DOCSLIB.ORG

Department of the Air Force General Funds

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Department of the Air Force General Funds UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE United States UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE Air Force UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCEStatement UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATESAnnual Financial AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE General UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE Funds UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE Fiscal UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE Year UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE 2000 UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE General Funds Table of Contents Message from the Secretary of the Air Force . .2 Message from the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force, Financial Management and Comptroller . .3 Overview . .5 Air Force Foundations . .5 Air Force in Action—Year 2000 . .7 The Future of the Air Force . .11 Air Force Resources and Organizations . .13 Financial and Performance Measures . .31 Financial Management Reforms and Initiatives . .51 Limitations of the Financial Statements . .62 Principal Statements . .63 Footnotes to the Principal Statements . .81 Required Supplementary Stewardship Information . .121 Required Supplementary Information . .137 Audit Opinion . .145 1 United States Air Force FY 2000 Financial Statement Message from the Secretary of the Air Force SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON February 2001 Message from the Acting Secretary of the Air Force Fiscal Year 2000 was a challenging year for the United States Air Force. We worked hard to sustain the capabilities of our Air Force despite the significant challenges associated with maintaining an aging fleet of aircraft while also recruiting and retaining our highly skilled all-volunteer force in a strong economy. We also modernized our equipment to the extent our budget allowed. We successfully transformed our Air Force into an Expeditionary Aerospace Force. That transformation allowed us to sustain our ability to meet combat requirements in a timely, responsive fashion over the long term. It also provided our people with more predictable deployment schedules. The Air Force addressed these challenges with an FY00 budget of roughly $70 billion. Consistent with the requirements of the Chief Financial Officers Act, this statement documents the expenditures devoted to our General Fund activities. It also briefly reviews selected performance measures established as part of the Government Performance and Results Acts and compares the results for FY00 to our previously set goals. We made effective use of our budget dollars by remaining a leader in financial reform. In FY00 we contin- ued our progress toward achieving auditable financial statements. Our enhanced internal controls and upgraded sys- tems continued to reduce the number of financial fraud cases. Furthermore, we maintained our commitment to train- ing our financial managers. Our guidelines for professional development ensured our financial professionals were well trained to meet constantly changing demands. As we progress through the new millennium, our mission remains: to defend the United States through con- trol and exploitation of air and space. We will continue our faithful stewardship of funds to ensure we dominate the aerospace medium. LAWRENCE J. DELANEY Acting Secretary of the Air Force 2 United States Air Force FY 2000 Financial Statement Message from the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force, Financial Management and Comptroller DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON DC 20330-1130 OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY February 2001 Message from the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force Financial Management and Comptroller I am pleased to present the Air Force General Funds financial statement for Fiscal Year 2000. This statement fulfills the requirements of the Chief Financial Officers Act and portions of the requirements of the Government Performance and Results Act. The statement documents how the Air Force spent the $70 billion of budget authority appropriated for FY 2000. In addition, this document briefly reviews our FY 2000 goals in light of actual performance. The Air Force successfully met its operational commitments in FY 2000 and achieved notable success in overcoming most of the staffing deficiencies of the previous fiscal year, meeting most of our target performance goals. We met our recruiting challenge; retention appears to be turning in the desired direction; and we are aggressively addressing readiness. We continue to implement financial management reforms in an effort to increase the resources available for application to the resolution of these remaining challenges. The Air Force did make progress in improving financial management in FY 2000, although much remains to be done. Achieving an auditable financial statement remains one of our key goals. In FY 2000, we continued to make progress on our plan to use the tri-annual review of obligations to remedy documentation shortcomings for older budget obligations, addressing one of the key remaining audit problems with our General Funds statement. We continued to tighten our controls to minimize the opportunities for financial fraud, and continued to implement guide- lines to increase the level of professional development and training for our key financial management personnel. We also made progress in improving some of our financial systems that provide data to the main accounting systems. The Air Force takes its responsibility for stewardship of the public funds seriously. We are therefore strongly committed to improvement in all aspects of financial management. JAMES R. SPEER Acting Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Financial Management and Comptroller) 3 United States Air Force FY 2000 Financial Statement Overview Air Force Foundations Mission The mission of the U.S. Air Force is to defend the United States through aerospace power. Vision 2020 America’s Air Force—Global Vigilance, Reach, and Power Core Values ! Integrity First ! Service Before Self ! Excellence in All We Do Core Competencies ! Aerospace Superiority ! Global Attack ! Rapid Global Mobility ! Precision Engagement ! Information Superiority ! Agile Combat Support 5 United States Air Force FY 2000 Financial Statement Overview Air Force in Action—Year 2000 During Fiscal Year (FY) 2000, the U.S. Air Force responded to numerous challenges and contingencies with effective actions designed to provide the most suc- cessful resolutions. Perhaps the foremost of these efforts was to begin integrating the lessons learned from our successful Kosovo air campaign into the tactical and strategic knowledge base of Air Force operations. Other operations in FY 2000 included those in Iraq, contin- gency operations, and humanitarian actions at home and around the globe. Air Force Operations to Stabilize World Situations ur modernization and readiness programs Kosovo—After decisively winning peace in Kosovo, the continue our commit- Air Force continued to support the necessary details of O maintaining that peace. By providing timely materiel ment to ensuring that when our air- support and reinforcement for American and European men are called on to go into peacekeeping forces on the ground in Kosovo, the Air harm’s way, they will have the Force increased the viability of the International Relief complete set of tools to ensure Force (IRF). Air Force units operating from German that their success is never in North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) bases trans- doubt. We owe them nothing less. ported Army units and their equipment to a staging base —F. Whitten Peters, in The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. In an Secretary of the Air Force effort similar to a bucket brigade operation, from this staging base the IRF moved on to Kosovo to provide Task Force Falcon with additional flexibility and force protection. Air Force capabilities were instrumental in 7 United States Air Force FY 2000 Financial Statement Air Force in Action—Year 2000 Force contingent of about 8,700 personnel based at Kunsan and Osan Air Bases continued to provide an air umbrella for protection from attack by the aggressively positioned North Korean military. North Korea continued to have a large well-armed force deployed close to the demilitarized zone and to spend a disproportionate share of its gross national product on its military at a time when its people were starving.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Technical Report
    NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL Monterey, California TECHNICAL REPORT “SEA ARCHER” Distributed Aviation Platform by Faculty Members Charles Calvano David Byers Robert Harney Fotis Papoulias John Ciezki Robert Ashton Student Members LT Joe Keller, USN LCDR Rabon Cooke, USN CDR(sel) James Ivey, USN LT Brad Stallings, USN LT Antonios Dalakos, Helenic Navy LT Scot Searles, USN LTjg Orhan Okan, Turkish Navy LTjg Mersin Gokce, Turkish Navy LT Ryan Kuchler, USN LT Pete Lashomb, USN Ivan Ng, Singapore December 2001 Approved for public release, distribution unlimited REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instruction, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188) Washington DC 20503. 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED December 2001 Technical Report 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE: 5. FUNDING NUMBERS “Sea Archer” Distributed Aviation Platform 6. AUTHOR(S) Charles Calvano, Robert Harney, David Byers, Fotis Papoulias, John Ciezki, LT Joe Keller, LCDR Rabon Cooke, CDR (sel) James Ivey, LT Brad Stallings, LT Scot Searles, LT Ryan Kuchler, Ivan Ng, LTjg Orhan Okan, LTjg Mersin Gokce, LT Antonios Dalakos, LT Pete Lashomb.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 239/Friday, December 11, 2020
    80060 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Notices Defense System Launcher political stability, military balance, 2. The highest level of classification of Transporter Units, twenty-five (25) economic and progress in the region. defense articles, components, and radar trucks, spare and repair parts, This proposed sale will improve the services included in this potential sale support and test equipment, recipient’s capability to meet current is CONFIDENTIAL. publications and technical and future threats by providing a 3. If a technologically advanced documentation, personnel training flexible solution to augment existing adversary were to obtain knowledge of and training equipment, U.S. surface and air defenses. The recipient the hardware and software elements, the Government and contractor will be able to employ a highly reliable information could be used to develop representatives’ technical and effective system to counter or deter countermeasures or equivalent systems, assistance, engineering and logistics maritime aggressions, coastal blockades, which might reduce system support services, and other related and amphibious assaults. This effectiveness or be used in the elements of logistics support. capability will easily integrate into development of a system with similar or (iv) Military Department: Navy (TW-P- existing force infrastructure. The advanced capabilities. LHX) recipient will have no difficulty 4. A determination has been made (v) Prior Related Cases, if any: TW-P- absorbing these systems into its armed that the recipient can provide LGV, TW-P-LGN, TW-P-LGL forces. substantially the same degree of (vi) Sales Commission, Fee, etc., Paid, The proposed sale of this equipment protection for the sensitive technology Offered, or Agreed to be Paid: None and support will not alter the basic (vii) Sensitivity of Technology being released as the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Air & Space Power Journal
    July–August 2013 Volume 27, No. 4 AFRP 10-1 Senior Leader Perspective The Air Advisor ❙ 4 The Face of US Air Force Engagement Maj Gen Timothy M. Zadalis, USAF Features The Swarm, the Cloud, and the Importance of Getting There First ❙ 14 What’s at Stake in the Remote Aviation Culture Debate Maj David J. Blair, USAF Capt Nick Helms, USAF The Next Lightweight Fighter ❙ 39 Not Your Grandfather’s Combat Aircraft Col Michael W. Pietrucha, USAF Building Partnership Capacity by Using MQ-9s in the Asia-Pacific ❙ 59 Col Andrew A. Torelli, USAF Personnel Security during Joint Operations with Foreign Military Forces ❙ 79 David C. Aykens Departments 101 ❙ Views The Glass Ceiling for Remotely Piloted Aircraft ❙ 101 Lt Col Lawrence Spinetta, PhD, USAF Funding Cyberspace: The Case for an Air Force Venture Capital Initiative ❙ 119 Maj Chadwick M. Steipp, USAF Strategic Distraction: The Consequence of Neglecting Organizational Design ❙ 129 Col John F. Price Jr., USAF 140 ❙ Book Reviews Master of the Air: William Tunner and the Success of Military Airlift . 140 Robert A. Slayton Reviewer: Frank Kalesnik, PhD Selling Air Power: Military Aviation and American Popular Culture after World War II . 142 Steve Call Reviewer: Scott D. Murdock From Lexington to Baghdad and Beyond: War and Politics in the American Experience, 3rd ed . 144 Donald M. Snow and Dennis M. Drew Reviewer: Capt Chris Sanders, USAF Beer, Bacon, and Bullets: Culture in Coalition Warfare from Gallipoli to Iraq . 147 Gal Luft Reviewer: Col Chad T. Manske, USAF Global Air Power . 149 John Andreas Olsen, editor Reviewer: Lt Col P.
    [Show full text]
  • Energy Sustainability Manual
    Energy Usage, GHG Reduction, Effi ciency and Load Management Manual Brewers Association Energy Usage, GHG Reduction, Effi ciency and Load Management Manual Energy Usage, GHG Reduction, Effi ciency and Load Management Manual 1 2 BrewersAssociation.org table of contents Acknowledgements . .4 Best Practices - Kitchen Area . 39 Introduction . .5 Best Practices - Dining Room . 40 Section 1: Sector Profi le – Energy Use in Breweries . .6 Best Practices - Parking Lot/Outdoor Seating . 40 1.1 Overview of Current Energy Use/Greenhouse Gas 3.5 Concerts and Events . 41 Performance and Trends . 6 Section 4: Onsite Renewable Energy . .42 1.2 Regulatory Drivers . 7 4.1 Technology and Use Application Review . 43 1.3 Non-Regulatory Drivers – Image/brand, community ties. 7 4.2 Fuel Availability . 43 1.4 Risks and Opportunities – Energy/Greenhouse 4.3 Fuel Supply and Cost . 43 Gas Reduction . 8 4.4 Size Selection and Infrastructure Impacts. 44 Section 2: Data Management . .9 4.5 Cost and Savings Review . 44 2.1 Data Collection . 9 4.6 Renewable Energy Certifi cates . 45 2.2 Ensuring accuracy . 11 Section 5: Brewery Case Studies . .46 2.3 Benchmarking – Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) . 11 5.1 Usage and Reduction . 46 2.4 Guidelines for Setting Measureable Goals and Objectives . .13 Boulevard Brewing Company – Kansas City, Missouri . 46 Section 3: Usage & Reduction Best Practices . .15 Deschutes Brewery – Bend, Oregon . 46 3.1 Brewing . 16 Harpoon Brewery – Boston, Massachusetts . 47 Best Practices – CO2 Recovery Systems . 16 New Belgium Brewing Company – Fort Collins, Colorado . 47 3.2 Packaging. 18 Sierra Nevada Brewing Company – Chico, California . 47 Best Practices - Variable Speed Drives .
    [Show full text]
  • Usafalmanac ■ Gallery of USAF Weapons
    USAFAlmanac ■ Gallery of USAF Weapons By Susan H.H. Young The B-1B’s conventional capability is being significantly enhanced by the ongoing Conventional Mission Upgrade Program (CMUP). This gives the B-1B greater lethality and survivability through the integration of precision and standoff weapons and a robust ECM suite. CMUP will include GPS receivers, a MIL-STD-1760 weapon interface, secure radios, and improved computers to support precision weapons, initially the JDAM, followed by the Joint Standoff Weapon (JSOW) and the Joint Air to Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM). The Defensive System Upgrade Program will improve aircrew situational awareness and jamming capability. B-2 Spirit Brief: Stealthy, long-range, multirole bomber that can deliver conventional and nuclear munitions anywhere on the globe by flying through previously impenetrable defenses. Function: Long-range heavy bomber. Operator: ACC. First Flight: July 17, 1989. Delivered: Dec. 17, 1993–present. B-1B Lancer (Ted Carlson) IOC: April 1997, Whiteman AFB, Mo. Production: 21 planned. Inventory: 21. Unit Location: Whiteman AFB, Mo. Contractor: Northrop Grumman, with Boeing, LTV, and General Electric as principal subcontractors. Bombers Power Plant: four General Electric F118-GE-100 turbo fans, each 17,300 lb thrust. B-1 Lancer Accommodation: two, mission commander and pilot, Brief: A long-range multirole bomber capable of flying on zero/zero ejection seats. missions over intercontinental range without refueling, Dimensions: span 172 ft, length 69 ft, height 17 ft. then penetrating enemy defenses with a heavy load Weight: empty 150,000–160,000 lb, gross 350,000 lb. of ordnance. Ceiling: 50,000 ft. Function: Long-range conventional bomber.
    [Show full text]
  • Test and Evaluation Trends and Costs for Aircraft and Guided Weapons
    CHILD POLICY This PDF document was made available CIVIL JUSTICE from www.rand.org as a public service of EDUCATION the RAND Corporation. ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE Jump down to document6 INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS NATIONAL SECURITY The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit POPULATION AND AGING research organization providing PUBLIC SAFETY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY objective analysis and effective SUBSTANCE ABUSE solutions that address the challenges TERRORISM AND facing the public and private sectors HOMELAND SECURITY TRANSPORTATION AND around the world. INFRASTRUCTURE Support RAND Purchase this document Browse Books & Publications Make a charitable contribution For More Information Visit RAND at www.rand.org Explore RAND Project AIR FORCE View document details Limited Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in this work. This electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for non- commercial use only. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents. This product is part of the RAND Corporation monograph series. RAND monographs present major research findings that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND mono- graphs undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity. Test and Evaluation Trends and Costs for Aircraft and Guided Weapons Bernard Fox, Michael Boito, John C.Graser, Obaid Younossi Prepared for the United States Air Force Approved for public release, distribution unlimited The research reported here was sponsored by the United States Air Force under Contract F49642-01-C-0003.
    [Show full text]
  • Calendar No. 439
    1 Calendar No. 439 115TH CONGRESS " ! REPORT 2d Session SENATE 115–262 THE JOHN S. McCAIN NATIONAL DE- FENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FIS- CAL YEAR 2019 R E P O R T [TO ACCOMPANY S. 2987] ON TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019 FOR MILITARY ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, TO PRESCRIBE MILITARY PER- SONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES UNITED STATES SENATE JUNE 5, 2018.—Ordered to be printed VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:42 Jun 07, 2018 Jkt 030285 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6012 Sfmt 6012 E:\HR\OC\SR262.XXX SR262 E:\Seals\Congress.#13 JOHN S. McCAIN NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019 VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:42 Jun 07, 2018 Jkt 030285 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6019 Sfmt 6019 E:\HR\OC\SR262.XXX SR262 Calendar No. 439 115TH CONGRESS " ! REPORT 2d Session SENATE 115–262 THE JOHN S. McCAIN NATIONAL DE- FENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FIS- CAL YEAR 2019 R E P O R T [TO ACCOMPANY S. 2987] ON TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019 FOR MILITARY ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, TO PRESCRIBE MILITARY PER- SONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES UNITED STATES SENATE JUNE 5, 2018.—Ordered to be printed U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 30–285 WASHINGTON : 2018 VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:42 Jun 07, 2018 Jkt 030285 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4012 Sfmt 4012 E:\HR\OC\SR262.XXX SR262 E:\Seals\Congress.#13 COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona, Chairman JAMES M.
    [Show full text]
  • ASROC with Systems
    Naval Nuclear Weapons Chapter Eight Naval Nuclear Weapons The current program to modernize and expand U.S. deployed within the Navy (see Table 8.1) include anti- Naval forces includes a wide variety of nuclear weapons submarine warfare rockets (both surface (ASROC with systems. The build-up, according to the Department of W44) and subsurface launched (SUBROC with W55)), Defense, seeks "increased and more diversified offensive anti-air missiles (TERRIER with W45), and bombs and striking power.. increased attention to air defense . depth charges (B43, B57, and B61) used by a variety of [and] improvements in anti-submarine warfare."' The aircraft and helicopters, both carrier and land based (see plan is to build-up to a "600-ship Navy" concentrating Chapters Four and Se~en).~ on "deployable battle forces." Numerous new ships will The various nuclear weapons systems that are under be built, centered around aircraft carrier battle groups, development or are being considered for tactical naval surface groups, and attack submarines. New, more capa- nuclear warfare include: ble anti-air warfare ships, such as the TICONDEROGA (CG-47) class cruiser and BURKE (DDG-51) class  A new surface-to-air missile nuclear war- destroyers, will be deployed. New nuclear weapons and head (W81) for the STANDARD-2 missile, launching systems, as well as nuclear capable aircraft soon to enter production, carrier based forces, form a major part of the program. A long-range, land-attack nuclear armed As of March 1983, the nuclear armed ships of the U.S. Sea-Launched
    [Show full text]
  • Socketed Harpoon Heads from the Northwest Coast
    SOCKETED HARPOON HEADS FROM THE NORTHWEST COAST ALAN LEWIS HOOVER B.A., Simon Fraser University, 1968 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS 0 f Archaeology @ ALAN LEWIS HOOVER, 1974 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY November 1974 All rights reserved. This thesis may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy or other means, without permission of the author. APPROVAL Name : Alan Lewlq. Hoover Degree : Piortar of Art8 Title of Therir: Sa8cketodBarporn Headr Prom th. Northat Coart ' Roy L. Carlron Ian Whitaker r External Examiner Professor Department of Sociology and Anthropology Simon Fraror Univerrlty ABSTRACT This thesis examines a number of ethno~raphicallycol- lected socketed harpoon heads and valves from the Northwest Coast. The aim of this thesis is to discover correlations between the formal attributes of harpoons and recorded func- tion. One hundred and twenty-seven specimen8 from the British Columbia Provincial Museum in Victoria, the National Museum of Man in Ottawa and the Museum of Archaeology and Ethnoloay at Simon Fraser University in Burnaby were examined and recorded. The methodology involved first of all establishine a standard- ized terminoloey for socketed harpoon heads and their consti- tuent parts. This terminology was then applied to the des- criptions of harpoon heads found in the ethnographic literature. Once the morpholoeical-functional types had been defined for the various groups, extendine from the Coast Salish in the south to the Tlingit in the north, the typology was ap~liedto the data in order to specify the formal attributes of the pre- viously defined types, or, conversely, to modify and redefine those types presented in the literature on the basis of the substantive data.
    [Show full text]
  • Ballistic, Cruise Missile, and Missile Defense Systems: Trade and Significant Developments, July-October 1995
    Missile Developments BALLISTIC, CRUISE MISSILE, AND MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEMS: TRADE AND SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS, JULY-OCTOBER 1995 CONTENTS OVERVIEW, 158 BRAZIL CROATIA Saudi Arabia, 167 Internal Developments, 162 Internal Developments, 165 Taiwan, 167 AFGHANISTAN with with Internal Developments, 160 GERMANY Argentina, 160 Russia, 165 with Internal Developments, 167 France, Germany, Italy, United States, 165 Pakistan, 160 with Russia, and U.S., 163 CZECH REPUBLIC Australia and U.S., 160 ARGENTINA Germany, 164 with Brazil, 163, 164 with India, Israel, and PRC, 164 Belarus, NATO, Russia, and Canada, Netherlands, Spain, Brazil, 160 MTCR, 181 Ukraine, 161 and U.S., 164 Russia, 164 AUSTRALIA France, Italy, and United Ukraine, 164 ECUADOR Internal Developments, 160 Kingdom, 166 United States, 164 with with France, Italy, and U.S., 166 Azores and Slovakia, 161 Germany and U.S., 160 BRUNEI India, 167 Russia, 160 Internal Developments, 164 EGYPT Iraq, 168 Russia and Sweden, 161 with Japan and U.S., 168 CANADA Kuwait, 166 MTCR, 181 AZORES with PRC, 166 Netherlands and NATO, 168 with Germany, Netherlands, Spain, Spain, 166 Netherlands, NATO, and Ecuador and Slovakia, 161 and U.S., 164 United States, 166 U.S., 168 BAHRAIN CHILE Netherlands and U.S., 168 EUROPEAN UNION Internal Developments, 161 with Russia, 168 Internal Developments, 166 Mauritius, 164 Syria, 168 BELARUS United Kingdom, 165 FRANCE United States, 168 with with Czech Republic, NATO, COMMONWEALTH OF HUNGARY Brazil, 163 Russia, and Ukraine, 161 INDEPENDENT STATES with CIS, South Africa,
    [Show full text]
  • Jane's Online Browsing
    Log In Log Out Help Feedback My Account Jane's Services Online Research Online Channels Data Search | Data Browse | Image Search | Web Search | News/Analysis 12 Images DEFENSIVE WEAPONS, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Date Posted: 24 April 2002 Jane's Strategic Weapon Systems 37 RIM-66/-67/-156 Standard SM-1/-2 and Standard SM-3 Type Short- and medium-range, ship-based, solid-propellant, theatre defence missiles. Development The RIM-66 Standard missile was developed in the 1960s as a replacement for the RIM-24A Tartar surface-to-air missile for the US Navy. The incremental improvement of this system has continued for over 30 years, with Standard missile versions from RIM-66A to -66M. RIM-66 Standard versions are known as SM-1MR and SM-2MR (medium range); the principal differences between the earlier SM-1MR (RIM-66A/B/E) and SM-2MR (RIM-66C/D/G/H/J/K/L/M) missiles were that the SM-2 incorporated an inertial guidance system and updated the conical scan semi-active radar terminal guidance to a monopulse semi-active radar. A surface-to-surface anti-radar homing version of SM-1MR (RGM-66D) was developed in the early 1970s and the air-launched variant of this, the AGM-78 Standard, is believed to still be in service with the US Navy. SM-1 missiles are single-stage and present build standards are block 6, 6A and 6B. SM-2 single-stage missiles are known as Tartar or Aegis categories, with present build standards block 2, 3, 3A and 3B.
    [Show full text]
  • Transforming the Philippines' Defense Architecture
    The Asia Program at the FOREIGN POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE Transforming the Philippines’ Defense Architecture by Felix Chang Senior Fellow, FPRI TRANSFORMING THE PHILIPPINES’ DEFENSE ARCHITECTURE: How to Create a Credible and Sustainable Maritime Deterrent By Felix K. Chang May 2012 About FPRI - - - Founded in 1955 by Ambassador Robert Strausz Hupé, FPRI is a non partisan,- non profit organization devoted to bringing the insights of scholarship to bear on the development of policies that advance U.S. national interests. In the tradition of Strausz Hupé, FPRI embraces history and geography to illuminate foreign policy challenges facing the United States. In 1990, FPRI established the Wachman Center to foster civic and international Aboutliteracy in FPRI’s the community Asia Programand in the classroom. FPRI’s Asia Program has established itself as a leading force in the United States promoting debate and analysis of the many important developments in a region that has captured the attention of academics and policymakers alike. Each year the program generally contains five major elements: (1) research projects; (2) the InterUniversity Study Group on the U.S. and Asia; (3) an annual conference; (4) special means of dissemination; and (5) educational programs for the general public and teachers. We look forward to continued growth in the community of scholars, officials, and concerned public citizens who regularly participate and make vital contributions to our organized activities. FOREIGN POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE -3684 Tel. 215-732- -732-4401 1528 Walnut Street, Suite 610 • Philadelphia, PA 19102 3774 • Fax 215 Email [email protected] • Website: www.fpri.org Table of Contents Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]