Why DHS needs better mobile security than other agencies

On the same subject

• 

  June 17, 2019 | International, Other Defence

  Here’s how many nuclear warheads exist, and which countries own them

  By: Kelsey Reichmann WASHINGTON — The number of warheads has decreased over the past year, even as countries continue to modernize their nuclear forces, according to an annual assessment of global nuclear arms. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute released the SIPRI Yearbook 2019 on the current state of armaments, disarmament and international security. The report found that 13,865 warheads in existence at the start of 2019 were owned by nine nations: the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France, China, India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea. The year before hosted an arsenal of 14,465 warheads. “A key finding is that despite an overall decrease in the number of nuclear warheads in 2018, all nuclear weapon-possessing states continue to modernize their nuclear arsenals,” Jan Eliasson, SIPRI Governing Board chair ambassador and former deputy secretary-general of the United Nations, said in a news release. The U.S. and Russia were the only nations that decreased their warhead inventory, by 265 and 350 respectively, according to the report. The U.K., China, Pakistan, North Korea and possibly Israel all increased their number of warheads, SIPRI found. India and France saw no changes to the size of their arsenals. One big cause of the decrease in arsenal size, according to SIPRI, is the implementation of the New START Treaty between the U.S. and Russia, meant to reduce and set limits on ballistic missiles. The two nations produce more than 90 percent of the world's nuclear arms. The U.S. and Russia announced in 2018 that they had met the limits of the New START Treaty. But if an extension is not implemented, the treaty will expire in 2021. What's the United States up to? The U.S. is in the process of modernizing its nuclear arsenal per the Trump administration 2018 Nuclear Posture Review, which put forth measures to continue a modernization program started by the Obama administration. However, the NPR moves away from reducing nuclear weapons and instead sets a plan to develop new versions while and modifying others. The U.S. hopes to achieve its goals by expanding nuclear options to include low-yield nuclear weapons, which will expand capabilities associated with submarine-launched ballistic missiles. This would add to a U.S. arsenal that already contains 1,000 gravity bombs and air-launched cruise missiles with low-yield warhead options, according to the SIPRI report. The NPR claims these new capabilities are necessary without evidence that the existing arsenal is insufficient. The SIPRI report notes that America's focus on its nonstrategic nuclear arsenal could push other nations in that same direction. Where does Russia stand? “Russia's decisions about the size and composition of its non-strategic nuclear arsenal appear to be driven by the USA's superiority in conventional forces and not by the US non-strategic nuclear arsenal or by weapons yield," according to the SIPRI report. "Instead, pursuit of a new [submarine-launched cruise missile] to ‘provide a needed non-strategic regional presence' in Europe and Asia could — especially when combined with the parallel expansion of US long-range conventional strike capabilities — strengthen Russia's reliance on non-strategic nuclear weapons and potentially could even trigger Chinese interest in developing such a capability,” the report adds. SIPRI data shows Russia has about 4,330 nuclear warheads; approximately 1,830 of them are categorized as nonstrategic. In 2018, Russia continued long-range operations over the Arctic, Atlantic and Pacific oceans. And in December, it also sent to Venezuela two Tu-160 planes, which are part of its long-range aviation command fleet. Russia also fired air-launched cruise missiles from a Tu-160 bomber over northern Russia in November, which caught attention because the number of cruise missiles launched. Meanwhile, in China, India and Pakistan ... China has an estimated 290 nuclear warheads. Though China is working to expand its nuclear forces, the report notes, it has said it's committed to a no-first-use policy. However, the report added that China has taken steps to improve its retaliation response. Rivals India and Pakistan each provide little information about the size of their nuclear arsenals. However, they have made separate statements about missile tests. India has an estimated 130-140 warheads, and Pakistan has an estimated 150-160 warheads. Both nations are estimated to have increased their arsenal by 10 to 20 warheads in the last year. North Korea has provided little transparency about it nuclear weapons capabilities, besides announcing missile tests afterward. It's estimated the country has 20-30 warheads, which would be an increase of 10-20 warheads from a 2018 estimate. The SIPRI report cites a lack of transparency from most nations in regard to nuclear stockpiles. The U.S., the U.K. and France have disclosed some information about their respective arsenals. Information from other nations is mainly based on missile tests and the supply of military fissile materials. https://www.defensenews.com/global/2019/06/16/heres-how-many-nuclear-warheads-exist-and-which-countries-own-them/

• 

  April 17, 2020 | International, Aerospace

  A key milestone of the Air Force One replacement program was conducted using virtual tools. It won’t be the last.

  By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — The Air Force One replacement program has hit a major development milestone, and it did so without the in-person meetings that have become more risky in the age of the novel coronavirus, the U.S. Air Force's top acquisition official said on Thursday. The Air Force recently completed the critical design review for the Presidential Aircraft Replacement program, which will replace the legacy VC-25A Air Force One planes with a new variant of the Boeing 747-8 known as the VC-25B. Although the classified portions of the review still must be done via face-to-face meetings in secure spaces, much of it was accomplished using virtual tools and applications, said Will Roper, assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition, technology and logistics. “I was really excited that the team was able to shift their CDR [critical design review] and go virtual,” he told reporters in an April 16 teleconference, adding that more programs will shift toward using virtual meetings to conduct key reviews and milestones even after the COVID-19 pandemic subsides. “I don't know if it makes any sense to do CDRs, at least at an unclassified level, outside of tools like this. And we're working really hard to provide the same capabilities at the secret level,” he said. While Roper did not detail which communication tools were used by the program office to conduct the CDR, he described it as being very similar to widely used applications like Zoom, where the briefer can share PowerPoint slides and participants can share thoughts and questions via a written chat function. “It allows a greater level of productivity than a meeting itself,” he said. “In meetings, you have someone speaking and you want to get a question in, but you've got to wait for them to stop, and then everyone else wants to ask a question. It's hugely inefficient. It's just such an antiquated way of sharing information that is ingrained in us.” The Air Force One replacement drew considerable attention in 2016 after then-President-elect Donald Trump tweeted that the program was too expensive at more than $4 billion and should be canceled. After Trump held numerous meetings with Dennis Muilenburg, who led Boeing at the time, the Air Force awarded Boeing a $3.9 billion contract to modify two 747s into VC-25B jets. However, once all costs are included — such as buying a new hangar for the aircraft and the base cost of the 747s themselves — the Air Force will pay $5.3 billion, according to Defense One. That expense includes an $84 million contract awarded to Boeing on Wednesday to modify Boeing 747 technical specifications and manuals to the VC-25B configuration. Roper doesn't project any schedule delays to the program as a result of COVID-19, which has pummeled prime contractor Boeing's commercial business and caused a temporary pause to certain defense production lines. In February, Boeing began modifying the two 747s slated to become VC-25Bs at its facility in San Antonio, Texas. During the first part of the process, Boeing will cut out large pieces of the aircraft's skin and structure and replace that with two specially designed “superpanels,” according to an Air Force release. The VC-25Bs will also receive upgrades including enhanced electrical power, specialized communication systems, a medical facility, a customized executive interior and autonomous ground operations capabilities. The new Air Force Ones are expected to be operational in 2024. https://www.defensenews.com/air/2020/04/16/a-key-milestone-of-the-air-force-one-replacement-program-was-conducted-using-virtual-tools-it-wont-be-the-last/

• 

  June 5, 2018 | International, Aerospace

  NASA’s new administrator says he’s talking to companies to take over the International Space Station

  NASA is talking to several international companies about forming a consortium that would take over operation of the International Space Station and run it as a commercial space lab, NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine said in an interview. “We're in a position now where there are people out there that can do commercial management of the International Space Station,” Bridenstine said in his first extensive interview since being sworn in as NASA administrator in April. “I've talked to many large corporations that are interested in getting involved in that through a consortium, if you will.” The White House touched off a heated discussion about the future of the orbiting laboratory earlier this year when it said it planned to end direct government funding of the station by 2025, while working on a transition plan to turn the station over to the private sector. Some members of Congress said they would vigorously oppose any plan that ends the station's life prematurely. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) said the decision to end funding for it was the result of “numskulls” at the Office of Management and Budget. And it was unclear, who, if anyone, would want to take over operations of the station, which costs NASA about $3 billion to $4 billion a year and is run by an international partnership that includes the United States, Russia, Japan, Canada and the European Space Agency. An orbiting laboratory that flies some 250 miles above the Earth's surface, it has been continuously inhabited by astronauts since 2000. In unveiling its plan to commercialize the station earlier this year, the White House offered few details of how exactly it would work. As it prepares a transition plan, the White House said it “will request market analysis and business plans from the commercial sector and solicit plans from commercial industry.” The international nature of the station could make it tricky, though perhaps there could be an international commercial partnership with some sort of a government role, said Frank Slazer, the vice president of space systems for the Aerospace Industries Association. “It will be very hard to turn ISS into a truly commercial outpost because of the international agreements that the United States is involved in,” he said. “It's inherently always going to be an international construct that requires U.S. government involvement and multinational cooperation.” Bridenstine declined to name the companies that have expressed interest in managing the station, and said he was aware that companies may find it “hard to close the business case.” But he said there was still seven years to plan for the future of the station, and with the White House's budget request “we have forced the conversation.” A former congressman from Oklahoma, Bridenstine, was confirmed by the Senate by a narrow 50-to-49 votethis spring, after the post had remained vacant for 15 months. Democrats had rallied against his nomination, saying he lacked the managerial and scientific background for the job. Many had labeled him a climate-change denier over controversial comments Bridenstine, a conservative Republican, had made in the past. But during a Senate hearing last month, he said his views had evolved, and that he believes human activity is the leading cause of climate change. That earned him plaudits from Democrats, such as Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) who had opposed his nomination. “I have come to the conclusion that this is a true evolution,” Schatz said. “That you respect people with whom you work, you respect the science, you want their respect.” In the interview, Bridenstine said there was no single event that cause him to change his thinking. As chairman of the Environment subcommittee, he said he “listened to a lot of testimony. I heard a lot of experts, and I read a lot. I came to the conclusion myself that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas that we've put a lot of it into the atmosphere and therefore we have contributed to the global warming that we've seen. And we've done it in really significant ways.” In the wide-ranging interview, Bridenstine also listed a return to the moon and the restoration of human spaceflight from United States soil as two of his top priorities. NASA has proposed building an outpost in the vicinity of the moon that could be inhabited by humans from time to time, with landers that could ferry supplies to the lunar surface. Known as the Lunar Orbiting Platform Gateway, the system would be built by NASA in partnership with industry and its international partners, he said. “I've met with a lot of leaders of space agencies from around the world,” he said. “There is a lot of interest in the Gateway in the lunar outpost because a lot of countries want to have access to the surface of the moon. And this can help them as well and they can help us. It helps expand the partnership that we've seen in low Earth orbit with the International Space Station.” But the first element of the system wouldn't be launched until 2021 or 2022, he said. Perhaps as early as this year, Boeing and SpaceX, the companies hired by NASA to fly its astronauts to the space station, could see their first test flights with people on board, though it's possible they could be delayed to next year. Since the space shuttle was retired in 2011, Russia has flown NASA's astronauts to the station, charging hundreds of millions of dollars over that time. Bridenstine said that it is “a big objective is to once again launch American astronauts on American rockets from American soil.” Both Boeing and SpaceX have had delays and setbacks in their programs. Government watchdogs have said they were concerned about an issue with Boeing's abort system that may cause its spacecraft to “tumble,” posing a threat to the crew's safety. Boeing has said it has fixed that problem, as well as a concern with the heat shield that the Government Accountability Office said last year could disconnect “and damage the parachute system.” John Mulholland, Boeing's commercial crew program manager, told Congress earlier this year that the company's "analyses show that we exceed our requirements for crew safety." As administrator, Bridenstine and his staff will also have to sign off on SpaceX's decision to fuel its Falcon 9 rocket after the crews are on board -- which some have said could put astronauts at risk. But during a recent NASA safety advisory panel, some members said they thought the procedure could be a “viable option” if adequate safety controls are in place. SpaceX founder and CEO Elon Musk told reporters last month that he did not think the fueling process "presents a safety issue for astronauts. But we can adjust our operational procedures to load propellant before the astronauts board. But I really think this is an overblown issue.” In the interview, Bridenstine said no decision had been made yet about the fueling procedures. “I haven't signed off on anything at this point,” he said. “We're going to make sure we test it every which way you can possibly imagine. And that's underway right now. We're not going to put anybody in any undue risk.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2018/06/05/nasas-new-administrator-says-hes-talking-to-companies-to-take-over-the-international-space-station/