By JUDY DEMPSEY and NICOLA CLARK NYT

BERLIN — Military officials from the European countries with orders to buy the Airbus A400M military transport plane tried and failed again Friday to resolve differences over how to share billions of euros in cost overruns, but said they would resume negotiations this coming week in Berlin in the hope of meeting a Jan. 31 deadline.

Many of the participating countries need the aircraft urgently as they play a greater and more demanding role in peacekeeping missions. The repeated delays — the A400M is now more than four years behind schedule — represent a big setback for European military cooperation.

Military procurement ministers from the seven customer nations met until late into the night Thursday with top managers from Airbus and its parent company, European Aeronautic Defense & Space.

“We will meet again early next week here in Berlin,” a German defense ministry spokesman, who asked not to be identified, said Friday. “All of the participants do want a solution to this problem.” Two people with direct knowledge of the negotiations said they would likely take place Tuesday.

Alexander Reinhardt, a spokesman for EADS, said nailing down the critical details of how to finance the program remained a thorny issue.

“The negotiations have been difficult, as expected,” Mr. Reinhardt said. Seven countries — Belgium, Britain, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Spain and Turkey — together ordered 180 A400Ms in 2003 for €20 billion, or $28.2 billion. Last year, EADS and Airbus asked them to help cover an additional €5.2 billion in costs and to accept significant delivery delays. The company has asked the countries to agree to an additional 25 percent payment, or around €5 billion, according to people with direct knowledge of the negotiations. The Airbus chief executive, Thomas O. Enders, warned this month that without an agreement soon, the project might have to be abandoned, placing as many as 40,000 European jobs at risk.

But while France said it would consider paying more, Germany has been more than reluctant. It has ordered 60 of the 180 aircraft, while France has ordered 50.
France was supposed to receive the first deliveries of the A400M transport aircraft late last year and Germany in 2010, but the plane made its first test flight only last month. Both countries will now have to wait several years more, according to the German Defense Ministry.

Germany, however, has little room to maneuver. With 4,300 German troops based in northern Afghanistan, Berlin needs access to such aircraft for transporting not only troops but also such heavy equipment as tanks, armored personnel carriers and helicopters. Without the A400M, it must either modernize at huge expense its Transall aircraft, which are more than 30 years old, or lease Russian Antonov aircraft.

“We want the A400M but not at any price,” the German defense minister, Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg, reiterated during an interview with the Bayernkurier newspaper to be published Saturday. “Our willingness to compromise has its limits.” Britain, too, is furious about the delays, especially given its big role in Afghanistan. The German Defense ministry official said that cost was not the only issue still on the table, but range and payload as well. The A400M is currently several tons over its specified weight.

An audit of the A400M program by PricewaterhouseCoopers, which was commissioned last year by the governments, has blamed a significant portion of the cost over-runs on EADS and Airbus for failing to put proper budget controls in place. It also said the manufacturer had consistently underestimated development costs.

The auditor’s report, which was leaked to several European media this past week, estimated that the A400M was roughly €7.6 billion over budget.

EADS and Airbus have rejected the findings of the audit, but have so far failed to provide their own cost estimate for the program, now four years behind schedule.

EADS has already written off €2.4 billion in costs for a project that continues to expend cash at a rate of around €100 million each month.

The seven countries failed to meet an year-end 2009 deadline to agree on a new delivery schedule and financing arrangement for the contract, and last month set a new deadline of Jan. 31.

With the financial crisis and recession straining budgets across Europe, the governments have been reluctant to come up with more money.

Predator takes off

Hackers working with Iraqi militants were able to determine which areas of the country were under surveillance by the U.S. military, The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday, adding that video feeds from drones in Afghanistan also appear to have been compromised.

Meanwhile, a senior Air Force officer said Wednesday that a wave of new surveillance aircraft, both manned and unmanned, were being deployed to Afghanistan to bolster ‘eyes in the sky’ protection for the influx of American troops ordered by President Obama.

This apparent security breach, which had been known in military and intelligence circles to be possible, arose because the Predator unmanned aerial vehicles do not use encryption in the final link to their operators on the ground.
From http://www.daemonnews.org/security/1509-predator-drones-hacked-in-iraq-operations.html

A400M Military airlifter

Barring poor weather or technical issues, Airbus Military officials late this week expect to complete a roughly 3-hr. flight from the company’s facility here to demonstrate the aircraft’s basic handling characteristics.

The event has been a long time coming, owing, in part, to development delays with the engine and subsystems that have set the program back several years. The event marks the official beginning of a flight-test program that calls for 4,370 hr., says Eric Isorce, chief flight test engineer. About 60% of the effort will focus on military certification, the balance will be dedicated to gaining European Aviation Safety Agency approval.

Six crew will be onboard, backed by 50 engineers at each of the two main telemetry stations in Seville and Toulouse.

The aircraft will initially be flown in direct law with some dampening. After takeoff—rotation speed is projected to be 120 kt.—the aircraft will climb to a medium altitude and the gear will be retracted. At 10,000 ft. some basic performance checks will occur, the aircraft will be taken close to its maximum speed of around Mach 0.72, and then to its minimum speed, says Ed Strongman, Airbus’s chief military test pilot who will be at the controls. Afterward, flight controls will be shifted to normal law and further segments of the flight envelope will be explored before returning to Seville.

The flight will likely be followed by two days of data evaluation and inspections. Strongman expects the pace of flight trials to pick up early next year.

Ground trials by the flight-test department have been underway since Nov. 12 and already a number of system refinements have been identified. Some are needed for first flight, others can wait until further in the development. Still, Strongman says, preparations are “ahead of my expectations.”

One problem is nacelle heating when the airlifter is on the ground. Heat buildup is higher than anticipated—something already seen on the C-130 flying testbed. As a fix, engineers have determined that they can take some air off the high-pressure compressor for a nacelle ejector system to provide better ventilation at low power. The switchover, only needed on the ground at low speed and low wind, is now activated manually, but an automatic function is to be developed.

The exhaust gases are also overheating aft parts of the nacelle in some conditions. As an interim step, insulation and metal plate protection is being added. A more permanent fix is planned for the third flight-test aircraft.

On the other hand, engineers are seeing less heat buildup at the auxiliary power unit exhaust on the wing than expected, potentially allowing the exhaust to be shortened to reduce drag.

Tweaks are also being made to the engine settings. For now, high reverse power is limited to inboard engines. The ground-idle position may change for a better neutral-thrust position, Strongman says, noting that the issue will not affect first-flight plans. Overall, engines have shown “good response.”

As expected, in ground reverse the pitot static tubes are exposed to airflow that is leading to anomalous air speed indications, which is causing the information to be rejected by the flight-control computer. Airbus officials anticipated the anomaly and are assessing where to apply the needed software filter.

Airbus also had to refine the software controlling the anti-skid braking system, which, early on, showed poor characteristics. Initial trials also encountered the loss of tachometer data from some of the wheels. This is being addressed in the near term by strengthening connectors.

“We are solving problems very quickly,” Strongman notes. In one case, the TP400D turboprop engines had start-up difficulties, but the Europrop International engine consortium was able to deliver a software fix to the full authority digital flight control system overnight.

Eventually, the flight-test program will comprise five aircraft. Program officials still have a bit of margin to handle any glitches, but are downplaying the chance of recovering some of the schedule lost.
From http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=awst&id=news/A400MUPDATE120409.xml&headline=Airbus%20Military%20Poised%20For%20First%20Flight%20This%20Week

A400 prototype

If the new development schedule can be met it may still be that the aircraft will attract a wide market and come to be a mainstay of Military airlift.

The A400 is intended to carry up to nearly 40,000 kg 1800nm, cruise at up to 400 kts and take off from unprepared fields under 1000 m. It is planned to have a ferry range of 5000nm. Wow.

Airbus has said its long-delayed A400M military transport aircraft should be ready to make its first test flight around the 7th December.

The A400M, designed to replace ageing military cargo carriers, has been on order by several European air forces for many years, however, a series of technical problems has created delays.

The aircraft was due to enter service with air forces this year, but the date has now been put back to 2013.

French and German officials have already told Airbus it only has until the end of the year to prove that the project remains viable.

Earlier this month, South Africa cancelled a multi-billion dollar contract for the planes.

US MArines Osprey

The MV-22s, which fly higher and faster than the helicopters they replace, are less vulnerable to ground fire. MV-22s were only fired on a few times in Iraq, and none of the aircraft were hit. The high speed and altitude (at least 9,000 feet, or 3,000 meters), kept the aircraft out range of most enemy weapons. Helicopters fly lower and slower. To do otherwise would further reduce the range of a helicopter. A big advantage in Afghanistan is the higher speed (about twice that of helicopters), enabling reinforcements to reach their objective in a more timely fashion. MV-22s also have longer range than helicopters, meaning more of Afghanistan is within range of fast moving reinforcements (of troops and supplies.)

The MV-22s proved easier to maintain than the CH-46 aircraft they are replacing. The MV-22s needed 9.5 man hours of maintenance for each hour in the air, versus 24 hours of maintenance for each hour the CH-46s fly. These helicopters are all over twenty years old, which adds a few hours to their maintenance requirements. While the MV-22 required less maintenance than expected, the dust and sand in Iraq led to some engines being replaced earlier than expected. That problem has been tended to, so the MV-22s in Afghanistan will have less of a problem.

Some of the MV-22s sent to Afghanistan are equipped with a GAU-2B machine-gun fitted to the bottom of the aircraft. The GAU-2B is a remote control turret using a six-barrel 7.62mm machine-gun. This system has a rate of fire of 3,000 rounds per minute (50 per second), and max range of 1,500 meters. The system weighs a few hundred pounds and includes 4,000 rounds of ammo. A member of the crew uses a video game like interface to operate the gun.

The marine MV-22s can carry 24 troops 700 kilometers (vertical take-off, level flight, landing, and return) at 400 kilometers an hour. The MV-22 is replacing the CH-46E helicopter, which can carry 12 troops 350 kilometers at a speed of 200 kilometers an hour. The MV-22 can carry a 10,000-pound external sling load 135 kilometers, while the CH-46E can carry 3,000 pounds only 90 kilometers.
From http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htairmo/articles/20091121.aspx

Laser Avenger

The Mobile Active Targeting Resource for Integrated eXperiments — or MATRIX — fired a 2½ kilowatt-class high energy laser that knocked down the aircraft, according to an Air Force Research Laboratory statement.

MATRIX “acquired, tracked” and destroyed the targets at “significant ranges,” the statement said. Scientists and engineers will design the laser system to protect the U.S. from enemy unmanned aircraft.

It was unclear how the laser brought down the aircraft or how big they were.

Boeing Directed Energy Systems built the MATRIX. The defense contractor has also developed the Airborne Laser — a Boeing 747 with a laser mounted on the nose designed to shoot down ballistic missiles.

Boeing also tested its Laser Avenger system at China Lake. The Humvee-mounted directed energy air defense system shot down another unmanned aircraft.

The Air Force Research Lab sponsored the test, which also was attended by Army and Navy officials.

“These tests validate the use of directed energy to negate potential hostile threats against the homeland,” Bill Baker, chief scientist of the Lab’s Directed Energy Directorate,

The 100-kilowatt target

Defense contractor Northrop Grumman has reported that it has fired a solid-state laser beam with a potency of 105.5 kilowatts.

For the ray-gun wing of the military-industrial complex, the 100-kilowatt threshold is a major milestone, marking the entry point to weapons-grade laser weapons. Adding to the appeal is that solid-state lasers are much more compact, and less noxious, than chemical laser systems such as the one in the works for the 747-centric Airborne Laser.

The technical details of Northrop’s achievement break down this way, starting with a modular, “building block” approach that bodes well for scalable systems, the company said:
For building blocks, the company utilizes “laser amplifier chains,” each producing approximately 15kW of power in a high-quality beam. Seven laser chains were combined to produce a single beam of 105.5 kW. The seven-chain JHPSSL laser demonstrator ran for more than five minutes, achieved electro-optical efficiency of 19.3 percent, reaching full power in less than 0.6 seconds, all with beam quality of better than 3.0.

Adding an eighth chain that the system was designed for would increase laser power to 120 kilowatts, Northrop says.

Where this test saw five minutes of continuous operation for the laser, altogether the system has been operated at above 100 kilowatts for a total duration of more than 85 minutes.

The efforts are part of the Pentagon’s Joint High Power Solid State Laser (JHPSSL) program.

Even though 100 kilowatts has long been the “proof of principle” sought for weapons systems, Northrop says that “in fact, many militarily useful effects can be achieved by laser weapons of 25 kW or 50 kW, provided this energy is transmitted with good beam quality, as our system does.”

Of course, this is still a laboratory laser system and not a field-tested, ruggedized product. “It is still a little heavy and a little big,” Dan Wildt, vice president of Northrop’s directed energy systems program, told the LA Times.

That’s probably a significant understatement. Says Noah Shachtman at Wired’s Danger Room blog of the news from Northrop:

Does that mean energy weapons are a done deal? Hardly. There are still all sorts of technical issues–thermal management and miniaturization, to name two–that have to be handled first. Then, the ray gunners have to find the money. The National Academies figure it’ll take another $100 million to get battlefield lasers right.

In a separate post, Shachtman reports on what’s involved in getting specific laser systems ready to go over the next several years.

Earlier this year, Boeing said that it had used a “kilowatt-class” solid-state laser to shoot down a UAV from a ground-based system. The company hopes that the Airborne Laser, meanwhile, will do its first-ever aerial target shoot sometime in 2009.

High Energy Laser weapon

C 2A Greyhound

“This is a significant milestone for Northrop Grumman and the C-2A Greyhound Program,” said Jim Culmo, vice president of Airborne Early Warning and Battle Management Command and Control Programs for Northrop Grumman’s Aerospace Systems sector. “Since taking its first flight in November 1964, and entering service with the U.S. Navy in 1966, Carrier Strike Groups have depended on the Northrop Grumman-built Greyhound to provide the critical logistics support they need to be mission ready at all times.”

In addition, the C-2 acts as the critical “first impression” of the United States when transporting foreign dignitaries and heads of state in support of U.S. engagement and foreign policy overseas.

A derivative of the E-2 Hawkeye, the C-2 Greyhound’s primary mission is to transport high-priority cargo, critical aircraft parts, mail and passengers to deployed Carrier Strike Groups. The two aircraft share a common wing and empennage, but the C-2 has a widened fuselage with a rear cargo loading ramp to facilitate quick cargo loading and off-loading. Together, this pair of aircraft provides security and sustainment for U.S. Navy deployed maritime forces.

The C-2A delivers up to 10,000 pounds of cargo over distances in excess of 1,000 n.m. without refueling. This capacity and range allows Carrier Strike Groups greater maneuver space and flexibility across a full range and type of operations. With a flexible interior configuration adaptable to accommodate cargo, passengers or both, the Greyhound can operate safely and seamlessly during carrier launch and landing cycles. The C-2’s folding wings allow it to minimize the amount of deck space it occupies when parked on the carrier deck and its on-board auxiliary power unit allows it to start its own engines and operate its electrical systems without outside assistance. These capabilities provide versatility not found in other cargo aircraft and help ensure carriers have the parts, supplies and personnel they need when they need them.

During a typical six-month deployment, a two-aircraft C-2 detachment will transport more than one million pounds of cargo, 5,000 passengers and accumulate approximately 1,000 flight hours.

Northrop Grumman Corporation is a global security company whose 120,000 employees provide innovative systems, products, and solutions in information and services, electronics, aerospace and shipbuilding to government and commercial customers worldwide.
From http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/globenewswire/178753.htm

Hawkeye off runway

Bad brakes and pilot error led to an E-2C Hawkeye accident in March in which an aircraft swerved off the runway and sustained more than $10 million in damage.

The Hawkeye was landing after a training flight at Chambers Field in Norfolk, Va., on March 19 when it skidded off the runway and broke its landing gear, according to a Judge Advocate General Manual Investigation report obtained by Navy Times. No one was injured.
From http://www.navytimes.com/news/2009/10/navy_hawkeye_102509w/

The aircraft’s problems began as it was approaching for a roll-out landing on the runway only to realize that the cockpit lights that show whether the propellers are ready for landing — known as beta lights — were not illuminated.

When the beta lights don’t illuminate, it means the plane will have trouble decelerating on the runway. When this happens, pilots are trained to conduct an arrested landing if possible. The landing strip at Chambers Field includes arresting gear to simulate carrier landings.

Rather than land, the pilot came around for a second approach, the report says. A crew member pulled out a checklist and suggested an arrested landing, but the pilot dismissed the suggestion, saying the lights were probably on a dimmer nighttime setting and there was no real problem, the report says.

On the second approach, the plane touched down, blew a left tire and began to swerve. The pilot dropped the tailhook in a last-minute attempt to catch the airfield’s arresting wire. The plane veered off the runway, parts of the landing gear broke off, and the plane slid on its belly for about 250 feet, according to the report.

Mishap investigators recommended that Naval Air Systems Command modify the landing system controls and add a secondary signal system.

Cmdr. Donald Basden, the commanding officer of Carrier Airborne Early Warning Squadron 120, reviewed the investigation and suggested that NavAir should also develop a “more robust braking system for all E-2 and C-2 aircraft.”

NavAir said plans to improve the brakes are on the horizon.

“There are currently no funded programs to develop a more robust braking system for the E-2 and C-2 aircraft. However, funding is being requested for fiscal year 2012 to improve operational ground controllability on the E-2C, E-2D and C-2A aircraft,” command officials said in a written statement. “If funded, the program would address those system components which affect aircraft ground controllability, and the braking system would be included in the effort.”

Concerns about the brakes on Hawkeyes date back to 2006, when Lt. Shawn Frazier wrote an article discussing the issue in Approach, a naval aviation safety magazine published by the Naval Safety Center.

“The brakes on the E-2 aren’t much better than the ones on my mountain bike, and any amount of heavy breaking causes them to heat up — fast,” Frazier wrote in the September-

Raphale

Besides being the guest of honour and besides the fact that it is the year of France in Brazil, Sarkozy came with two missions: the first one was simple and the second was relatively difficult. The simple mission was to carry out something that was already or partially agreed upon: the purchase of submarines and helicopters. The difficult mission would be to turn things around regarding the fighters Brazil intends to buy.

Still missing a technical report, Rafale (French fighter aircrafts) was not FAB’s (Brazilian Air Force) favorite. The engineers apparently prefer the Swedish plane Gripen NG, while pilots show a preference for the Super Hornet F-18, from the USA. Informally, Lula made Sarkozy’s job easier when argued that Rafale fighters could be chosen because this agreement would also include “transferring technology”. In the FX-2 program, technology transfer is a qualifying condition since the beginning of the bidding process. Each of the three current competitors presented solid technology transfer proposals.

Regardless of the merit of finding the best or worst choice for Brazil, Lula created a serious problem. Competition has become a relatively simple target for lawyers who would like to legally paralyze FX-2. The deal is only expected to be closed in October, but Lula ignored FAB’s opinion and created a diplomatic situation with the USA and Sweden. In Latin America, repercussion was immediate. The Colombian press, for instance, wants to find out whether there will be a dispute for influence among the USA, France and Russia in South America. According to Colombians, the rationale will take place through the full support of the USA concerning the Colombian cause against FARC (the Revolutionary Armed Force of Colombia), the relationship between Chávez and Russia and now the possibility Brazil has to buy everything at once.

Sovereignty, a word repeated time and again by the Brazilian Government, is in a dubious situation: depending on only one country for strategic weapons, as well as their parts and know-how. This same sovereignty was the theme on each Argentinean trendsetters decided to argue about. Will Brazil really take a dominant global position, or does the country want to speed up this process by getting stuck to a aligned country? For Argentineans, the purchase of Brazilian weapons is extremely important. In some occasions, they make it clear that, as far as the fighters are concerned, Argentina could follow Brazil’s choice. However, considering Rafale’s astronomic value, which even reduced will continue high if compared to the other two competitors, Argentina will not afford a complete squad. As part of the seduction package offered by Sarkozy, Brazil will be the exclusive vendor of Rafales in Latin America. Nevertheless, which neighbour country can pay for such plane?

In Mexico, they set a tone of irony. Formally the purchase of Brazilian weapons was little discussed, but according to talks with Mexican government sources, they believe Brazil is about to close a complicated deal with France in case it really buys the Rafale fighters. It is even considered that this plane could not be sold outside France. There were 14 lost biding processes and a great deal of confusion. There is no doubt that this is an excellent fighter, but which runs the risk of having Brazil and Libya as its sole purchasers.

Source: http://thegovmonitor.com/world_news/europe/the-choice-of-french-fighter-aircraft-in-brazil-and-its-impact-on-latin-america-6865.html