Got a tip for Noah?
SEND IT!
(Guaranteed Confidential)
Subscribe

Subscribe via RSS

Archives by Date
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006

See all Archives
Archives by Category
'Canes
Ammo and Munitions
Armor
Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
Bizarro
Blimps
Blog Bidness
Bomb Squad
Cammo Green
Chem-Bio
Cloak and Dagger
Comms
Cops and Robbers
Data Diving
Dissent Tech
Drones
Eat My Dust
Eye on China
FCS Watch
FOS Files
Gadgets and Gear
Ground Vehicles
Guns
Homeland Security
Info War
Iraq Diary
Lasers and Ray Guns
Less-lethal
Logistics
Los Alamos and Labs
Medic!
Mercs
Missiles
Money Money Money
Net-Centric
Nukes
Planes, Copters, Blimps
Politricks
Rapid Fire
Raptor Watch
Red Team
Retro-Futuro
Roll Your Own
Sabra Tech
Ships and Subs
Space
Strategery
Terror Tech
The Deadlies
Those Nutty Norks
Training and Sims
War Update
You can run...

See all Archives
Related Links
News and Intel
Military.com News
Aviation Week
Natl Defense Mag
Strategy Page
Global Security Newswire
Soldiers for the Truth
Security News
Defense Review
Fed Comp Week

Security Sources
GlobalSecurity.Org
Fed Am Sci
CSIS
Ctr for Defense Info
Defense & Natl Interest
Instit for Sci & Intl Secy
Secrecy News
POGO
Cryptome
The Memory Hole
Natl Security Archive

Geeks and Mad Scientists
Slashdot
Wired News
Security Focus
The Register
Gizmodo
Geek Press
Robots.Net
Cosmic Log
Space Daily
New Scientist
TechCentralStation
Engadget
Space.Com
Technology Review
Gyre
Near Near Future
Fed Dev Blog

Bloggers and Buddies
Phil Carter
Global Guerillas
Jeffrey Lewis
Milblogging
OPFOR
Laura Rozen
Larisa Alexandrovna
Juan Cole
Ryan Singel
Josh Marshall
Cursor
Boing Boing
InstaPundit
Winds of Change
Tapped
TalkLeft
Brad DeLong
Mountain Runner
Gene Healy
Clive Thompson
Greg Djerejian
Jeff Quinton
Workbench
Electrolite
Jim Henley
War in Context
Kathryn Cramer
Wash Park Prophet
Blogs of War
Tom Shachtman

Official Dispatches
DARPA
AF Research Lab
Marine War Lab
Soldier Systems Ctr
Naval Research
Army Research Lab
UK Def Sci Lab
NASA News
DoJ Cybercrime

Military Network
Military Benefits
Veteran Employment
GI Bill Express
Personnel Locator
Free ASVAB
The Few
Fred's Place
Army Insider
Navy Insider
Air Force Insider
Marine Corps Insider
Coast Guard Insider



Edited by Noah Shachtman | Contact

No Trophy for NBC News

sheriff-stryker1.jpgLisa Myers (NBC News) conducted a special investigation into the Army's seemingly unwillingness to adopt an Israeli RPG defense system which has been successfully tested in field conditions. The "Trophy" system, produced by Rafael (and shown here on a Stryker vehicle), was cited by the DOD's Office of Force Transformation as a really good deal. But Army officials would rather wait five years for Raytheon to complete the development and testing of its "Quick Kill" RPG defense solution, which will be part of the Future Combat Systems program.

In part two of her investigation (which aired last night), she documented how the Army bent over backwards to ensure that Raytheon remained in the competition - not that there was a competition. The Army was supposed to have a shoot-off between the two systems, but because the Raytheon system was still on the drawing board, the Army canceled the shoot-off and issued a single-source selection for the Raytheon solution. I'm shocked... shocked to discover that a military acquisition office might be biased towards one of the largest U.S. defense firms. Why, I've never heard of such outlandish behavior. I declare, I do believe I have the vapors...

First of all, this might have been a good news report - in APRIL, when this issue was made public (see this DefenseTech post). Or maybe Lisa might have done an internet search and found Noah's Popular Mechanics article in August. Both articles discuss the Army's concern that, yes, this seems to be a good idea, but there are some outstanding issues:

"It is not just about giving [soldiers] an APS system. How do the soldiers work with it? How does it tie into the network? How do you know when to turn it on? When not to turn it on?" said Future Combat Systems program manager Brig. Gen. Charles Cartwright. "We could put something over there . . . overnight but have I got the logistics to be able to support," the technology.

Some of you may be familiar with David Drake's Hammer's Slammers - he has written a number of scifi novels about this mercenary tank regiment, which has nuclear-powered tanks and armored cars that move around like hovercrafts. The vehicles also feature an anti-projectile defense system which, when activated, shoots out like a shotgun to defeat the incoming projectile (also good for shredding light infantry in the way). Issue is, it can be set for manual rather than automatic. These concept of operation issues need to be worked out (also see Murdoc's take on this issue).

I have to tell you, Colonel Don Kotchman showed that he had clearly taken the "how to deal with the media" class that every acquisition manager has to take. Get a load of this:

Lisa Myers: Was the Raytheon system tested by the Pentagon?

Col. Donald Kotchman: The Army did not specifically test the Raytheon system.

Instead, Raytheon tested its own system this February.

Myers: How well did the Raytheon system do in its own testing?

Kotchman: I don't have that information.

Myers: Were there any Pentagon officials present for the Raytheon testing?

Kotchman: I do not know.
----------------
In May, a technical team was chosen and given the task of evaluating competing RPG defense systems. But here again, Raytheon had a leg up.

Myers: Do you know how many of the 21-person technical team worked for Raytheon?

Kotchman: To the best of my knowledge, none.

Army documents obtained by NBC News, however, reveal that nine of the 21 technical experts — as well as all the administrative personnel — were from Raytheon. The team ultimately concluded that of the seven RPG defense systems examined, Raytheon’s was “the clear winner.”

Raytheon’s “Quick Kill” solution — which the Army concedes will not be fielded before 2011 at the earliest — won out over Trophy, the Israeli system championed by the Pentagon’s Office of Force Transformation.

Myers: It appears as though Raytheon was allowed to select itself.

Kotchman: I don’t know that to be a fact, and so I really can't comment on it.

Priceless. Bravo, colonel, bravo. You survived the interview. Best that you can hope for. I have to say, this isn't news - that is to say, it's a shame that our acquisition process works this way, but it's normal procedure. Eisenhower was right about the military-industrial complex, we know he was right, but there's no way to fix the system short of finding a new set of honest congressmen and women, defense contractors who don't see dollar signs as the bottom line, and military acquisition officials who want to be promoted while in uniform and have a nice job when they retire.

-- Jason Sigger, crossposted at Armchair Generalist

UPDATE 8:58 AM: Noah here. While I appreciate Jason's shout-outs, the real credit should go to Defense News scoopmasters Greg Grant and Barbara Opall-Rome, who did most of the original reporting on this story. I just sorta played clean-up. Oh, and if all this hasn't satisfied your RPG defense fix, check out what Murdoc has to say.

UPDATE 6:48 PM: JH reminds us that there's another, potentially more interesting Israeli grenade-stopper out there. Ladies and gents: the Iron Fist.

Latest Comments

As the mother of an Army son currently undergoing an abbreviated Georgia pine forest training for deployment as a Humvee driver in Iraqi deserts, I'm worried. What protection is the Army providing now for soldiers in Humvees, and is there something better? How does one support our troops on this issue?

Posted by: Proud but worried at September 26, 2006 9:50 AM


Anyone know if Trophy really works against a tandem warhead projectile like a PG-29V? Presumably the second charge is reasonably well-protected against premature detonation (otherwise it could be destroyed by the explosion of it's own first charge). In addition, it is relatively heavy and propelled by a powerful rocket motor. The greater momentum would make it harder to knock off course.

Posted by: Tortoise at September 14, 2006 3:39 AM


The other story this site seldom tells.

Our Arabic allies refuse to allow Israel Military Industry equipment on their soils. There was a small mention of this in a MSNBC story at the start of the last Iraq war.
We can not use or transport IMI ammo, equipment or technology on their soils. Gee Imagine that we actually respect our allies wishes.
Too bad lisa didn't do her homework.
D~W

Posted by: Draq Wraith at September 10, 2006 2:08 PM


Good Morning Robot Economist,

I find compareing the numbers of military killed by RPG's and IED's a little demeaning to our troops in Iraq. Although I can understand your point and I will admit to being more then a little biased on this issue since I have been on the receiving of an RPG (the were B-40's and B-41's in my time) as well as Recoiless Rifles and Mortars more times then I can remember and walked away mostly unscared execpt for the last time, I see little value in the number 130 with out also stating how many service personal have suffered amputations and head wounds but managed to survive.

Being in the military is a risky job with few tangable rewards. I do agree with your point that PRG's are an assigned risk and the military has to prioritize it's weapons programs and yes I agree IED's seem to be a more pressing problem the RPG's.

Personaly I think more agressive tacts on the part of the Americans in Iraq could go a long ways is dealing with RPG's. One tactic, like we used in Vietnam was to do more agressive dismounted patrols in area of known RPG activity. When we started moving around on foot among the locals on a regular basis a lot of good things started to happen.

About spelling, I would be the last here to object, he** I can't spell my own name half the time either, so what, as I see it it give those who have no counter to my argurment(s) to plat too.

ALLONS,
Byron Skinner

Posted by: Byron Skinner at September 9, 2006 1:27 PM


Why didn't we buy the Trophy from an Isrealie company? Another reason is the Army follows a staute known as the Buy American Act, and they remember too well those that lost their careers when the Army bought berets from China. If Meyers and other reporters did their homework, the Office of Force Transformation and General Dynamics made the choice not to consider the spirit of this law when they went ahead and conducted the demonstration. It is about time the media stop putting a liberal spin on stories and start printing objective news. Any colonist publically talking about vunerabilities of our Army during the American Revolution would have been considered treasonists. They would be lucky not to be killed by an angry mob of Early Americans. Americans need to wake up and stop supporting these networks that put damaging stories about our military vulnerbilities on the airways. I am sure Rome experienced a similiar lack of nationalistic committment from its mass media just before they toppled as well.

Posted by: moorhouse at September 9, 2006 6:39 AM


» View All 22 Comments

» Post a Comment