South Africa, Technology and Border Security: Shaping New Options

12/01/2016

2016-12-01 By defenceWeb

That South Africa has a particularly porous land border is well-known and almost as well-known are the efforts of mainly SA Army regulars and reserves to ensure some integrity with the oft repeated “shortage of funds” pointed out as the biggest contributor to the thousands of illegal immigrants, smugglers and traffickers who seemingly come and go as they please.

The Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) maintains notwithstanding the limited scope for technology investment, the opportunity for novel and innovative thinking can lead to ways of doing more with what exists.

Border safeguarding in South Africa, says the national scientific research and applied knowledge organisation, entails the challenge of an extensive borderline and several hundred ports of entry.

The borderline consists of close on two thousand eight hundred kilometres of coastline, 4 800 km of land border and more than 1.2 million square kilometres of airspace. There are more than 700 registered airports of which 10 are recognised international ones, at least 52 formal land border posts and 111 seaports.

“Rich in valuable, sought-after natural assets (precious minerals and stones, rhino horn, abalone), located on an increasingly active trade route and with often non-existing, inefficient land border structures, the risk expands to economic losses through piracy, poaching, smuggling, illegal entry and the potential to unhinge regional safety and security.

“Improved border safeguarding requires close co-operation and integration between government departments responsible for defence, immigration and policing. Beyond safety and security, border breaching and protection also has social, economic, education, health, transport and migration issues,” the CSIR says.

New C2 and ISR technologies can provide for CONOPS to provide for enhanced border security.
New C2 and ISR technologies can provide for CONOPS to provide for enhanced border security.

For border control to be effective, the CSIR maintains the practical implementation of command, control, communication and surveillance technologies are key.

As an option it sees the use of an integrated concept development and experimental process to surface optimal solutions. This entails incorporating existing infrastructure, using readily available surveillance technologies and ensuring better integration of different platforms.

Field experiments are conducted in border zones to test the use of sensors, communication mechanisms and networks in combination. The ultimate aim is to manage a solution as an interoperable system adding scope to detection and providing intelligence guided command decisions and patrols, the CSIR said.

Challenges are created to add more stringency to testing. These include geographic spread and smart phone technology integrated with other communication platforms. Technology options include use of unmanned aerial systems capturing video views, cellular telephone intercepts, GPS jamming, video and audio conferencing and sharing of remote computer desktops.

The key, according to the CSIR defence and security focus section, is effective collaboration and synchronisation.

“The pivotal requirement is the means to facilitate and enable inter-departmental collaboration. This implies that the interplay between humans and processes must be interoperable for optimal and effective collaboration.”

The CSIR’s concept development and evaluation centre becomes the nerve centre of a mission where various sources are integrated into a single comprehensive view. Information from diverse systems such as radar, satellites and video feeds from unmanned aerial telemetry systems, communication devices and others can be displayed on screens to provide an integrated overview of a defence scenario. The centre is used for operations planning to create border security response strategies, centrally monitoring counter-poaching efforts and training.

Taking counter-poaching operations as an example, the CSIR sees the integrated war room as a space where officials and decision makers can instantly see collated data, for instance on poaching incidents. These are mapped out in near real-time with statistics showing number of rhino killed, number of shots fired, number of poachers caught as well as ranger and poacher movements.

By integrating a large amount of information on a central platform, patterns can also be analysed and anticipated, for instance identifying when poachers routinely target a certain area or a specific part of a fence for easy access.

The research and development organisation sees data from aerial views and camera surveillance (called in on radio or mobile phone and detected through sensors then channelled through an interoperability gateway into a software system) as giving the full border picture and pinpointing areas of concern as what can be cost-effectively achieved.

“This means improved surveillance – without sending armies of patrol staff – and the information as a deterrence mechanism or best-suited combat tactics is available to commanders.

“Smuggling, alien influx and illegal grazing across South Africa’s borders are the results of lacking or vandalised fencing and insufficient capacity to deploy on patrol. By combining various surveillance and detection technologies in integrated communication and command systems, the CSIR works to assist its defence client by expanding the ability to watch over the country’s territories,” the CSIR’s defence and security focus group says.

Republished with permission of our partner, defenceWeb.

http://www.defenceweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=46097:csir-maintains-better-border-protection-is-achievable&catid=87:Border%20Security&Itemid=188

Editor’s Note: President-elect Trump has certainly highlighted the importance of enhanced border security in the United States.

In many ways, he is going back to the discussions and potentially could adopt some of the approaches discussed in the first three years after 9/11 in the United States.

There was much creative thinking about the way ahead with regard to border security that was never acted on.

With regard to a program called SBI net, it would have been possible for example, working with ways to enhance the reach and effectiveness of the border patrol to provide for improved border security.

Unfortunately, DHS focused on a pure technology solution set which really did not address the fundamental requirement, namely to enhance the performance of the border patrol.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SBInet

A number of the solutions offered in the RFI to SBI net could be revisited and adopted in the new strategic initiative suggested by the President-elect. In many ways, its back to the future, and keeping the promises made in the wake of 9/11 to the American people and not delivered.

Cyber Security: Paying Protection Money to the Wrong Gang

2016-12-01 By Michael W. Wynne, 21st Secretary of the Air Force

Summary

It is time to wake up the liability lawyers and truly drive change in the Cyber Security Field.

Corporations that are paying weekly or monthly protection money, are really stuck in a belief system that is naive. Its saving grace is that it currently protects them from liability suits from attorneys that also believe that Cyber Security is impossible, that hackable systems are a societal issue, not a correctable technical fault that has infected our networks.

This is a false mantra that needs to be questioned.

Insurance companies that are the real suckers in the deal routinely pay out losses, and now ransom money to keep our ailing system afloat in this belief system.

Folks, this is not religion, not a belief system; technologists stuck our society with a flaw identified in 1934 when Turing Computers were introduced.

This flaw has been identified and is being exploited over great distances with the spread of the Internet.

The federal government wrings its hands over exploits, and one wonders where are the innovators that were supposed to protect us.

Well they are here; in the form of Analog Programmers, using analog systems to mimic Internet Appliances.

The Problem; it is cheaper to pay the protection money than correct the fundamental flaw.

What price freedom, you ask, why pay protection money to the wrong gang.

The Cyber patching industry is not the Cyber exploitation industry, which is sophisticated, and National in Character.

We now know the answer is Analog, let’s design in security; let’s get back our freedom.

Background

Academics have known since 1934 that Turing computers were and remain inherently vulnerable to hacking as Godel and Keene Mathematically proved, and confidently expressed that proof in the years following.

The times were different; and computers were just aborning, and abandoning a rule of circuit design to firmly comprehend the relationship of every input to every output seemed acceptable when operating in isolation.

As society wallows in the deceit that a software patch can save the Turing Computing Machines that underlay the present internet, we find even senior security officials such as the Chair and Co-Chair of the Intelligence Committee espousing the thought that protection is simply unavailable.

Hackers are constantly working to break data locks. (Credit: Bigstock)
Hackers are constantly working to break data locks. (Credit: Bigstock)

This is not fact based, but has grown to be the popular myth. This mythology has led our society to lose billions of dollars to the phenomena of Hacking.

Hacking is the exploitation, usually from a distance of the identified flaw in the Turing Machines that populate the Internet appliances. Worse; this mythology has stymied our Intelligence and Security Agencies from offering protection to America’s institutions.

So; time for a giant do-over, time to reassess where we are in the technology world. From the world of linear programming, time to increase the penalty function with the intention of introducing another technology path forward.

How this can best be done is by first identifying an alternate path that is becoming more and more well known, Using Analog Computing to mimic the intended digital circuit design, and truly design in security.

Then by asking simply, why are we still vulnerable; is that now by choice, risking our security, risking our wealth, risking our future Intellectual Property?

Is the now known corrective action too expensive, or just different?

Returning to complex circuit design to mimic the intended digital circuit can and should underpin the ‘Designed in Security’ our society seeks, a proper defense.

Current Situation

Whining beats correction.

We often boast that our innovators are the best in the world, but I am now worrying that our advantage is eroding as competitors around the world have basically invaded our collaborative activity with sophisticated Hacking, and proceeded to drain our innovative activities into their engineering designs.

We whine to them, and wring our hands. This is an awful response; and can’t represent the best of America.

But, the Capitalist will not innovate so long as the penalties are small, and the rewards are not clear. S

o; let’s begin to raise the penalty function, by refusing to pay for losses, whether caused by Corporations not moving to protect; or Banks settling Hacked accounts.

Let’s turn our attention to converting existing systems to retain functionality, but in the safe mode.

This is a far better use for the eighteen billion dollars now spent ofn the protection racket.

bigstock-Cyber-attack-concept-in-word-t-29231093

Finally, let’s understand the role of Government is allowing infrastructure to be manipulated like the Dam in upstate New York; or fretting over the invasion of the ‘Smart Grid’ and basically threatening our society with Armageddon, with the loss of the benefits of the present Internet as it applies to government.

Where have they been?

Unfortunately; they apparently do not any longer see their role as lead innovator in this Communication Space. They have taken the role of follower to an extreme level; even as that role threatens the very freedoms we hired them to protect.

How many times do we have to see the Foreign Military Innovation combining Cyber Virtual Attacks with Physical Military Attacks before we awake with devastation to our backyard.

Government asleep at the switch does not make a protected society.

We now know the answer to this scourge, let’s get on with offering our society a real fix.

Then; the penalty function can be reduced for society, and systematically increased for commercial adaptation.

The government does not need to force change or its pace; it simply needs to show the way forward.

The National Institute of Standards (NIST)  has essentially declared out loud the futility of the many solutions it has encountered, citing the patience of the Advanced Persistent Threat in many papers. Can they be clearer, yes, they can identify the benefit of analog in correcting the flaw.

Where, frankly, is NIST in helping our society move forward, in lieu of further whining about the problem.

Looking Forward

Society is slowly becoming aware that the current stream of denial is a scam and they are tired of our clinging to a belief that they must remain unprotected.

Right now, they are riding an unending strife curve; and the alarms are beginning to sound as if the end of life as we know it is nigh again.

It is seeping into engineering and into design that those that have stayed with Analog are immune to this Internet Hacking, this distant and malicious, threat.

Whether aircraft safety systems, or in some of the most carefully protected areas within the Military or Industry; suddenly what is old is new again.

Our tort system is a marvelous tool for shaping our society.

Can it be used to spark change where government used to be the driving force?

It is a difficult thing to basically claim that our society is not protected by a choice, when the choice is not certified.

Basically Analog users are quiet in their situation, worrying that by claiming protection they will unleash either an inside or outside threat that they haven’t considered, but they are far better off than their digital colleagues.

What then do we need?

Right now, with all of the ‘followers’, we need a thought leader to certify the protective capability that the complex frozen analog appliance offers.

To be able to testify, if you will, that using frozen (e.g.; non reprogrammable) complex analog circuitry mimicking and replacing currently installed internet appliances satisfies the pent up desire for a corrective action against hacking; for designed in Cyber Security.

This would provide the way forward for our industry when the liability gets large, and the insurance companies raise their rates and demand action.

Protecting our society, whether water pumps, gas lines, or the electrical grid could fall to being regulated by the Department of Homeland Security to actually get protected, beyond worry –action.

Infrastructure Owners can be realistically tasked to put in place protected SCADA Systems, with motivation and support from the Department of Homeland Security, which can design and approve frozen analog complex circuitry.

These systems could then replace the currently installed Internet appliance.

Security teams from the agency who routinely monitor security procedures for these assets, can as well advise of security concerns from the internet facing appliances.

Once this breakthrough is underway Internet Service Providers, router designers, and server designers can then look to provide needed support to agencies and public corporations to protect them as vital economic assets.

Society is not stuck, but thought leaders are, time for a change.

Let’s raise the Penalty Function to force design innovation and change for the better. It can and should be one of the roles for government,

Thought Leaders should not be lawyers, and insurance companies, but the technologists that brought us this situation.

Where are they?

Also, see the following:

http://sldinfo.wpstage.net/shaping-a-new-approach-to-cyber-defense-time-for-analog/

DTIII Testing for F-35B: November 5, 2016

11/29/2016

2016-11-29 DTIII Testing for F-35B: Working an Integrated MAGTF at Sea

The F-35B short takeoff/vertical landing (STOVL) variant is the world’s first supersonic STOVL stealth aircraft.

USS America, with VMX-1, Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 211 (VMFA-211) and Air Test and Evaluation Squadron 23 (VX-23) embarked, are underway conducting operational testing and the third phase of developmental testing for the F-35B Lightning II aircraft, respectively.

DTIII Testing for F-35B: November 5, 2016 from SldInfo.com on Vimeo.

The tests will evaluate the full spectrum of joint strike fighter measures of suitability and effectiveness in an at-sea environment.

Credit: USN

11/05/16

The Next Phase for the F-35B: Empowering the Sea-Base

2016-11-29 By Todd Miller

The US Marine Corps (USMC) F-35 program is accelerating rapidly, and deployment is underway.

Second Line of Defense had the opportunity to see the progress in action during a “Proof of Concept” demonstration on the USS America off the coast of Southern California November 18-20, 2016.

During the visit the program status was provided by USMC Col. George “Sack” Rowell, Commanding Officer (CO) of VMX-1 (Marine Operational Test & Evaluation Squadron) and Lt. General Jon “Dog” Davis, USMC Deputy Commandant for Aviation.

Rowell noted that VMFAT-501 the Fleet Replacement Squadron (FRS) based at MCAS Beaufort, SC has qualified over 60 F-35B pilots to date.

These are conversion pilots, in other words coming over from the F/A-18 or the AV-8B. EA-6B pilots have been utilized in developing the CAT 1 syllabus for those pilots coming straight out of flight school into the F-35B (CAT 1 graduates are imminent).

The Marines are scheduled to train an additional 63 pilots by 2018, and these pilots from VMFAT-501 will fill the pipeline for VMFA-211 & VMFA-121 (the two current operational squadrons) as well as VMX-1, MAWST-1 (Marine Aviation Weapons and Tactics Squadron One) and additional Instructors for VMFAT-501.

MAWTS-1 creates fleet weapons and tactics instructors.

The F-35 is fully integrated into this course and has been for several years, where both a 4th & 5th Gen integration is addressed (AV-8B, F/A-18 & all other aviation platforms with F-35).

Qualified F-35 Weapons and Tactics Instructors (WTI) have graduated and additional graduates are forthcoming.

Davis indicated that he is particularly focused with the F-35 deployments.

Funding has been executed for spare parts to ensure adequate support for the deployments.

The VMFA-121 “Green Knights” are well into their deployment to Japan to be complete January 2017.

VMFA-121 will deploy at sea in 2018, as will VMFA-211 “Wake Island Avengers.”

Davis is now focused on the “Werewolves” of VMFA-122, the next F-35B squadron that will move from F/A-18s and stand-up in F-35Bs out of MCAS Yuma.

Next up in 2019/2020 will be the “Black Knights,” VMFA-314 of MCAS Miramar, the first USMC squadron with the F-35C.

As Davis stated, his priority is “getting the Marines out of the old metal and into the new metal.”

Onboard the USS America the “Proof of Concept” (POC) demonstration was underway.

Per Rowell the intent was demonstrating the integration of a large package of F-35Bs into the US Navy (USN) US Marine Corps (USMC) structure to maximize seaborne power projection.

This demonstration was an important step to explore operational aspect for both the USN and USMC in preparation for upcoming deployments.

The POC included 10 F-35Bs gathered from VMFA- 211 and VMX-1, two MV-22B Ospreys, a UH-1Y Venom and AH-1Z Viper from VMX-1.

Two additional F-35Bs from VX-23 were shipborne at the time of our visit.

Beyond the tactical portion of the demonstration, valuable experience was gained from the integration of USMC STOVL, rotor wing and tiltrotor assets in the deck cycle.

Per Rowell the DT-III and POC demonstration were supported by a contingent of Marines on board.

  • F-35B pilots; 5 from VMFA-211, 7 from VMX-1, 2 from VX-23.
  • 18 VMX-1 rotor wing and tiltrotor pilots.
  • 140 Maintenance & support personnel

For many of these Marines it was their first visit to a ship and they quickly experienced the unique challenges of everything from shipborne cooking to shipborne maintenance – in steady and high state seas.

On the 3rd day of the POC a Marine Air-Ground Task Force (MAGTF) tailored strike mission was planned.

Four F-35Bs were designated to engage a notional Integrated Air Defense System (IADS), with a AH-1Z and 2 MV-22s escorted by an additional 2 F-35Bs.

This mission set represents the high level of capability the F-35B brings to the amphibious assault force – comprised of an LHA platform, with MV-22Bs, AH-1Zs, UH-1Ys, & incoming CH-53K.

The F-35B performed very well throughout the DT-III and the POC.

Rowell indicated about 300 vertical landings had taken place in the last 3 weeks, equal to about 4 months of normal operations with 6 AV-8Bs.

In addition, the aircraft on board utilized a variety of software Blocks, including Blocks 2B, 3i and 3F, with no stability issues experienced with 3F.

The F-35Bs performance and the solid progress across the board are clear indicators that the Marines consider themselves “good to go” with the F-35B. This confidence was expressed by Davis, “I’d deploy tomorrow. Tomorrow.

The Commanding Officer (CO) of VFMA-211 is chomping at the bit he would deploy them, so would the CO of VFMA-121.

They are ready.

These airplanes are highly capable and ready to go.“

The Second Line of Defense thanks Sylvia Pierson, and Brandi Schiff, JSF/JPO PA; Capt. Sarah Burns & 1st Lt. Maida Zheng, USMC PAOs; Captain Joseph R. Olson, Commanding Officer of the USS America and entire crew; Lt. General Jon “Dog” Davis, USMC Deputy Commandant for Aviation; and USMC VMX-1 Commanding Officer, Col. George “Sack” Rowell.

The photos are credited to Todd Miller.

Deciphering PRC’s Stance on THAAD in South Korea: A Chinese First Strike Policy in Asia? (Updated with Chinese Response)

Shaping a New Sensor-Shooter Relationship in Japan with Aegis, Patriot and THAAD will significantly expand the capabilities of all (Credit Photo: Raytheon and its PAC-3)

2016-11-27 By Danny Lam

During President Obama’s meeting with President Elect Donald Trump, a “big problem for the country” was discussed.

North Korea and its nuclear ballistic missile program was identified in September as the first problem for the Trump Administration.

President Elect Trump will be briefed by the priesthood of China / North Asia experts on the issue, and will hear their pitch for the continuation of multilateral diplomacy based approaches to solving the problem — the approach that repeatedly failed for decades and got us to where we are.

Except that today, or by 2020, the NORK problem have turned from a nuclear ballistic missile threat to allies like Japan and South Korea, and perhaps US bases like Guam, to a problem that directly threaten every major U.S. population center including those of happy go lucky free riding allies like Canada.

U.S. Co-operation with the Beijing regime, administered by the “China Expert” priesthood, produced a direct threat to the United States by one of the most irresponsible, unpredictable, irresponsible, and dangerous powers in the world.

Yet, the priesthood maintain that their approach is the only way even as PRC’s intransience appeared to have risen to a new level with arguments that THAAD based in South Korea threaten the allegedly small nuclear force controlled by Beijing, and Beijing’s insistence on no deployment as a precondition for increasing sanctions on North Korea.

The Beijing Regime alleged that THAAD 10 extra minutes of warning of missile launches from China.

PRC diplomats claim THAAD threatens the “terminal” and “mid-course” phases of their intermediate range and ICBMs.

This is a notional rendering of the 10 and 2 O'Clock challenge. It is credited to Second Line of Defense and not in any way an official rendering by any agency of the US government. It is meant for illustration purposes only.
This is a notional rendering of the 10 and 2 O’Clock challenge as seen by then Northcom/Norad Commander, Admiral Gortney. It is credited to Second Line of Defense and not in any way an official rendering by any agency of the US government. It is meant for illustration purposes only.

One perspective is to take Beijing’s statements as technical errors by diplomats poorly trained in the technical details of arms control.

From this, it follows that Beijing’s allegations and opposition to THAAD are technically unsound based on any plausible assessment of THAAD capabilities and the flight path of PRC’s nuclear ballistic missiles.

Chinese nuclear forces are now split between land based silos, road and rail mobile launchers, and SSBNs at very different locations.

The actual numbers of launchers deployed have sharply risen.

However, if it is the case that the PRC regime in fact have substantially more nuclear weapons deployed than they claimed, particularly on intermediate and short range missiles aimed at Japan, S. Korea, and US bases, it will lead to a very different conclusion.

An increase in warning time of 8 to 10 minutes may not make much of a difference for an ICBM attack on the US.   Nor will it make much difference for a retaliatory strike against US allies aimed at population centers consistent with the “No First Use” policy declared by the PRC Regime.

However, reducing the warning time will have substantial impact on the ability of Japan, S. Korea, and US bases like Okinawa, Guam, etc. to activate defense systems like Patriots that defend relatively small footprints like military bases.

Extant anti-ballistic missiles like Patriots and sea based Standard Missiles are only “moved out” on alert, with only a small percentage of the systems held at high levels of readiness.

Shaping a New Sensor-Shooter Relationship in Japan with Aegis, Patriot and THAAD will significantly expand the capabilities of all (Credit Photo: Raytheon and its PAC-3)
Shaping a New Sensor-Shooter Relationship in Japan with Aegis, Patriot and THAAD will significantly expand the capabilities of all to defend against first strike threats in the Pacific. (Credit Photo: Raytheon and its PAC-3)

PRC use of “terminal” and “mid-course” terms, rather than being technical errors, it is exactly the right term to describe the course of ballistic missile attacks on Japan and major US bases like Okinawa.    PRC knows that early warning and cueing data from THAAD can be flowed to Patriots and Aegis in an integrated ABM system.

If the PRC’s intent is to be able to launch a nuclear first strike at installations protected by Patriots and Aegis systems, then their objection to THAAD is technically sound.    

Rather than being threatened by a handful of THAAD interceptors, Beijing’s plans for a nuclear missile attack on Japan would be frustrated by far more numerous Patriot and Aegis interceptors.  

If they are given sufficient warning to be deployed.

It is well known that PRC have substantial inventories of medium and short range ballistic missiles.

A nuclear ballistic missile first strike offers the opportunity to destroy the conventional arms capability of US and allies in the region in a lighting first strike.

If the PRC actually have thousands of warheads as opposed to 250 alleged by a number of arms control advocates, a nuclear first strike aimed at allied military installations makes sense.

The PRC’s nuclear arsenal is not subject to any arms control agreements, or any credible verification.

Perhaps Beijing is not as toothless or benign as they want the world to believe.

Editor’s Note: Interestingly, the Japanese government has recently indicated its interest in acquiring and deploying THAAD as well.

The Defense Ministry has launched a full-fledged study into adopting the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense missile system developed by the United States.

The ministry plans to set up a team for discussions on THAAD that will be headed by Deputy Defense Minister Kenji Wakamiya, sources said. The panel’s aim is to draw up specific measures by next summer to strengthen Japan’s missile defense system.

The ministry had considered the possibility of deploying THAAD under the next medium-term defense buildup program from fiscal 2019 to 2023.

But after more than 20 ballistic missile tests by the North this year, as well as the steady progress it has made in its quest to miniaturize nuclear warheads, the ministry is now aiming to introduce the ground-based system earlier, the sources said.

Japan’s current two-tier missile defense system calls for first trying to shoot down a missile in space with SM-3 (Standard-Missile 3) interceptors mounted on Aegis destroyers and, in the event that fails, destroying it at an altitude of less than 20 km using the PAC-3 (Patriot Advanced Capability-3) surface-to-air missile system.

THAAD would be able to intercept a missile re-entering the atmosphere at a higher altitude than the PAC-3 can.

The United States has decided to deploy the THAAD system at a military base in South Korea. If Japan introduces the system, that would enable effective THAAD operations and information-sharing to be conducted among the three allies, the sources said.

The Defense Ministry also plans to introduce a ground-based missile defense system known as Aegis Ashore.

Both systems face hurdles as each will cost hundreds of billions of yen and require public approval to adopt, the sources said.

“It will not be easy to secure related budgets,” a senior ministry official said.

Adoption of either system is also likely draw a backlash from China, the sources said.

Beijing has angrily denounced Washington’s plan to deploy THAAD in South Korea as a serious threat to the region’s geopolitical balance.

And  the Chinese have commented on the new Japanese response and on the issues raised in this article.

According to an article in The Global Times published on 11/28/16, “China Must Work to Render THAAD Void.”

According to reports, Japan’s defense ministry is planning to set up a team headed by Deputy Defense Minister Kenji Wakamiya to discuss adopting the US-developed Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile defense system. Given North Korea’s frequent ballistic missile tests this year, Japan plans to hammer out a blueprint for the deployment before summer next year. 

Deploying THAAD will enable Japan to not only guard against missiles from North Korea, but enhance its strategic deterrence against China. South Korea and Japan, both set to deploy the THAAD system, can spy on the northeastern and southeastern regions of China respectively. After they just inked an intelligence-sharing agreement last week, they can form a fully-fledged missile defense system in Northeast Asia with the THAAD adoption, which will weaken China’s missile deterrence and add to the US’ leverage against China. 

China has failed to stop South Korea from adopting the THAAD system, and is no more likely to force Japan out of it. With a closer alliance with the US than South Korea and a tougher stance over China, Tokyo brings up the deployment at this moment in an attempt to affect US President-elect Donald Trump‘s policy on the Asia-Pacific. This leaves little for China to do to turn it around.

The US is intensifying its missile defense system in the West Pacific. China cannot expect Trump to retreat from it. Instead China should focus more on what it can do, not what it can talk the US out of doing. 

In the current circumstances, China needs to improve its missile defense system and to significantly enhance the penetration capability of its missiles to an extent that outpaces THAAD deployment. The latter is crucial. Seoul and Tokyo’s THAAD deployment plans have given China a chance to upgrade the penetration capability of its missiles and expand its nuclear arsenal to approximately the size of that of the US and Russia. 

As the second-largest economy, China has been deemed by the US as its top strategic rival and been dragged into a major power competition. China remaining a second-rate nuclear power will prompt US radicals to get tough on it. The US’ overwhelming nuclear margin on China is not conducive to bilateral relations. 

China is fully able to develop its missile penetration capability with a smaller investment so as to render the THAAD system obsolete before its deployment is finished. With mature technology in ballistic missile nuclear submarines, it should launch more submarines to circumvent the THAAD system. 

China cherishes peace, but the US, Japan and South Korea are keen to take actions that threaten China’s strategic security. In response, China needs to be flexible diplomatically and meanwhile build reliable military might. Since we can hardly stop the THAAD deployment, we can render the deployment void so that next time these countries will understand that they need to consider before taking any action.  

For a chance to comment on this article, please go to the following:

Trump Raised the Question about the Future of Extended Deterrence: The Chinese Challenge

Editor’s Note: With the election of President Trump, there is the possibility to relink at key security questions with a fresh eye.  

Clearly, one of these involves China’s support for North Korea and their nuclear policy and its impact on the region and the United States.

Trump raised the issue of extended deterrence during the campaign, and it is a real challenge, not easily dismissed by pursuing past policies.

There is clearly a need for a fresh approach.

Rather than assuming than assuming that China is going to do anything constructive about North Korea, a closer look at China’s own nuclear policy is clearly required.

We have done so on an earlier Second Line of Defense Forum on the Second Nuclear Age, and the recent work of Paul Bracken, who generated the process of a strategic rethink would be a good launch point for reworking U.S. policy in the region with regard to nuclear weapons.

https://www.globalasia.org/latest-issue.php

And for a graphic characterization of the evolving “Pentapolar Nuclear Order” in the 2020s as seen by Bracken (graphic credited to Bracken):

Pentapolar Nuc Race

 

For our interview with Admiral Gortney where he discussed the nuclear threat to North America in very realistic and graphic terms, see the following:

http://sldinfo.wpstage.net/north-american-defense-and-the-evolving-strategic-environment-admiral-gortney-focuses-on-the-need-to-defend-north-america-at-the-ten-and-two-oclock-positions/

For an earlier article by Lam on the Chinese nuclear dynamic, see the following:

How Many Chinese Nuclear Warheads Dance on the Head of a Pin?

DTIII Testing for F-35B: November 4, 2016

11/28/2016

2016-11-28 The F-35B short takeoff/vertical landing (STOVL) variant is the world’s first supersonic STOVL stealth aircraft.

USS America, with VMX-1, Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 211 (VMFA-211) and Air Test and Evaluation Squadron 23 (VX-23) embarked, are underway conducting operational testing and the third phase of developmental testing for the F-35B Lightning II aircraft, respectively.

DTIII Testing for F-35B: November 4, 2016 from SldInfo.com on Vimeo.

The tests will evaluate the full spectrum of joint strike fighter measures of suitability and effectiveness in an at-sea environment.

Credit: USN

11/04/16

 

The A400M as a Digital Aircraft: Crafting a 21st Century Baseline

2016-11-22 By Robbin Laird

After my visit to the Albacete Air Base in Spain, I spent time in Madrid with Airbus Defence and Space.

During my time in Madrid, I was able to conduct two interviews, the first with the head of the tanker program, namely, Antonio Caramazana, and the second with Fernando Alonso, head of Military Aircraft and with the chief engineer of the A-400M, Lionel Rouby.

https://sldinfo.com/visiting-albacete-airbase-eurofighter-operations-and-support/

https://sldinfo.com/visiting-the-eurofighter-squadron-at-albacete-air-base-spain/

The A400M has been delivered to several air forces and will become a key part of their fleets for operations over the next 50 years.

Currently, the program is working through engine modifications, which has fixed a known problem with the gear boxes.

During a visit to the Bricy air base, the squadron leadership provided insights with regard to the French approach to the A400M and the squadron leader highlighted the importance in his view of the inherent upgradeability of the aircraft associated with its software systems as well as the promise of digital maintenance for shaping a new approach to fleet management.

In that interview, Lt. Col. Paillard highlighted the importance of keeping the aircraft common among the A400M users to get the maximum impact from the aircraft operating as a fleet.

“We do not want to end up like the Transall which was a common French and German aircraft but at the end became completely different aircraft.”

https://sldinfo.com/visiting-the-first-a400m-squadron-at-bricy-shaping-a-way-ahead/

https://sldinfo.com/visiting-the-a400m-in-seville-and-in-orleans/

A key potential for leveraging commonality is derived from the digital nature of the aircraft.

The sensors onboard the aircraft and the various software upgradeable systems provide an inherent potential for the A400M to provide for inherent upgradeability and serviceability across the fleet.

Lt Col. Paillard seen in an A400M cockpit at Bricy. Credit: Second Line of Defense
Lt Col. Paillard seen in an A400M cockpit at Bricy. Credit: Second Line of Defense

Put in other terms, the digital nature of the aircraft is part of every A400M which enters the combat fleet and can provide a significant advantage over legacy aircraft. In that sense, the A400M is part of the strategic transition associated with other software upgradeable aircraft like the Wedgetail, the P-8, the Triton and the F-35.

My discussion with Fernando Alonso and Lionel Rouby focused on the sensors and software upgradeability of the aircraft built in and the potential impact of leveraging this inherent or built-in capability.

As Alonso put it: “Every A400M may look the same outside, but as the software evolves, new capabilities are generated for the aircraft.”

fernando-alonso-biography-eng

Question: How would you describe the software upgradeable quality of the A400M and field upgradeable capabilities associated with that upgradeability?

Lionel Rouby: The systems architecture of the aircraft, there are about 5,000 equipment (gathered in more than 200 systems/subsystems) onboard the aircraft and their around 130 of them – key ones – which are software upgradeable and could be uploaded by customers themselves.

You can upload software changes in the field. This makes the system quite flexible for upgrades.

The system is called the DLCS or data load control system, which manages the 130 systems for software upgrades featuring field loadable systems.

Fernando Alonso: For example, with the flight control systems we have software capabilities, which can be modified.

We are upgrading the flight control system to manage load shifts onboard the aircraft is dropping loads.

The center of gravity obviously changes as you drop loads during an operation.

By upgrading the software, although the airplane is physically the same, it now has a new capability associated with the upgrade.

The A400M at the Farnbourgh Airshow 2016. Credit: Airbus Defence and Space
The A400M at the Farnbourgh Airshow 2016. Credit: Airbus Defence and Space

And this capability is field loadable.

Lionel Rouby: Key computers onboard the aircraft operate this way, such as the flight management system, the mission management system, the load master work station, the flight warning system, the flight control system or the flight display system.

Obviously, the upgrades is not done in a few minutes but you can do this in a few hours as you ensure that the upgrade to the system has been properly installed and operating.

Question: This is very different from legacy aircraft.

This gives you a 50-year growth cycle and as you build up operational experience, which can shape as well the software changes, desired by customers.

Keeping the aircraft common allows the software upgradeable quality to give customers significant growth in capabilities over time.

But also the digital quality of the aircraft provides significant change in how maintenance can be done as well.

Could you describe this advantage?

Fernando Alonso: Onboard the aircraft are sensors which can provide real time data on the performance of the aircraft and this data can clearly provide key information to shape both an understanding of its operation but provide data for more effective maintenance.

Lionel Rouby: The sensors are there, but the system to exploit the data generated by the sensors is a work in progress.

We can shape a lifetime maintenance system.

We can process on the ground by the maintenance system which can process this data which can shape a customized maintenance system.

You can maintain the aircraft based on real need rather than having predetermined maintenance points.

When a set of conditions has been met, then the maintenance can be performed.

In effect, demand side maintenance can be provided rather than milestone maintenance.

We need to develop the algorithms which can translate the sensor driven data to shape the new maintenance regime which the aircraft can clearly deliver to our customers.

Fernando Alonso: From the standpoint of the airplane the data is there; shaping the systems to exploit the data is a work in progress but is inherent in the technology onboard the aircraft.

Question: This provides you with the opportunity to provide services to the customer to support the digital management process.

 Could you describe these possibilities?

Lionel Rouby: We are opening the door to two new kinds of services to support the A400M.

The first is software maintenance whereby we provide for software upgrades to our customers.

The second is a customized solution by national customers based on mission driven operations.

Fernando Alonso: With the data coming from the aircraft, you can drive down to specific aircraft tails.

This allows customers to shape fleet management options, such as used in the commercial sector.

You can determine the correlation between the actual state of a particular aircraft against missions to determine how best to use the aircraft with its current operational state.

You can target the particular aircraft in its current operational state against lift, tanking, or Special Forces missions for a particular case.

And with the generation of data in flight, it is possible to deliver the data of the aircraft in flight to the ground to prepare the maintenance team PRIOR to the aircraft landing what maintenance needs to be done to get that aircraft back in flight more rapidly.

You can then generate better sortie generation rates by managing the data effectively.

In short, the digital nature of the aircraft provides for inherent upgradeability of the aircraft and new approach to modernization.

And the data generated by the sensors provides the basis for big data management for more effective and realistic maintenance approaches.

A400M Flight Demo at Farnbourgh Air Show 2016 from SldInfo.com on Vimeo.

For some earlier pieces on the A400M, see the following:

https://sldinfo.com/delivery-of-first-a400m-to-spanish-air-force/

https://sldinfo.com/an-update-on-the-a400m-refueling-of-one-a400m-by-another/

https://sldinfo.com/the-a400m-tests-in-madama-sustainable-support-from-france-to-the-battlespace/

https://sldinfo.com/a400m-and-voyager-at-raf-lossiemouth/

https://sldinfo.com/french-a400ms-provide-logistics-support-to-operation-barkane/

https://sldinfo.com/challenges-of-aerospace-innovation-the-case-of-the-a400m/

https://sldinfo.com/an-update-on-the-a400m-training-facility-in-seville-a-building-block-in-allied-coalition-capabilities/

https://sldinfo.com/visiting-the-a400m-in-seville-and-in-orleans/

https://sldinfo.com/visiting-the-a400m-training-facility-in-seville-spain/

https://sldinfo.com/a400m-supports-french-middle-east-operations/

https://sldinfo.com/an-evolving-multi-national-training-infrastructure-the-roll-out-of-the-a400m/

https://sldinfo.com/the-introduction-of-the-a400m-into-the-french-air-force-a-catalyst-for-change/

https://sldinfo.com/the-a400m-in-service-with-the-french-air-force-shaping-a-solid-foundation-for-the-future/

https://sldinfo.com/a-step-forward-in-german-defense-the-coming-of-the-a400m/

http://www.defenceweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=30921:sld-the-a400m-takes-flight-redefining-the-airlift-market&catid=47:Logistics&Itemid=110

https://sldinfo.com/the-a400m-takes-flight-redefining-the-airlift-market/

 

The French Presidential Election: A Key Chance to Reboot Europe

2016-11-28 By Murielle Delaporte

Yesterday, against all odds (at least the odds defined by the general media buzz for months), François Fillon, the French initial outsider for the Republican Primaries won by close to 70% of the votes against the initial favorite Alain Juppé.

This was in the second and last round of a long campaign aiming at designing who, out of seven candidates, would be best suited to win against incumbent socialist President François Hollande.

There is still a long way to go for the LR – “Les Républicains” – candidate to become the next President of France in May 2017, as there are several “nextgen” leftwing candidates who are pushing the door to fill in part the vacuum left by the defeat of center right candidates such as Alain Juppé and the current President François Hollande.

The next six months are going to be very conflictual on the left and on the right to win the hearts of a divided French population.

Fillon following his surprise victory after the conseratives' first round of voting. Credit: Getty Images
François Fillon following what was perceived by many as his surprise victory after the conservatives’ first round of voting. Credit: Getty Images

Speaking The Truth, Overcoming Divisions

Divided politically, economically, socially, ethnically… 1789 is back but with colors, and it is going to take a real Leader to gather all these colors.

These colors are not necessarily the “rainbow” ones, but the national ones.  The same “blue-white-red” flag of French history can recall the past to shape a more viable and dynamic future for France and for Europe.

This is indeed the challenge posed to François Fillon already labeled since last week’s victory as a “divisive reactionnary”.

Sounds familiar to American voters?

One may not agree politically with a Donald Trump or a François Fillon who are rather different both in style (actually quite at the opposite of the spectrum in characters, although seemingly outspoken) and philosophy.

But there are an undeniable resetting of the rules of the political game and a common force on the move being currently unleashed: a force opposed to “political correctness.”

This is referred to in French as the “unique way for thinking” — a force opposed to the way the main stream media has been trying to influence the public opinion.

We are already seeing a different style of reporting with more emphasis on fact-checking and less opinion-preaching.

In addition, the thrust of debate is highlighting the need to shift from state-assistance versus hard-work and self-reliance;

A debate challenging an at times naïve globalization pulling everyone towards the lowest common denominator as opposed to a greater good based on well-understood self-interests;

An emphasis away from the excesses of a revisionist view of national histories which have been underscored in the recent years, in which only a minority can – maybe – recognize itself, with the risk of identity roots being pulled out at a time when they are most needed.

There is a true return to national pride and the need for traditional milestones both in the United States and in France.

Contrary to the way critics (will increasingly) portray François Fillon, he is very far from the far right, from a Marine Le Pen. He is perceived (at a minimum by close to 70% of the nearly 4 million Republican Primaries voters) closer to what a Charles de Gaulle or an Antoine Pinay[1] have been in the French psyche: no less than a savior, militarily in the first case, economically in the second case.

During this first part of the presidential election campaign, he talked the truth, restored a certain vision of the authority of the Presidential function (especially hurt by President Hollande’s recent confidences to Le Monde’s journalists[2]), but also of the role of France in the world: speaking one’s mind and not being a Russian or American pawn; being back to lead as the first Power in Europe “not for the sake of it”, but built on renewed economic strength[3]

Transatlantic Clash or Joint Strength?

A Franco-American relationship under the twin impact of Trump and Fillon governments – if Fillon wins in France next May – might look more like the “love-hate” relationship which characterized much of the 1960’s transatlantic bond, but was one of mutual respect, and above all, a fundamental respect for each other’s own expression of national interest.

Based on each political leader’s statements, trade and environment negotiations will probably be rockier than they have been in the past.

But common ground is clearly there for solving the ISIS threat as a priority and riding the Russian Trojan horse might be a rational common course of action.

There is on both sides a clear priority to eradicate the terrorist Islamist threat affecting both countries and there is room for a fruitful cooperation which has been built up ever since 9/11.

Linked to the above, there is also the same desire to free oneself from oil dependency and Middle-Eastern politics and entanglements.

The US via renewed domestic oil and related energy production; France via relaunching nuclear energy self-sufficiency.

A new uncharted foreign policy territory may therefore open up for cooperation in which both systems seek to restore themselves to what would be perceived by each national electorate to their proper place in the world and in history.

There is also a similar determination to give the police and military – and their chiefs – the means and politico-legal backing to enable them to fulfill missions more attuned to serving national interests and global stability than the past decade of nation-building and long-term and open ended entanglements.

Will Fillon reach France's political summit? Credit Photo: Getty Images
Climbing Towards France’s political summit (Credit Photo: Getty Images)

In any case, toughness and authenticity – as opposed to photo ops – could be the new motto of a Fillon government willing to reboot the system by fully “changing software.”[4]


Footnotes

[1] Antoine Pinay restored a « strong France» as minister of Finances in the 50’s at a time when the French economy was suffering and the French population was doubting about its future. (see for instance >>> http://www.lepoint.fr/histoire/personnages/pinay-antoine-1891-1994-31-08-2013-1719732_1617.php)

[2] See: Un président ne devrait pas dire ça >>> https://www.amazon.fr/pr%C3%A9sident-devrait-pas-dire-%C3%A7a/dp/2234075483

[3] François Fillon, in last Republican Primary Debate, November 24th, 2016

[4] « changer de logiciel », cité dans : François Fillon, Republican Primaries’victory speech, November 27th, 2016

If you wish to comment on this article, please go to the following:

Rebooting Western Values: The Case of the French Presidential Election