Thursday, November 14, 2024
More
    Home Blog Page 335

    Israel Air Force to Install Helmet Displays in UH60, CH53 Helicopters

    Some of the Helicopters will be Equipped with Line of Sight Systems, improving situational display and coordination between crewmembers

    Elbit Systems Ltd. (NASDAQ:ESLT) announced it has been awarded a contract to supply ANVIS/HUD systems for the Israeli Air Force Blackhawk (“Yanshuf”) and CH 53 (“Yasur”) helicopters. The project is scheduled to be completed within 2009. Part of these systems will implement the new ‘Line of Sight (LOS) control’ feature recently introduced for the ANVIS/HUD, controlling payloads and other systems on board to the pilot’s line of sight.

    The new Head-up Display systems will enable the helicopter pilot to fly “head out of the cockpit”, day & night, while having all the flight data projected onto the helmet mounted visor. The display enhances the crew’s situational awareness and thus improves flight safety, particularly in challenging conditions, particularly during formation flight, takeoff and landing such as at night or under bad weather conditions limiting visibility.

    The system will implement the new ‘Line of Sight (LOS) control’ feature recently introduced for the ANVIS/HUD, controlling payloads and other systems on board to the pilot’s line of sight. For example, this feature correlates the pilot’s line of sight with on board navigation cues, for designating navigation waypoints, targets, threats or other points of interest with intelligence value along the flight route in real-time.

    Additionally, the system improves pilot coordination by allowing each crew member to track the other’s line of sight, eliminating the need for distracting intercome among the crew. To date Elbit Systems delivered over 6,000 ANVIS/HUD systems to various helicopter types.

    The company anticipates its new Line of Sight (LOS) feature will be applicable for many of these helicopters. Both attack and tactical transport helicopters have already been supplied wit the systems.

    Common Anti-Air Modular Missile family (CAMM)

    The U.K. Ministry of Defense envisage the Common Anti-Air Modular Missile (CAMM) family to provide a local area air defence protecting against a broad threat set, characterized by high speed and highly maneuverable subsonic and supersonic fast jets and cruise missiles, as well as helicopters, both operating under heavy countermeasures environment.

    MBDA has been involved in preliminary studies to define and develop a common solution for such anti-air target guided weapons, used for naval, land and aerial operations which could be implemented in a future system currently known as CAMM – the Common Anti-air Modular Missile, to be fielded within 7 – 10 years (2015-2018). The missile family considered for CAMM will comprise a common missile and modular standard subsystems utilized across several systems, contributing to cost savings in acquisition and logistical support. Systems design and integration will be based on an open architecture, further contributing to ease of incremental upgrades, eliminating potential future obsolescence in capability, functionality and technology thereby enabling an extended life.


    This approach has already been established with the PAAMS (Principal Anti-Air Missile System) naval area defense weapon system. CAMM follows this approach by re-using software and adding new low cost components. For Land and Sea applications the low footprint and low cost Soft Vertical Launch SVL is offered. In the naval application, CAMM could provide timely replacement for the Sea-Wolf missile, whose effective service life with the Royal Navy’s Type 23 frigates will expire in around 2018. The CAMM family is being designed to meet the MoD’s requirement for a Future Local Area Air Defense System (FLAADS) for the Type 23 Frigate and, subsequently, for the Future Surface Combatant. The impact of the new system could be minimized by reusing existing systems, including Command and Control systems. As the new missiles will employ more advanced targeting and missile homing, tracking and illumination radars can be eliminated.

    Another derivative of the CAMM family is considered as a successor for the current Rapier weapon system whose effective service life will expire in around 2020. In this role, CAMM will be fielded as a self-sustained stand-alone unit designed for the networked battlefield environment. A future derivative of the system could be used as an upgrade for the current ASRAAM infrared guided missile currently in service with the Royal Air Force. The CAMM solution has evaluated the future need and by utilizing the existing ASRAAM airframe, with its proven high maneuverability, aircraft integration and clearance costs can also be minimized. CAMM will be able to improve over the current ASRAAM capabilities, particularly as it is designed to engage air targets in highly cluttered environments and adverse weather conditions.

    An improved version of the AASM is currently undergoing flight qualification by the French DGA. This ‘metric’ AASM’ version is equipped with the standard INS/GPS guidance system employed by the weapon, and an infrared imager that automatically identifies the target several seconds before impact and corrects the trajectory for much more precise Impact, reducing the circular error point from ‘decametric’ to ‘metric’ dimensions. During the second test held In June 2008, the weapon demonstrated the capability to hit the target accurately without the use of GPS. The AASM flew for about 25km relying exclusively on inertial navigation. On the terminal phase the AASM executed course readjustment using the infrared imager to score a direct hit. On a previous test the weapon demonstrated the capability to attack targets from a range of 50km. The ‘decametric’ AASM is already in service in the French Air Force and has been successfully used several times by Rafale fighter planes in Afghanistan.

    The Golan Heights Will Remain Israel’s Strategic Bulwark

    Ankara’s mediation efforts yielded result on April 24 when Israel announced that it was ready to give up the stategic Golan Heights to Syria for peace, forty-one years after it occupied the area in 1967. It was Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan who passed the news to Syrian President on his visit to Damascus. Although this is not the first time, that rumors of concessions to Syria’s presidents abound in Israel, its seems that Israel’s Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has focused on a deal with Damascus to bolster his flagging political stance, which is in constant decline since the 2006 Lebanon War.

    But there is growing opposition to Olmert’s move, which is regarded largely as an opportunistic spin, rather than a serious strategic turnabout in the enigmatic relations with Syria. Even in Olmert’s own party there are cabinet ministers who already raised eyebrows. Prominent among these is former IDF chief of staff and defense minister Shaul Mofaz who openly warned, that giving Syria the Golan Heights will mean bringing Iran onto Israel’s most topographically sensitive borders. Syria being a very central and dominant component of the radical axis, any handover of the Golan Heights to them means deploying Iranian military elements, sooner or later, on the Golan Heights overlooking Israel’s vulnerable north. A combined Iranian backed threat, from Hezbollah along the Lebanon border and Iranian bolstered Syrian forces, could present a dangerous threat to engulf the entire Israeli north, with no effective defense line to its West.

    Thus, the question is not whether Israel is willing to cede it’s hold on the strategic Golan Heights, but if it can afford to do so, without risking it’s national security – by actually inviting an irreconcilable foe, like a Syria-Iran military combination, to exploit it’s first opportunity to strike a mortal blow on Israel’s north.


    Syrian president Bashar Assad cannot be trusted in any way. The young leader worships extremists – like Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad – encourages violent means, like brutal assassinations of his opponents in Lebanon and even in his own country. In contrast to his utterly shrewd and ruthless, but extremely politically wise father Hafez Assad, young Bashar asserts his power-base by irresponsible actions, which have already cost his nation most of it’s political and economic assets in Lebanon and, among the Sunni Muslim leaders who had counted Syria as one of their own. Now devoid of their support, Bashar has maneuvered his country as Iran’s subservient nation. To trust such a dubious and dangerous leader would spell sheer disaster to Israel’s security.

    But the ultimate reasons for Israel’s not ceding the Golan Heights should be based on geo-stratgic facts: Above the Sea of Galilee rises an escarpment, its height ranging from 800 to 100 meters altitude known as the Golan Heights, towering over the Jordan rift valley to its west. It covers a total area of some 900 square kilometers. These heights are characterized by a ridge of volcanic hills that erupted few thousands years ago, creating a plateau made of layers of hard basalt rocks. This terrain makes cross-country movement difficult. Dominating the area is 2814 meter high Mount Hermon, creating a mountain providing excellent observation of the entire region, up to the Damascus Basin to the east, only some 60 kilometers away. To the west, it also dominates the entire Israeli Galilee, up the Haifa Bay on the Mediterranean.

    The so-called “Purple Line” established after the ceasefire that followed the Six Day War, June 10th, 1967 provided an excellent line of defense for Israel, located mostly along the watershed and enabling long range observation posts from a line of volcanic hills, on which the IDF established strategic electronic surveillance stations. On the other hand, from pure strategic view, the same Golan Heights contribute almost nothing to the defense of Syria’s capital Damascus. A glimpse at the map indicates that due to topographical features to its west, Damascus can best be defended along the Awaj River near Sasa and the ‘Leja’, the volcanic stony deserts to the south, both impassable to military traffic. Any defense further west, including the Golan Heights can be outflanked, as the IDF did during the latter stages of the 1973 Yom Kippur War.

    Furthermore, there is also another highly critical element to be considered – Israel’s vital water supply sources. Although the core issue of the Arab-Israeli conflict has always been the Palestine question, water has been a continuous matter of dispute that is intrinsically linked to it because half of Israel’s water demands are being met outside of its internationally recognized borders. Indeed, water has become a major factor in all past disputes, especially over the Golan Heights. Thus, any serious peace negotiations with Syria must eventually focus on Israel’s price tag over its irreplaceable water resources on the Golan Heights.

    The geographical facts are stark and simple: The Golan water-shed is the source for more than 55 percent of Israel’s fresh water needs and forms part of the main aquifer-system that supplies Israel with most of their water supply. Together with the Jordan river headwaters originating near the disputed “Sheeba Farms” in south Lebanon, Wazzani springs, the Hasbani and Banyas, are all receiving their main sources from the area of Mt. Hermon. It should be stressed that most of the tributary streams flowing into the Jordan and Lake Tiberias originate on the Golan slopes. As past history conflicts over these water disputes demonstrated, only an Israeli presence in the basins of these streams can assure their continued flow to Lake Tiberias. In contrast to Israel’s irreplaceable water lifeline from the Golan Heights basin to the river Jordan below, Syria obtains approximately 85 percent of the renewable water supplies from two of the Middle-East’s largest rivers – the Tigris and Euphrates flowing through its east and center regions, while and the river Orontes irrigates large parts of northern Syria. Indeed, Syria has an ongoing dispute with Turkey over it’s northern water resources – which in the past nearly came on the brink of war.

    Another major element in any future peace negotiations between Syria and Israel will be the dispute over the so-called “Line of 4 June 1967”, depicting the uncharted border that existed before the Six Day War. This issue has become part of the Arab-Israeli peace process lexicon, for years. It encapsulates the extent of the withdrawal demanded of Israel by Syria in the context of any peace treaty. Conceptually, the line of 4 June 1967 was the confrontation line, on the day before the outbreak of the 5 June 1967 war. Here again shortsighted geo-political constraints became a dangerous source of mortal conflict.

    Only along one short 15-kilometer stretch did this dubious line correspond with the international boundary between Palestine and Syria instituted by Great Britain and France in 1923. Neither did it correspond to the mutually agreed UN brokered Armistice Demarcation Line agreed to by the parties in 1949, after the first Arab Israeli war. In fact, the root of the Arab-Israeli water issue can be traced back to 9 March 1916, when the Sykes-Picot Agreement was signed between the British and the French

    The Syria-Palestine boundary (later Israel) itself was a product of the post World War I Anglo-French partition of Ottoman Syria. It was intentionally demarcated so that all of Lake Tiberias, including a ridiculous “ten-meter wide” strip of beach along its northeastern shore, would stay inside Palestine. Under the terms of an armistice signed on 20 July 1949, Syrian forces were to withdraw east of the old Palestine-Syria boundary. Israeli forces were to refrain from entering the evacuated areas, which would become a demilitarized zone. However, following incessant armed clashes over these territorial ambiguities, Israel, feeling constantly threatened by the dominating Golan Heights over the Jordan Valley rift, started a creeping annexation of the disputed territory, which ended only with the occupation of the entire Golan Heights after 1967. Israeli claimed sovereignty over Demilitarized military zone (DMZ), on the basis that, “it was always part and parcel of the British Mandated Territory”. The conflict over the Golan waters culminated in 1964, when Syria decided, unilaterally, to tap two of the sources Jordan river sources, diverting the Hasbani and Banyas from their natural flow into Israel, leading their waters to a planned reservoir on the Yarmouk river, on their southern border with Jordan. Israel immediately retaliated sharply by armed force destroying the Syrian construction first by long-range precision tank fire and later, as the Syrians shifted their work further eastward, with massive air-strikes. A few years later the Six Day War broke out, capturing the Golan Heights in June 1967.

    Even this strange distinctiveness is not the only anomaly in this highly sensitive region. Due to its geo-strategic topography, Israel’s northern border poses some serious challenge to its defensive posture. What is known as the “Galilee Panhandle”, an area which pokes like a finger from the Hula valley northward up to the Lebanese border, is a curious geographical phenomenon, created as result of hasty, shortsighted decisions made by the French and British planners, following their victory over the Ottoman empire after WW1. The facts of this political fiasco are apparent to even the most impartial observer. On its west, the Panhandle leans on a mountain range, only partially under Israeli sovereignty, the rest is Lebanon. (Over this very ground was fought last summer’s Second Lebanon War, with disastrous consequences, partly due to topographical constraints.) Merely five to seven kilometers in width along its northern part, the Panhandle is dominated on its east by the towering Golan Heights and Mt. Hermon, from which, Israeli villages were constantly bombarded by Syrian artillery located on the overlooking slopes.

    Under the present circumstances prevailing in this region, should Israel deprive itself of its most important strategic asset for a mere piece of paper, signed by a single leader, would be a strategic mistake, having serious consequences to any future negative change in Middle Eastern affairs. In fact, Syria’s national interests are focused not only on the Golan Heights, which represent only an insignificant part of its entire territory. Syria’s long-term strategic aims are to exert its hegemony over Lebanon and Israel’s northern territory and even part of northern Jordan, which it considers part of their strategic aspirations over “Greater Syria” predominance.
    One of the options being proposed by the Baker-Hamilton report is to place US forces to mentor a future Syria-Israel peace deal over the Golan Heights, following Israel’s withdrawal. Part of this would be US experts taking charge of the IDF monitoring stations on Mt. Hermon and the overlooking border hills. As real-time intelligence in modern warfare is regarded imperative in early warning relinquishing these highly strategic assets, even under a friendly monitored replacement could become a crucial matter of national security. For example, During Operation Desert Storm, US intelligence on Iraqi Scud launch zones in western Iraq, vital to Israel, was denied even when Saddam’s missiles impacted on Tel Aviv. But there are other reasons for Israel’s reluctance to place US forces on the Golan. The presence of US forces in harms way to guard Israel against hostile infiltrations and subsequent preventive counter-guerrilla operations by the IDF could lead to unnecessary tension between the two allied nations.

    In conclusion, the Golan Heights represents a vital strategic asset for Israel’s security, especially in view of the current political developments in the region. The danger of the so-called Shi’ite Crescent engulfing Israel from its north and north-eastern border, with a Hezbollah dominated and Iranian-backed Lebanese Government, places Israel, should it cede the Golan Heights to Syria, before a strategic disaster: a potential confrontation on indefensible borders, with a Syrian-Iranian-Hezbollah military alliance. Thus apart from being defensive in its nature, the Golan Heights not only safeguards Israel’s north, but deters, by the IDF long range reach into the Damascus basin, to deter any offensive options, which Bashar Assad may consider to regain the Heights by force even under an Iranian umbrella, will become a highly dangerous adventure.

    This article updates our previous analysis report covering the Golan Heights situation, published December 2006.

    Personal Positioning System

    Draper developed the Personal Positioning System (PPS) in response to the US Army requirement for Personal Navigation System, required to provide autonomous, uninterrupted position, location and attitude reference in GPS-challenged signal environment.

    This robust suite is currently in prototype phase. As it is moved into production, the size, power and packaging are expected to improve by an order of magnitude or higher, improving usability and decreasing weight.

    Using MEMS inertial devices for measurement, Draper’s PPS uses GPS, inertial, Doppler radar, barometer and magnetometer inputs, to enable the GPS receiver to maintain satellite lock for longer periods in areas where GPS signals are attenuated, screened (by tree canopy) or blocked by (in an urban canyon, for example).

    It will also sustain navigation accuracy In areas where GPS signals are absent. The system provides measurement accuracy within 3-5 meters, depending on the distance from last GPS reading. PPS is part of the Future Force Warrior system and is implemented withinthe General Dynamics’ Fusion system.

    Gabriel 5 Anti-Ship Missile System

    Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) is working on a new anti-ship missile designed as a primary armament for naval vessels. With dimensions similar to the Exocet and Harpoon, Gabriel-5 represents the latest member to IAI’s Gabriel Missile family of naval attack missiles. The new Gabriel 5 is design to offer superior performance compared to most contemporary missiles, particularly when employed in littoral waters and sophisticated soft- and hard-kill defenses.

    The new configuration is believed to have evolved from an earlier version which replaced the Gabriel II in Israel Navy service. The existence of such missile was never confirmed but the fact that Israel hasn’t updated its Harpoon (RGM-84D) missiles into Block II configurations (RGM-84L), unlike most other Harpoon users which implemented this option.

    Hints about a possible existence of such weapon surfaced in the early 2000s, as IAI participated in an international tender to equip the new Singaporean Navy frigates. Eventually Singapore selected the Harpoon missile.

    The new Gabriel 5 is design to be superior compared to most contemporary missiles, particularly when employed in littoral waters. It uses an advanced active radar seeker backed by a sophisticated weapon control to optimize operational effectiveness in a target congested battlespace. The missile significantly improves target selectivity capability, especially in littoral waters, typically congested with marine traffic, and interference generating extensive and complex false target signals. As an advanced attack missile Gabriel 5 can penetrate the target’s protection, both soft- and hard-kill defenses. It is designed with sophisticated electronic counter-countermeasures (ECCM) dealing with chaff, advanced decoys and active ECM.

    Gabriel 5 is expected to be part of a new offensive and defensive system suite under development at IAI’s Missiles and Space division. This new family of weapons will also comprise the Barak-8 wide area, long range air defense missile and multi-mode, a n integrated combat management system and IAI/Elta’s multi-function EL/M-2248 MF-STAR shipborne phased array radar system, which Elta claims to be superior to the SPY-1 AEGIS radar.

    Airborne Tactical Laser (ATL)

    The Airborne tactical Laser is a Special Operations Command (SOCOM) sponsored Advanced Concept Technology demonstration (ACTD) program, designed to demonstrate the use of high power tactical lasers from an airborne platform.

    Under the program, a chemical oxygen-iodine laser (COIL) will be installed on a modified C-130H transport aircraft, simulating a future AC-130 laser equipped gunship. The airborne tactical laser will be able to destroy, damage or disable targets at tactical ranges with little to no collateral damage, supporting missions on the battlefield and in urban operations. The laser will be able to place a 10-centimeter-wide beam with enough energy to melt and slice through a metal target from a distance of 15 kilometers. ATL is expected to produce scaleable effects, meaning the weapon operator will be able to select the degree and nature of the damage done to a target by choosing a specific aimpoint and laser shot duration. For example, targeting the fuel tank of a vehicle could result in total destruction of the vehicle, while targeting a tire might result in the vehicle stopping without injury to the driver.

    The program is led by Boeing, which is assisted by an industry team including L-3 Communications/Brashear, which made the laser turret, and HYTEC, Inc., which made various structural elements of the weapon system. Boeing began flight testing of a surrogate solid-state laser in October 2006. The aircraft used a surrogate solid-state “low-power” laser for search and track of ground targets. The system utilizes the hardware designed for the high power chemical laser, which includes the beam director and optical control bench, controlling and directing the laser beam to its target; weapon system consoles, which will display high-resolution imagery and enable the tracking of targets; and sensors.

    The high power chemical laser destined for the program was also tested for the first time on Sept 21st, the ground, generating the “first light” of the high-energy chemical laser in ground tests. In december 2007, the high power module was installed on the aircraft and by 2008 it is scheduled to fire in-flight at mission-representative ground targets to demonstrate the military utility of high energy-lasers. The test team will fire the laser through a rotating turret that extends through an existing 50-inch-diameter hole in the aircraft’s belly. Future potential ATL platforms could be the C-130 and MV-22 tilt-rotor aircraft.

    Autonomous Gun Module (AGM)

    Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW) developed the Autonomous Gun Module (AGM), a modular, air transportable unmanned turret which can be installed on various land based and naval platforms. Weighing 12.5 tons, the AGM turret is self contained with a 155mm /39 Caliber gun, automatic loading system and a supply of 30 projectiles and a corresponding amount of charge modules. The AGM fits the dimensions and weight to provide operational mobility with the future A400M transport aircraft. The first AGM system demonstrator has already been implemented on the MLRS chassis which is in service with many NATO countries. The total weight of an MLRS deployed self propelled AGM is 27 tons. AGM uses automatic gun aiming and autonomous loading system, ramming the shell and charges required for the mission. During recent test firings, the system demonstrated a rate of fire of six rounds per minute.

    In June 2008 Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW) and General Dynamics European Land Systems (GD ELS) announced a teaming agreement to develop and market a new self-propelled gun called Donar, based on the AGM. The chassis made by GDELS’ is derived from the ASCOD 2 infantry fighting vehicle. A crew of two soldiers (a driver and a commander) operates the entire system from a highly protected driver cabin, increasing survivability and allowing for extremely rapid fire and movement maneuvers. The system, named Donar weighs less than 31 metric tons, allowing it to be transported in the future European Transport Aircraft A400M. A first prototype has already undergone mobility and fire trials at the test facility of the German procurement agency BWB (Bundesamt für Wehrtechnik und Beschaffung). Donar will be unveiled this month at the Eurosatory 2008 exhibition in Paris, France.

    TacEye Miniature Eyepiece

    The TacEye miniature eyepiece developed by Vuzix Tactical Display Group can be attached to standard goggles to form a 800×600 SVGA head mounted display. The TacEye runs for five hours on a single rechargeable lithium battery, supporting operating modes from full daylight to total darkness, where special filters are used to interface with the goggles and minimize leaks that can indicate the warfighter’s position to the enemy. The 3 ounce (85 gr.)

    TacEye system is designed to support a wearable computer or laptops. The system comprises all the peripherals required to operate the PC, including the display eyepiece, an interface and control box and a wearable mouse.

    Mossad’s Secret Role delaying Rogue Nukes?

    In 1950, 5-year-old Meir Huberman came to Israel as a holocaust survivor, now nearly sixty years later, renamed Dagan and toughened by almost a half-century defending the Jewish state, that son of Russian refugees heads one of the world’s most fearsome secret services: the Mossad. Evidence is mounting that Dagan has restored the Mossad’s reputation, after a long period of mismanagement and costly failures. According to unconfirmed sources, since Dagan was made spymaster in 2002 by his old army mentor, then Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, several Arab arch- terrorists have died mysteriously in foreign operations widely attributed to Mossad.

    A retired general of compact build and few words, the pipe-smoking Dagan has stayed in the shadows, but he seems to lead his agency no doubt, with an iron grip.

    In Fact under his leadership, Meir Dagan’s Mossad has undergone a revolution in terms of organization, intelligence and operations. Over the past two years, unofficial reports indicated, the Mossad having foiled three major Islamist attacks intended against Israeli targets in Africa, and another in Thailand.

    Not everything went smooth, though. A few years ago, two Israelis were caught in Auckland trying to obtain a New Zealand passport by assuming the identity of a bedridden local man. They pleaded guilty and spent several months in jail. All-too reminiscent was Mossad’s botched 1997 attempt on the life of Hamas top man Khaled Meshaal in Amman, to which Ephraim Halevy owed his promotion having forced the resignation of then-Mossad director Major General Danny Yatom.

    The Israeli media is normally extremely browbeat, if not even coy, in describing activities of Mossad’s secrets. Quite surprising then, was an interesting article published by the daily Haaretz newspaper on the Jewish New Year eve, which sheds some light on Meir Dagan’s clandestine activities. Here are some of the highlights of this quite rare revelation.

    Olmert’s entry into power was Dagan’s big chance. Olmert did not have the military background of his predecessor, so that Dagan’s expertise could clearly come to the fore. Over the past two years Dagan has become the most important security official close to the prime minister. Olmert and his ministers are very much perturbed by developments in Iran and Meir Dagan’s presentations are highly commended by all concerned.

    His evaluations on the Second Lebanon War and the Mossad’s cumulative achievements vis-a-vis Iran, Syria and Hezbollah have strengthened his status and led Olmert to approve more and more daring missions. But Dagan’s biggest step forward came as a result of his long Lebanon experience. The Winograd Committee that investigated the 2006 war cited his evaluations, which were far more accurate than the IDF’s.

    During one of his last cabinet meeting, in which Olmert announced his resignation, he said: “I believe the processes the government of Israel has enacted under my leadership in various areas, those that can be told and those that cannot, will yet receive their proper place in the history of the State of Israel.”

    While Olmert did not go into detail, analysts mention that over the past year, since September 2007 when the nuclear facility built by Syria was bombed; Hezbollah still attributes to Israel the assassination of a senior leader, Imad Mughniyeh in Damascus in February; the foreign press reported the blowing up of a chemical weapons factory in Syria, in which dozens of Iranian and Syrian technicians were killed; an Iranian Revolutionary Guards convoy delivering weapons to Hezbollah was blown up near Tehran. The Mysterious assassination of top Syrian adviser, Brigadier General Muhammad Suleiman in early August, directly connected to the nuclear issue. These events only added to the riddle, which surrounds Mossad’s alleged clandestine activities. In fact, no one has claimed responsibility for these actions, but the Arabs, at least, credit Dagan’s organization and whether right or wrong, it raises it’s prestige.

    New year’s eve rumors in Tel Aviv mentioned news coming out of Damascus, that the nuclear reactor destroyed in Deir Al-Zour in the past year will be restored. Syria returned to the start of activity to build several new reactors. There were conflicting accounts in the Arab Media, about the identity of the senior officer who was killed in the bombing of the Al Qazzaz district in Damascus last week. Syrian sources said that among the dead was the Syrian army Brigadier General George Ibrahim al-Gharbi. Another report identified the slain officer as Brigadier General George Ibrahim Al-west, who was allegedly working in production management of the Syrian army. Finally, the dead man was believed to be Brigadier Abdul-Karim Abbas, Vice-Chairman of the Palestine Branch of Syrian intelligence. (Your choice- there is no official death certificate on any of these men!)

    Quite surprisingly last June, prime Minister Olmert announced to the cabinet that Dagan’s tenure would be extended by another, seventh year, telling the ministers “there is no doubt that the work of the Mossad has taken off” thanks to Dagan.

    Dagan’s main task is, however, to point his agency’s activities primarily to Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Gaining insider access to vital intelligence from reliable sources is a major operation, which requires top expertise and experience second to none.

    In the last year of Sharon’s term, the defense establishment presented a list of necessary equipment and organizational aspects to confront the Iranian threat. This included sophisticated deterrents and protection of sensitive facilities, with huge price tags. “Forget it,” Dagan reportedly said. “Let me deal with Iran my way. I promise to give you deterrents in time.”

    Although there is only scant reliable information available to the professional media, Dagan’s Mossad seems to have gained some success in attempting to delay Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s nuclear project.

    Over the past year a number of reports over malfunctions have emerged regarding the Iranian nuclear project. Among them: An Iranian general who defected, Ali-Reza Asgari, had been involved in leading his country’s contacts with Hezbollah; an Iranian dealer in sophisticated communications equipment was charged with spying for Israel and sentenced to death; his sons, engineers who helped build the Iranian centrifuges, were fielded as double agents for the CIA. It is still not clear who killed Ardeshire Hassanpour, 44, a leading Iranian nuclear physicist in February 2007, the local Fars news agency, reported that the man was “suffocated by fumes from a faulty gas fire in sleep.” Only last February, a mysterious explosion rocked Tabriz, in which one of Iran’s top secret nuclear research facilities are located. Equally mysterious are reports, which indicate serious accidents in various production plants around the country, which remain unexplained.

    Some of those who warn most vociferously against the Iranian threat are full of praise for Dagan. Minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer, who recommended Dagan’s appointment to Sharon, said he restored the Mossad to being “Israel’s long operational arm, with the ability to go anywhere and do anything it wanted.” CIA chief Michael Hayden had warm words for the role played by an unnamed foreign intelligence agency that he said initially identified a structure at Al-Kibar as a nuclear reactor similar to one in North Korea. He likened the cooperation to “working together on a complex equation over a long period.

    Dagan is now at the peak of his power. Premier-designate Tzipi Livni, a former junior officer in the Mossad, receives continual updates from him as foreign minister. But she has no experience of approving special operations. It will be interesting to see if she continues the line of approving Dagan’s daring operations, or will step back and sleep on things before making her decisions.

    The Iraqi Fiasco Slides into World Focus Again

    Having passed the tragic milestone of 4,000 Americans killed, world focus is once again, on the war in Iraq. Baghdad’s fortified “Green Zone” came under repeated rocket and mortar attack last month, with up to 17 people killed by rockets falling short of the government and diplomatic compound. Following soon after, factions of the Mehdi Army, led by the notorious anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, attacked checkpoints throughout the city of Kut, 150km southeast of Baghdad. It was a first outbreak in violence, by al-Sadr’s forces, following the break in a six months unilateral truce, declared by the Shi’ite leader.

    All this was the harbinger of Sadr’s next move, his real objective- Basrah. The crisis began when Iraq’s Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, a Shiite, launched a military offensive supposedly aimed at crushing gangs and armed militias in Basra. The move, quicky inflamed violence in the city and threatens to destabilise the already highly tense situation all over Iraq.

    In and around Basrah city, two powerful factions of Iraq’s Shi’ite majority, the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council and Sadr’s Mehdi Army militia, are fighting for power in the city along with a smaller Shi’ite party, Fadhila. The Sadr loyalists are widely regarded as the most influential group on the streets of Basrah, his political movement and Mehdi Army militia seem to have considerable popular support. The Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council (SIIC) also has a strong following in Basra and, like the Sadrists, has built up powerful support by running charities to help the poor. The party, engaged in a power struggle with Sadr’s followers across much of the south, but had joined Sadr in opposing the governor of Basrah, who belongs to the smaller Shi’ite Fadhila Party.


    The SIIC favours the creation of a large federal region with wide autonomy that would include the nine southern mainly Shi’ite provinces, which Muqatada al-Sadr vehemently opposes. As for PM al-Maliki’s forces, these number over some 30,000 soldiers and police to keep the peace in Basra. They are commanded by army Lieutenant-General Mohan al-Furaiji and police chief Major-General Abdul-Jalil Khalaf, both of whom were appointed in June as part of the central government’s plan to combat militia influence.

    After their withdrawal from Basrah city, last September, British forces numbering about around 4,00 troops are still based in a fortified encampment at Basra air base just outside the city, but rarely venture outside, apart from routine security patrolling. In fact, the British government hoped to draw down at least half of the troops left in Iraq and possibly pull out the entire force by the end of the year, but those prospects are looking less likely because of the renewed violence. There is little doubt that Basrah has become a special case in the Iraqi power struggle. Since the American-led invasion, in spring 2003, it had been under the protection of the British Army, which preferred a strategy of virtually laissez faire to the militias, as long as left in relative peace. Thus the continued power struggle in the city – Iraq’s main port – differed sharply from that in the other Shiite areas. Basra was essentially divided up among Shiite warlords, each of which had its own form of extortion and corruption. Fighting each other in brutal feud, criminal gangs had established a crude modus vivendi in the city, which escalated sharply as the Brits left.

    But there is more. Basrah, due to its geographical neighbourhood to Iran, makes it highly lucrative for the influence of Iran, which has for generations eyed its oil as a major strategic objective, especially the large refineries, which Iran itself is lacking. Thus, Iran’s religious paramilitary force, Al Quds, has been an equal-opportunity supplier of weapons and money to all the Shiite militias, effectively ensuring that it will support the winner, regardless of who the winner turns out to be. There are good reasons for the central government and the US military to reassert control of Basrah. Being not only the key to Iraq’s oil exports, the city and it’s environment sits across the main logistical landline ensuring vital supplies for US forces in Baghdad as well as the only land axis for an eventual withdrawal, when ordered. With Iran only a “stone throw” away to the east, over the Shat-al Arab waterway, Basrah, under hostile control could become a dangerous strategic bottleneck for the US Army.

    Still, viewing the larger picture in Iraq, the fighting in Basrah is probably an ugly prelude of what will ensue if the next U.S. president decides to pull U.S. troops out of Baghdad prematurely – a collapse of weak governmental institutions, with Iraqi factions fighting one another once foreign forces no longer separate them. Indeed, the looming power struggle has shifted focus from another brutal actor inside Iraq- al Qaeda, which may be making a comeback, to re-establish its own powerplay in the Iraq fiasco. Analysts warn that al Qaeda, which is believed to be behind some of last month’s brutal attacks, may be shifting tactics to it’s former headline grabbing warfare, which could lead to renewed inter-ethnic civil war in Iraq. “We have some indicators that they may be planning on executing a kind of a large media type event”, said Major-General John Kelly, commander of the I Marine Expeditionary Force in Western Iraq.

    Putting the squeeze on al-Qaeda in Iraq was a primary objective of the revised U.S. military “surge” strategy that Gen. David Petraeus inherited when he became the top commander in Baghdad 13 months ago. The goal – largely achieved -was to minimise the group’s ability to inflame sectarian violence, which at the time was so intense that some characterised Iraq as trapped in a civil war. The militants are weakened, battered, perhaps even desperate, by most U.S. accounts. But far from being “routed,” as Defense Secretary Robert Gates claimed , they’re still there, still deadly active and likely to remain far into the future, military and other officials told the Associated Press. It seems that Osama bin Laden’s men are proving they can survive even the most suffocating U.S. military pressure.

    Counter insurgency experts believe that al-Qaeda in Iraq’s change in tactics comes in response to the turmoil and self-doubt that arose among its members as they lost the support of Sunni tribesmen, a process vividly described in a letter by an unnamed Iraqi al-Qaeda emir, that the U.S. military said it seized during search operations, last November. The letter, which referred to the situation in Al Anbar as an “exceptional crisis,” was found in an al-Qaeda safe house in Samarra, about 65 miles north of Baghdad, along with a half-dozen CDs and DVDs of secret material from the group. The authenticity of the document could not be independently confirmed. “We found ourselves in a circle not being able to move, organize or conduct our operations,” the letter lamented: “There was a total collapse in the security structure of the organization.” But since, it seems, that Iraq’s al Qaeda leaders have found ways to redress some of their capabilities within a changed tactical faculties.

    Al-Qaeda in Iraq, which practically did not exist as a coherent group before U.S. troops invaded Saddam Hussein’s regime in March 2003, probably now numbers no more than 6,000, according to U.S. intelligence estimates. It may have been closer to 10,000-strong before the severe pummeling it took last year, when it lost its main bases of Sunni Arab support. It now controls no cities, but is reportedly, still very active in pockets through much of central and northern Iraq.

    But impressive resilience has been the hallmark of al-Qaeda in Iraq, since its leader, the notorious Jordanian born arch- terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, pledged his allegiance to Osama bin Laden, leader of the global al-Qaeda network, in October 2004. It has survived innumerable reverses in recent years, including al-Zarqawi’s death in a June 2006 U.S. airstrike. His immediate successor became Abu Ayub al-Masri, an Egyptian who, while keeping a lower public profile, for his own safety, did not rise to Zarqawi’s expertise, but nevertheless, until the US “Surge” operations in Al Anbar, kept al Qaeda’s terrorist activities intact.

    According to recent intelligence updates, the group’s other leadership figures also are still foreigners from Arab nations including Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Yemen, Syria, Morocco and Libya. Two US defense officials who discussed details of the organization on condition of anonymity, regard the rank-and-file membership of Iraq’s al Qaeda as being largely domestic.

    Only three months ago, as the US troop surge in Iraq approached its one-year anniversary, the commander of Multinational Force Iraq said he was encouraged by successes his troops made with the built momentum, but cautioned that the Army’s job was by far from over. Army Gen. David H. Petraeus told the Pentagon Channel the new strategy in Iraq — with more coalition and Iraqi troops helping quell violence in and around Baghdad and operations that promote closer cooperation with the Iraqi population — has helped stabilise once-violent areas. But Gen. Petraeus was also quick to warn that the fight has not been won yet. He said that al Qaeda continued to be public enemy No. 1 in Iraq, and although most of its forces may have been flushed out of Baghdad and Anbar province, they remain “very potent in other places around Iraq” General Petraeus said. “Let’s not forget that al Qaeda in Iraq is still intent on reigniting ethno-sectarian violence, on carrying out acts of horrific violence, of damaging the infrastructure and killing innocent Iraqis and going after us.” Now, with the recent upsurge in violence, it seems clearly that the general’s assessment has certainly proven itself not at all premature.

    American military advisers are teaching the Iraqi troops everything from physical fitness to urban warfare tactics, and mentor their officers in leadership and mission planning. But whether all this effort will shape an efffective fighting force, capable to maintain security in a divided and highly suspicious population, on its own remains highly questionable. Freeing the US Army to withdraw, without leaving total chaos behind, seems, at best, wishful thinking to anyone well versed in Middle East affairs. In fact, culminating the ridiculous, President Bush, most astonishingly, had this to say only last March : “Normalcy is returning back to Iraq!” Is it really?

    Hightech Gear for the Dismounted Warfighter

    Sniper detection was one of the urgent requirements made by users of Land Warrior systems in Iraq. This capability is now provided with the current Land Warrior system by sending sensor cueing received from vehicle mounted Boomerang systems. QinetiQ and Planning Systems Inc. (PSI) unveiled at AUSA the Ears, an acoustic gunshot localization system designed to protect installations, vehicles and individual soldiers or small units. Packed in a single sensor, the lightweight and compact Ears unit is designed to operate in difficult acoustic environment; requiring only one gunshot to accurately locate snipers in a 360 degree view, using shockwave and muzzle blast signatures, even when in use on a vehicle moving at speeds over 50 mph. In September 2007 Ears was first deployed to several fire bases in Afghanistan. More systems are to be deployed in Iraq during 2008. Some of these models (MM/VM) are already operational and have been used in combat operations since January 2008. The system was recently selected by the U.S. Army Natick Soldier Research, Development & Engineering Center (NSRDEC) for integration into the future force warrior evaluation.

    QinetiQ and PSI also introduced a hand held radio communications management system called MiniTAC, controlling three radio channels from one unit and a single pair of tactical earpiece. MiniTAC is suitable for infantry team leaders who must operate or communicate on more than one radio simultaneously. The unit has three distinct PTT switches, a common volume control three radio jacks interfacing with PRC117, PRC148, AIC-2, personal computer and MP3 player.

    As the modern infantry system is addressing the “Warfighter as a System”, this approach cannot be completed without monitoring the soldier’s vital signs indicating the ‘platform’s status and operational conditions’. Currently in pilot production for military and non military customers, QinetiQ/Foster-Miller’s Watchdog system incorporates a special garment with embedded sensors, which translate the individual’s vital signs into physiologic algorithms defining the wearer’s status – Red Light (significant health or performance perturbation), Yellow Light (modest perturbation) or Green Light (normal) to the remote display. The company is already working on improving the algorithm to provide more detailed condition indications such as heat stress and other health status information, fitness level and individual training prescriptions.

    When operating in close combat, infantry units are being supported with organic and non-organic direct support elements, such as helicopters, aircraft, UAVs. In such complex scenarios, Combat Identification (CID) is a critical factor for the warfighter’s safety. Effective CID enables joint forces to employ effects and fire at shorter safety distances, extending the support as close as possible to the close-combat firefight. At Ausa Winter, ICX Photonics unveiled a range of combat identification devices utilizing thermal beacons and markers. The CID operates both as an active signaling device and an interrogation response component for use with infrared vision and targeting systems. The new devices use Microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) technology to create infrared light with emission tuned for visibility in only the desired spectral region. When the MarkerID device is activated, worn on the infantrymen’s uniform, its pulsing infrared can be seen by a thermal viewer or image intensifier at a range of one kilometer. However, when configured for ‘query-and-response operating mode, the device can be set to identify ‘blue’ troops in a fraction of a second, prior to engagement.

    Simplicity is the main issue when it comes to warfighter systems. MTC Technologies demonstrated such simplicity with its Parascope, a simple, highly effective off-axis sight viewer which can be used as an ‘urban combat sight’. Parascope allows combatants to engage targets from behind a protective barrier with minimal exposure. The sight is designed to reduce the warfighter vulnerability in close combat situations. The 370 gram (13 oz) device fits on standard Picatinny rail, mount behind the sight. Parascope has a sideways and a rear view ports, enabling the soldier to maintain direct or ‘around the corner’ firing as required. According to sources at MTC, few dozen sights have been deployed with US Marines and government users to Iraq. 40 more are to be delivered soon.

    Parascope off-axis optical sight (mounted in this picture behind the hollographic sight) enables riflemen to aim and shoot around a corner. Photo: Defense Update.

    British Army Phase Out Pheonix for Hermes 450, Desert Hawk III

    The Phoenix unmanned aerial vehicles is officially withdrawn from active service with the British Army this month. The 32 Regiment Royal Artillery, the army’s tactical unmanned air vehicle (UAV) regiment retired the UAV in an official parade at its barracks on March 20, 2008. The 32 regiment operates two batteries, the 22 (Gibralter) Battery and 57 (Bhurtpore) Battery. These units are currently operating Desert Hawk 3 mini UAVs and larger, more capable Hermes 450, acting as interim replacements for the Watchkeeper UAV, to be fielded by 2010. The Royal Air Force also operates three larger Predator B (Reaper) in Afghanistan.

    Hermes 450 prepares for a mission in Iraq. Photo: British MOD

    A member of 22 Battery RA  prepares a DesertHawk UAV for a mission. Photo: British MOD

    Originally developed by GEC Avionics (now merged into BAE Systems) Phoenix UAVs were first bought into service in 1999, after 12 years of development and testing, as part of the NATO peacekeeping mission in Kosovo. They participated in Operation Telic (the War In Iraq) and in Afghanistan. 22 Battery was the first and last Battery to operate Phoenix in Iraq. The final operational flight was conducted by Koehler’s Troop in May 2006, at Camp Abu Naji, Al Amarah. The Battery is now training for possible deployment to both Iraq and Afghanistan in April 2009.

    22 (Gibralter) Battery RA took the lead role in taking Desert Hawk 3 UAVs and Hermes 450 UAVs into operational service in Iraq last year. The Hermes operators provided new and invaluable support to 1 Mechanised Brigade, accumulating over 3000 flying hours. The Desert Hawk operators deployed all over the British area of operations including Basrah Palace, Maysaan Province, the Iranian border, and often operated with front line infantry units using their own infantry skills to support these units on demanding operations. The detachments flew in excess of 1000 operational Desert Hawk flights across southern Iraq. 22 Battery was the first and last Battery to operate Phoenix in Iraq. The final operational flight was conducted by Koehler’s Troop in May 2006, at Camp Abu Naji, Al Amarah. The Battery is now training for possible deployment to both Iraq and Afghanistan in April 2009.

    57 (Bhurtpore) Battery RA deployed to Afghanistan in April 2007 with Desert Hawk, one Mini UAV and Hermes 450, which provided a significant capability increase. Members of the Battery provided UAV imagery directly into the Brigade Headquarters and operated across the whole British area of operations.

    Personnel of the 32 RA  training with Hermes 450 UAVs.

    The Pheonix UAV in Flight.


    Pheonix UAV System

    The Phoenix unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) is an all-weather, day or night, real-time surveillance and target acquisition system. Pheonix’s surveillance suite is data-linked to a ground station which, in turn, transmits the intelligence gathered directly to artillery command posts. The Phoenix UAV is almost entirely made from Kevlar, glass fibre, carbon reinforced plastics and Nomex honeycomb; and is powered by a 25hp two stroke flat twin engine. The UAV can be launched within an hour of reaching launch site. Up to 2 UAVs can be controlled from the same ground control station.

    The concept of the Phoenix system was to provide a battlefield surveillance and target acquisition capability, to replace the Canadair Midge 501 Drone system, which had been in service with 94 Locating Regt RA in BAOR, and 22 Bty RA in the UK, since 1972.

    The Drone system gathered data by flight over pre-planned flight paths using ‘wet film’ EO and IR sensors, resulting in data always being several hours old. Phoenix would provide live video into the GCS, with near real time target acquisition data, and the ability to dynamically re-task in flight.

    The Phoenix system was developed by BAE Systems (formerly GEC Avionics), based at Rochester in Kent. The development trials began in 1987 at Lavington Folly on SPTA. Initially the trials were supported by a team of 8 personnel, from HQ DRA and 156 Bty Battery RA, 94 Regt RA. This team supported the technical development of the system and provided the operators for the Launch/Recovery and GCS/GDT detachments.

    The original ‘A Model’ airframe was fitted with a crushable dome, the sensor was an “off the shelf” home video camera, and the system was flown using radio control. The system evolved through a series of airframes, the introduction of the GCS and numerous versions of software, until 1995 when the majority of the technical development issues had been overcome.

    In 1995 the military support to the trials increased to troop level, when the emphasis of the trials shifted to developing the tactical use of the system, although some technical issues still had yet to be resolved. The manpower for this stage of the trials was provided by 57 Bty RA, 39 Regt RA. This stage lasted until 1997, when the final acceptance tests were completed, and the system was brought into service.

    Pheonix UAV air vehicle (Photo: MoD, Crown Copyright)

    Advanced Threat Infrared Countermeasures system (ATIRCM)

    BAE Systems is also working on a laser-based DIRCM, under a US Army $27 million contract to prepare the Advanced Threat Infrared Countermeasures system (ATIRCM) for testing in 2009. The system is expected to become the Army’s future directable infrared countermeasure system, based on a Multi-Band Laser (MBL).

    This device will replace the infrared jam laser and flashlamp subsystems used in current DIRCMs, enhancing system’s effectiveness over all three threat frequency bands. The system will be compatible with BAE’s Common Missile Warning System (SMWS). The combined system will be able to evaluate the entire threat environment and select the appropriate response to counter specific missile threats using an array of countermeasures.

    European METEOR Missile Test Fired over Sweden

    Testing of the Meteor Beyond Visual Range (BVR) Air/Air Missile (BVRAAM) developed by MBDA continue in Sweden. The recent missile test flights were conducted by Gripen fighter aircraft on 6 March, as the Meteor was fired at an MQM-107B ‘Streaker’ high-subsonic subscale aerial target at the Vidsel Missile Test Range in Sweden. This test concluded a series of development firings to prove the overall performance of the missile and its various subsystems in terms of guidance, propulsion, data link and fuse. The next phase in the program will test fully capable pre-series production missiles. These tests will commence towards the end of 2008 and will continue progressively through to the end of the development program by late 2011.

    The missile was rail-launched from the Gripen flying at 0.9 Mach and at an altitude of 18,000ft (5500m). Following the boost phase, the missile successfully transitioned to its ramjet operation and accelerated to its operational speed. The seeker then acquired the target and tracked it through to intercept. During the flight the missile’s data link successfully demonstrated communication between the missile and the firing aircraft.

    Meteor will be operated on Typhoon, Rafale and Gripen aircraft, with the air forces of France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden and the UK. According to MBDA, Meteor has three to six times the kinematic performance of current air/air missiles of its type. The key to Meteor’s outstanding performance is throttleable ducted rocket (ramjet). Designed in Germany by Bayern Chemie, this new propulsion system allows the missile to maintain a very high speed all the way to the target, giving increased stand-off and disengagement ranges and better ability to chase and destroy highly agile maneuvering targets. Other key features of the missile include stealthy launch, and robust performance against countermeasures.

    According to Dave Armstrong, MBDA’s Meteor Multinational Project Director, the program partners are expected to commit taking up their production options in the upcoming pre-production industrialization phase.

    Diehl’s Sky Sphere set to Defeat UAS, OWA Drones Head-On

    0
    Diehl Defence has teamed up with Skysec to develop a drone interceptor. Diehl works with Skysec’s subsidiary, Skysec Defence, to modify the original civilian-oriented net-arresting interceptor into a hard-kill system suitable for military missions....

    Defense Update Weekly News Summary

    0
    Welcome to the latest episode of Defense-Update News Summary! In this episode, we dive into this week’s developments in defense technology, military acquisitions, and strategic partnerships worldwide. Some of this week's highlights include: Elbit Systems...

    Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicle Program Launches as Part of Rafale F5 Standard

    0
    The French Ministry of Armed Forces has officially launched the Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicle (UCAV) program as part of the Rafale F5 standard development. This event marks the beginning of a new era in...

    Air Defense & C-UAS Innovations at the AUSA 2024 Exhibition

    0
    Army Air Defense Undergoes Significant Modernization to Counter Drone Threats The U.S. Army's air defense branch has experienced its most substantial modernization and growth in over four decades, primarily driven by the need to counter...

    Elbit Systems Address US Army Artillery Modernization with Sigma 155×52 Wheeled Howitzer

    0
    Elbit Systems of America showcases the Sigma Next Generation Howitzer at AUSA 2024, where competing systems from Sweden, South Korea, France, and Germany are likely to be presented, some in models, others in full...

    Defense-Update Weekly News Summary

    0
    Welcome to the latest episode of Defense-Update News Summary! In this episode, we dive into this week’s developments in defense technology, military acquisitions, and strategic partnerships worldwide. Some of this week's highlights include: Elbit Systems...

    Israel Revamps Aerial Bomb Production

    0
    Elbit Systems has signed a 1.5-billion-shekel (approximately $400 million) contract with Israel's Ministry of Defense to establish an aerial bomb manufacturing bombs for the Israeli Air Force. In the past, the government-owned IMI operated...