called, They Want Their Yellow Smiley Face Back.”

Despite the title, the background is valuable, and the discussion is substantive. Is EMALS a technology too far? Or is it just a complex technology with more issues than expected, each of which is being dealt with but at a rate that creates some schedule concerns? What, if anything, does a realistic Plan B look like? Delay construction until EMALS is ready, given its promised operations costs savings? Extensively redesign CVN 78 for steam catapults? Buy another CVN 77 design ship instead, and store the pieces that have already been made?

March 31/09: Review. The Daily Press of Virginia reports:

“We’re still conducting a review to assess and mitigate risks in the program cost, schedule and performance of EMALS,” said Lt. Cmdr. Victor Chen, a Navy spokesman. “At this point, EMALS is still the launching system of record for (the Ford).

…If EMALS is scrapped for the Ford, the shipyard would have to re-engineer the carrier to support the old steam-driven catapults used on previous ships. That process, which includes running thousands of feet of new pipe to and from the Ford’s propulsion system, could extend the construction schedule by up to a year and is expected to cost several hundred million dollars.”

“At this point…” is perhaps not the ringing endorsement one had hoped for.

March 30/09: GAO report. The US government’s GAO audit office issues GAO-09-326SP: “Defense Acquisitions: Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs.” With respect to EMALS and the CVN-21 program, it says that 10/14 technologies are either fully mature, including the nuclear propulsion and electrical plant, or approaching maturity. Of the remaining 4 immature technologies:

“…the development and design of the electromagnetic aircraft launch system (EMALS), the advanced arresting gear, and the dual band radar (composed of the volume search and multifunction radars) present the greatest risk to the ship’s cost and schedule.”

Ominously, it adds:

“A February 2008 program assessment recommended a number of changes to the EMALS program to improve performance. The Navy re-planned the test program and changed the management approach. The CVN 21 program office is now responsible for overseeing EMALS production and ship integration, rather than the Naval Air Systems Command. In addition, EMALS will no longer be provided as government-purchased equipment. Instead, the shipbuilder will purchase EMALS, giving it a more direct role in managing the integration on CVN 78. The cost impact of this change has not been finalized.”

There are also schedule concerns:

“Problems during EMALS development have already resulted in cost growth and schedule delays. In order to meet CVN 78’s delivery date, the Navy adopted a strategy that will test, produce, and ultimately install EMALS with a high degree of concurrency. In September 2008, the contractor completed the first round of high- cycle testing, gaining confidence in the performance of the generator–a source of past problems. Contractor-led integrated land-based system testing will not be complete until the end of fiscal year 2011–2-years later than estimated in December 2007. Assuming no further delays, EMALS will not demonstrate full performance of a shipboard ready system until at least 7 months after installation on CVN 78 has begun…”

March 27/09: CVN 78. Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding, Inc. in Newport News, VA received $43 million, unfinalized modification to a previously awarded contract (N00024-08-C-2110). The contract covers long lead-time materials that must be ordered early, in order to ensure timely production of Gerald R. Ford’s [CVN 78] EMALS catapults. Materials bought will include Energy Storage Subsystem (ESS) Induction Motor Stator Assemblies, ESS Induction Motor Rotor Assemblies, ESS Exciter Stator Assemblies, ESS Exciter Rotor Assembly, ESS Rectifier Assemblies, ESS Main Rotor Assemblies and Power Conversion Subsystem Rectifier material components.

Work will be performed in North Mankato, MN (74%); Mt. Pleasant, PA (17%); and San Diego, CA (9%), and is expected to be complete by November 2012. The US The Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington Navy Yard, D.C. manages this contract.

March 19/09: Testing. NAVAIR’s EMALS developers have given a green light to engineers at General Atomics in Tupelo, MS to engage in full power train testing of EMALS motor components.

This second phase of High Cycle Testing (HCT-2) will involve full power train testing, and will give a specific prediction of EMALS operations. HCT-2 will also perform environmental qualification testing, which is used to confirm the adequacy of the equipment design and safety under normal, abnormal, design basis event, post design basis event and in-service test conditions. US NAVAIR.

Dec 23/08: Infrastructure. Sauer, Incorporated in Jacksonville, FL wins an $8.3 million firm-fixed-price task order to design and build an Electromagnetic Launch RDT&E(Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation) facility at Naval Support Activity South Potomac in Dahlgren, VA (N62477-04-D-0036, #008).

Work is expected to be complete by May 2010. The Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Washington in Washington, DC received 5 proposals under an existing multiple-award construction contract.

FY 2004 – 2008

From development contract to Preliminary Design Review; Considerable worry that EMALS will be ready in time. EMALS motor, HCT-1
(click to view full)

Sept 3/08: Testing. EMALS reaches the 10,000 High Cycle Testing, phase 1 (HCT-1) milestone at the General Atomics test facility in Tupelo, MS. HCT-1 was conducted in order to verify the performance capabilities of EMALS’ electrical and thermal power equipment, and the shipboard cycling rate of the energy storage subsystem. Those tests reduce the risk of structural failure, strengthen confidence in EMALS’ reliability, and help to validate both system life predictions and electromagnetic interference predictions.

EMALS is scheduled to begin its second phase of HCT in winter 2009. US NAVAIR.

March 14/08: During US House Armed Services Seapower and Expeditionary Forces Subcommittee hearings about the proposed the FY 2009 budget, chairman Gene Taylor [D-MS] discusses the state of the program:

“Another very risky program is the new aircraft carrier. Not that the Navy and Newport News Shipyard don’t know how to build aircraft carriers, they do. However, one of the major new technologies, the electro-magnetic launch system, or EMALS, has not even been tested in a shipboard configuration and the ship is already under construction. Just this last week the Navy requested an additional $40 million dollars for continued development of EMALS because, and I quote, ‘the contractor underestimated design and production cost.’ The cynic in me would say the contractor purposefully low-balled the bid to get the contract knowing full well the Navy would be forced to pay whatever the true costs of the system turned out to be. Perhaps we should have built another Nimitz class carrier until the research and design for EMALS was complete.”

Read “US Navy’s 313-Ship Plan Under Fire in Congress” for more.

April 17/08: The first full size test motor generator for the Navy’s Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) has now been assembled, and finished its 30 days of factory acceptance testing at Kato Engineering’s plant in Mankato, MN on April 11/08.

The motor generator weighs over 80,000 pounds, and is 13.5 feet long, almost 11 feet wide and almost 7 feet tall. It’s designed to deliver up to 60 megajoules of electricity and 60 megawatts at its peak. In the 3 seconds it takes to launch a Navy aircraft, that amount of power could handle 12,000 homes. This motor generator is part of a suite of equipment called the Energy Storage Subsystem, which includes the motor generator, the generator control tower and the stored energy exciter power supply. The new Gerald R. Ford Class will require 12 of each, and 5 of each are currently being manufactured under General Atomics’ Systems Development & Demonstration contract. One is slated for component level testing, and 4 will be installed and used for system level testing at the Lakehurst, NJ, EMALS catapult site. NAVAIR release.

Nov 28/07: General Atomics’ Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) catapult recently passed its final critical design review (CDR), led by Mr. Dave Cohen of NAVAIR’s Systems Engineering competency. The team spent a week thoroughly reviewing the entire EMALS program, and determined that the design is technically compliant with requirements and properly documented, although “a few open action items remain.” As noted above, EMALS is one of the new technologies that will be critical to the CVN-21 Class’ ability to fulfil its cost-saving promises and enter service on time.

Capt. Stephen Rorke, Aircraft Launch & Recovery Equipment program manager thanked the team for open and honest dialog during the months leading up to the CDR as evidenced by the fact “the team knew about all open issues prior to the review and that no issues of major significance surfaced during the CDR.”

The next step in the process is to begin installing the full size, ship representative EMALS equipment in the recently completed EMALS test facilities at Naval Engineering Station Lakehurst, NJ. The EMALS equipment installation is scheduled to begin in mid 2008, with actual testing to begin in early 2009 and continue throughout 2009. The first components of the EMALS equipment is scheduled to be delivered to Northrop-Grumman Newport News Shipbuilding in Norfolk, VA for installation in the Gerald R. Ford [CVN-78] in 2011. The USS Gerald R. Ford is scheduled to be delivered to the US Navy in 2015. NAVAIR release.

CDR

Nov 27/07: Infrastructure. Officials at the Lakehurst Naval Base hold a ribbon-cutting ceremony to acknowledge the completion of the base’s new Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) facility. General Atomics will have the system’s equipment installed at the Lakehurst base in the beginning of March 2008, with the strong intent of beginning testing in February 2009. Manchester Times story.

March 17/06: SDD. General Atomics’ team receives $6 million for engineering changes to the EMALS catapult system.

April 2/04: General Atomics is awarded an SDD $145 million contract to design, build, integrate test and support a full scale, full length, shipboard representative Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) for NAVAIR Lakehurst, at the Naval Air Engineering Station Lakehurst, NJ. The contract is the final step in a multi-phase research and development acquisition program to replace the current steam catapults used on aircraft carriers. According to the Navy release, “General Atomics, based in San Diego, will have its equipment installed at Lakehurst by 2006 and conduct testing in 2007-2008.”

The EMALS land based support facility is to be built by Hensel Phelps Construction Co., of Aurora, CO under a $20.5 million contract, and is expected to be complete by December 2005 [DID: the ribbon cutting would actually take place in November 2007, and construction will last to late 2008]. It will include building the infrastructure, supporting buildings and related utilities for the EMALS program. US Navy | General Atomics.

EMALS base SDD

Background: EMALS & AAG

• NAVAIR, via WayBack – Aircraft Launch & Recovery Equipment (ALRE).

• NAVAIR – Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS).

• General Atomics – Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS).

• GlobalSecurity.org – Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System – EMALS

• NAVAIR PMA-251 – Advanced Arresting Gear Program.

• General Atomics – Advanced Arresting Gear.

• QinetiQ North America – Advanced Naval Control Systems (ANCS). Includes EMALS/AAG work.

• Smithsonian Air & Space Magazine, via WayBack (Dec 2007 – Jan 2008) – How Things Work: Electro-Magnetic Catapults.

• American Heritage Magazine, via WayBack (Spring 2006) – Shot Into the Air. A very good look at the use of naval catapults from their earliest days to the forthcoming EMALS. Includes a fine conceptual schematic of the modern steam catapult.

• Electronics Design News (April 11/02) – Electronics poised to replace steam-powered aircraft launch. See esp. the references and linked diagrams.

Official Reports

• US GAO (Sept 5/13, #GAO-13-396) – Ford-Class Carriers: Lead Ship Testing and Reliability Shortfalls Will Limit Initial Fleet Capabilities. EMALS and AAG are big contributors to this situation.

News & Views

• Aviation Week (July 13/07) – Risk Areas In CVN 21 Cost, Development [dead link]

• Defense Tech, via WayBack (April 5-7/07) – EMALS: Next-Generation Catapult and Building a New Ford. Latter includes some interesting background re: EMALS integration challenges and solutions.

Background: The Carriers

• DID FOCUS Article – Design & Preparations Continue for the USA’s New CVN-21 Super-Carrier.

• DID (Dec 19/05) – Costing the CVN-21: A DID Primer. Sets the record straight on the CVN-21 Class’ cost per ship, and also goes into detail re: the lifetime operating cost savings expected as a result of design and technology innovations.

• DID FOCUS Article – Design & Preparations Continue for Britain’s New CVF Future Carrier (updated). At one point, EMALS was slated for use in this class as well.

The French Navy has deployed its second frégate Européen multi-mission (FREMM) frigate, Provence, into active duty.

The US Navy's first Gerald R Ford-class nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, pre-commissioning unit (PCU) Gerald R Ford (CVN 78), has achieved a pre-delivery milestone with the completion of its turn ship evolution.

The beginning of construction on the Royal Canadian Navy's (RCN) first Harry DeWolf-class of arctic offshore patrol vessels (AOPS) was officially marked with a keel-laying ceremony at Irving Shipyard in Halifax.