DOCSLIB.ORG

Chapter Seven

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

7 Nuclear Capable Aircraft and Bombs Chapter Seven Nuclear Capable Aircraft and Bombs According to the Department of Defense, "any air- retard and a time-delay fuze.3 When used at low alti- plane that is designed to carry an ordinary bomb can, tudes, the laydown delivery method is extremely accu- with the proper wiring and certification, also carry a rate.4 The accuracy of the B61 and B83 bombs delivered nuclear bomb."l However, not every airplane or even in the laydown mode is reportedly averaging 600 ft tactical fighter is so certified. "Most dual capable air- CEP.5 The older bombs, like the B28, B43, and B57, have craft have not been optimized for the nuclear strike mis- a minimum delivery altitude of 300-600 feete6They can sion and have deficiencies that limit their effectiveness be delivered "over the shoulder and at low or medium in this role."Z angle l~ft."~ Nuclear bombs are designed for delivery by aircraft The B83 "Modern Strategic Bomb" is the major new either in a bomb bay (internal) or under the wing (exter- nuclear weapon under development for aircraft deliv- nal). Aircraft configured for nuclear weapons delivery ery. The bomb, will replace the older B28, B43, and B53 have an Aircraft Monitoring and Control (AMAC) sys- bombs. It is entering production in FY 1983 and is tem installed to monitor and control fuzing, arming, and planned for deployment starting in 1984-1985 after a safing functions of the nuclear bombs. A permissive long and difficult development period. The B83's roots action link (PAL) or Nuclear Consent Switch is installed are in the B77, a very expensive strategic bomb under in the cockpit to release the weapon for detonation. development in the 1970s. The B77 included improved Fifteen tactical aircraft are currently modified to carry safety features, but also included a capability for deliv- nuclear weapons (see Table 7.2). Four different kinds of ery at high speeds at extremely low altitude^.^ The cost bombs are used in the tactical air forces. These bombs, of the B77 grew so excessive that in FY 1979 the program B28, B43, B57, and B61 (see Chapter Three), vary in yield was cancelled, and a modified B43 model took its place.9 from approximately 5 kilotons to over 1 megaton. The Congress, however, directed that FY 1978 and 1979 newest can be delivered at low altitudes at supersonic funds not be expended on a modified B43 and instead speeds. Currently there are no nuclear missiles deployed allocated funds for development of a cheaper new stra- with tactical aircraft. tegic bomb. The B83, initiated in FY 1980, is a modern strategic bomb which contains most of the essential fea- tures of the B77, but at reduced cost.1Â Nuclear Bombs The B83 is intended to "enhance the effectiveness of All deployed nuclear bombs can be delivered with a the strategic nuclear gravity bomb stockpile."" The pri- variety of options, including ground ("laydown") and mary reason for developing the B83 is to enable tactical airburst detonations. Four delivery and fuzing modes and strategic aircraft to deliver their weapons while are most common: airburst/retarded, groundburst/ flying low level, supersonic evasion missions.12With a retarded, air/full fuzing and ground/full fuzing (see 150 foot low-level high speed delivery capability and Glossary). Table 7.1 describes the six nuclear bombs yield in the megaton range, the B83 will be capable of deployed or under development. Nuclear bombs must destroying "hardened Soviet ICBM silo and launch com- usually be dropped directly over their targets to assure plexes, command, control and communication installa- accuracy. In order to achieve optimum heights of air tions, and nuclear storage sites."13 The B83 is the first burst with all nuclear bombs to avoid detonation too megaton yield bomb specifically designed for ground- close to the ground, the delivery aircraft must fly at an burst retarded ("laydown") delivery against hard altitude that is vulnerable to enemy air defenses. The targets.14 The production schedule of the B83 is being newer bombs, the deployed B61 and the not yet increased to meet larger strategic bomber force require- deployed B83, allow the pilot to release the weapon at as ments with deployment of the B-lB.15 low as 50 feet, activating a parachute-type (drogue) 1 SASC, FY 1982 DOD, Part 7, p. 389. 9 Cancellation was also tied to cancellation of the B-1 2 JCS, FY 1982. p. 78. 10 HAC, FY 1980 DOD, Part 4, p. 667. 3 ACDA, FY 1979 ACIS, p. 92. 11 ACDA, FY 1983 ACIS. p. 65. 4 ACDA, FY 1980 ACIS, p. 169, 12 Ibid. 5 Aerospace Daily, 28 December 1978, p. 263. 13 ACDA, FY 1981 ACIS, p. 114. 6 ACDA, FY 1979 ACIS, p. 92; ACDA, FY 1980 ACIS. p. 169 14 SANDIA, "Lab News," 12 June 1981. 7 ACDA, FY 1979 ACIS, p. 92. 15 SASC, FY 1983 DOD, Part 7. p. 4172. 8 SASC, FY 1979 DOE, p. 41. 198 Nuclear Weapons Databook, Volume I 7 Nuclear Capable Aircraft and Bombs Table 7.1 Nuclear Bombs Weight (Ib] Yield (Kt] Aircraft 2027-2540 70-1 450 A-7, F-4, F-100, F-104, B-52 2060-2330 1000 A-4, A-6, A-7, B-52, F-4, F-100, F-104, F-111, FB-111 8850 9000 B-52 765 5-20 A-4, A-6, A-7, B-52, F-4, F-16, F-18, F-100, F-104, F-111, FB-111, P-3, S-3, SH-3 less than 840 10-500 A-4, A-6, A-7, B-52, F-4, F-16, F-18, F-104, F-111, FB-111 2408 1000 + A-4, A-6, A-7, B-1 B, B-52, F-4, F-16, F-111, FB-111 Table 7.2 Nuclear Capable Tactical Aircraft Type Function Nuclear Weapons A-4 Short-range attack MC 643, 657, 661 A-6 Long-range attack N 643, 657, 661 A-7 Medium-range attack ANG, N 643, 657, 661 AV-66 Medium-range fighter MC 657, 661 CF-101 Interceptor Canada GENIE F-4 Medium-range fighter AF, N 628, 643, 657, 661 F-15 Interceptor / fighter AF GENIE, bombs F-16 Medium-range fighter AF, NATO2 643, 661 F-18/A-18 Medium-range fighter / attack MC, N 657, 661 F-100 Medium-range fighter NATO3 626, 643, 657 F-104 Medium-range fighter NATO4 626, 643, 657, 661 F-106 Interceptor AF GENIE F-111 Long-range fighter AF 643, 657, 661 P-3 Long-range Maritime Patrol N 657 S-3 Long-range Maritime Patrol N 657 SH-3 Short-range ASW Helicopter N 657 SH-60F Short-range ASW Helicopter N 657 TORNADO Medium-range fighter NATO5 657, 661 1 Nuclear capable versions. 4 Belgium, Greece, Italy, Netherlands, West Germany. 2 Belgium, Netherlands. 5 Italy, West Germany. 3 Turkey. Nuclear Weapons Databook, Volume I 199 SAFEGUARDS AND Category D PAL, nonviolent ARMING command di~able;~weak link/ FEATURES: strong link, one-point safe by the present criterion" FUZING AND improved low-level, high speed DELIVERY MODE: delivery capabilitie~;~airburst, groundburst, full fuzing; new parachute design permits the B83 to be dropped at transonic and supersonic speeds (up to Mach 2), slowing down the bomb to 60 mph to withstand the shock of delivery at high speeds from altitudes as low as 150 feet and as high as 50,000 feet9 DEVELOPMENT: Laboratory: LLNL History: IOC: 1984 Jan 1979 Lab assignment (Phase 3)1Â Figure 7.1 F-111 delivering 683 bomb prototype. (through FY 1983)" 1981 B83 enters Phase 412 FUNCTION: Modern high-yield strategic 1984 initial deployment (Phase 5) bomb, with improved low level delivery capability.' Production Period: WARHEAD none known DEPLOYMENT: MODIFICATIONS: Number Planned: approximately 2500 (1983) SPECIFICATIONS: Delivery System: primarily carried by the B-lB, B-52, and FB-111 strategic Yield: probably 1000+ Kt, "high bombers; F-4, F-111, A-4, A-6, yield,"2 "megaton class"3 A-7, and F-16 will be secondary carriers.13 It will be the major Weight: 2408 lb4 gravity weapon for the B-1B.14 Dimensions: Service: Air Force, Navy Length: 12 ft Diameter unknown Allied User: none planned Materials: probably plutonium/oralloy mixed weapon; IHE (probably PBX-9502)5 200 Nuclear Weapons Databook, Volume I COMMENTS: B83 is scheduled as a replace- ment for the older high-yield bombs, the B28, B53, and B43.15 Because of the development of the B83, the production and de- velopment of the B77 was nev- er executed.16 The B77 was cancelled in 1978 and develop- ment was shifted to a variant of the B43Y1, then the B83. The B83 is still one of the more complicated and expensive bombs.17 1 HASC, FY 1982 DOE, p. 116. 8 SAC, FY 1981 EWDA, Part 2, p. 726. 2 SASC, FY 1981 DOE, p. 37. 9 ACDA, FY 1981 ACIS, p. 115; ACDA, FY 1983 ACIS, p. 65. 3 Dennis Rockstroh, "A New Hydrogen Bomb Being Built." Son Jose Mercury, 2 July 1981; 10 Continued in Phase 3 in FY 1980; SAC, FY 1981 EWDA, p. 818. Information also provided by Sandia Corporation. 11 DOE Justification, FY 1983, p. 51. 4 Sandia, "Lab News," 12 June 1981; GAO, Draft Study for B-1. 12 Sandia, "Lab News." 12 June 1981. 5 ACDA, FY 1982 ACIS, p. 115; SASC, FY 1981 DOE, p. 37. 13 HAC, FY 1981 EWDA, Part 4, p. 2669; HASC, FY 1981 DOE, p. 119; SASC, FY 1981 DOE, p.
Recommended publications
  • Report: the New Nuclear Arms Race

    Report: the New Nuclear Arms Race

    The New Nuclear Arms Race The Outlook for Avoiding Catastrophe August 2020 By Akshai Vikram Akshai Vikram is the Roger L. Hale Fellow at Ploughshares Fund, where he focuses on U.S. nuclear policy. A native of Louisville, Kentucky, Akshai previously worked as an opposition researcher for the Democratic National Committee and a campaign staffer for the Kentucky Democratic Party. He has written on U.S. nuclear policy and U.S.-Iran relations for outlets such as Inkstick Media, The National Interest, Defense One, and the Quincy Institute’s Responsible Statecraft. Akshai holds an M.A. in International Economics and American Foreign Policy from the Johns Hopkins University SAIS as well as a B.A. in International Studies and Political Science from Johns Hopkins Baltimore. On a good day, he speaks Spanish, French, and Persian proficiently. Acknowledgements This report was made possible by the strong support I received from the entire Ploughshares Fund network throughout my fellowship. Ploughshares Fund alumni Will Saetren, Geoff Wilson, and Catherine Killough were extremely kind in offering early advice on the report. From the Washington, D.C. office, Mary Kaszynski and Zack Brown offered many helpful edits and suggestions, while Joe Cirincione, Michelle Dover, and John Carl Baker provided much- needed encouragement and support throughout the process. From the San Francisco office, Will Lowry, Derek Zender, and Delfin Vigil were The New Nuclear Arms Race instrumental in finalizing this report. I would like to thank each and every one of them for their help. I would especially like to thank Tom Collina. Tom reviewed numerous drafts of this report, never The Outlook for Avoiding running out of patience or constructive advice.
  • LESSON 3 Significant Aircraft of World War II

    LESSON 3 Significant Aircraft of World War II

    LESSON 3 Significant Aircraft of World War II ORREST LEE “WOODY” VOSLER of Lyndonville, Quick Write New York, was a radio operator and gunner during F World War ll. He was the second enlisted member of the Army Air Forces to receive the Medal of Honor. Staff Sergeant Vosler was assigned to a bomb group Time and time again we read about heroic acts based in England. On 20 December 1943, fl ying on his accomplished by military fourth combat mission over Bremen, Germany, Vosler’s servicemen and women B-17 was hit by anti-aircraft fi re, severely damaging it during wartime. After reading the story about and forcing it out of formation. Staff Sergeant Vosler, name Vosler was severely wounded in his legs and thighs three things he did to help his crew survive, which by a mortar shell exploding in the radio compartment. earned him the Medal With the tail end of the aircraft destroyed and the tail of Honor. gunner wounded in critical condition, Vosler stepped up and manned the guns. Without a man on the rear guns, the aircraft would have been defenseless against German fi ghters attacking from that direction. Learn About While providing cover fi re from the tail gun, Vosler was • the development of struck in the chest and face. Metal shrapnel was lodged bombers during the war into both of his eyes, impairing his vision. Able only to • the development of see indistinct shapes and blurs, Vosler never left his post fi ghters during the war and continued to fi re.
  • The Sur-Metre

    The Sur-Metre

    The Sur-Metre "D1mn" has geared wmches operated From under the deck, the wmches alongs1de the mam cockpit having large drums for Geno4 sheet Md spinnaker ge4r Note the Geno4 sheet lead blocks on the r4il, the boom downhaulcJnd the rod riggmg Just o~fter a sto~rt of tbe Sixes. No. 72 is Stanley Barrows' Strider, No. 38 is George So~t~cbn's /ll o~ybe, 50 is Ripples, · sailed by Sally Swigart. 46 Vemotl Edler's Capriu, o~ml 77 is St. Fro~tlciS , sailed by VincetJt Jervis. Lmai was out aheatl o~Jld to windward.- Photo by Kent Hitchcock. MEN and BOATS Midwinter Regatta at Los Angeles Again Deanonstrates That it is not Enough to Have a Fast Boat; for Boat, Skippe r and Crew Must All he Good to Form n Winning Combination AS IT the periect weather. or the outside competition, the time-tested maxim that going up the beach is best. Evidently W or the lack of acrimonious protest hearings, or the he did it on the off chance of gaining by splitting with Prel11de, smooth-running race committees, or the fact that it was the first which was leading him by some six minutes. Angelita mean­ regatta of the year, or all four rea~ ons that made this Midwinter while was ardently fo ll owing the maxim and to such good seem to top all others? advantage that when the two went about and converged llngl!l­ Anyway, there had been a great deal of advance speculation. it,/J starboard tack put her ahead as Yucca passed an elephant's How would the men from San francisco Bay do with their new e)•ebrow astern.
  • La Guardia-Pyke Bomb Carriers James A

    La Guardia-Pyke Bomb Carriers James A

    Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume 34 | Issue 3 Article 8 1943 La Guardia-Pyke Bomb Carriers James A. Pyke Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Criminology Commons, and the Criminology and Criminal Justice Commons Recommended Citation James A. Pyke, La Guardia-Pyke Bomb Carriers, 34 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 198 (1943-1944) This Criminology is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology by an authorized editor of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. THE LA GUARDIA-PYKE BOMB CARRIERS* James A. Pyket Soon after the World's Fair bomb explosion of July 4, 1940, in which two members of the New York Police Department were killed and several injured, the Honorable Fiorello H. La Guardia, Mayor of the City of New York, summoned the author, as Com- manding Officer of the Bomb Squad, to the City Hall for the pur- pose of discussing the catastrophe and means of preventing a re- currence. As the result of this and several other conferences the "La Guardia-Pyke Bomb Carriers" were developed. The purpose of these carriers is to take a bomb from a congested area to a remote or suburban district and to do so in a manner which will protect the public and the police. With the construc- tion adopted should the bomb explode enroute the explosive forces are reduced to a minimum by means of a triple air-cushioning effect produced by the baffle screens of woven steel cable.
  • Air Force OA-X Light Attack Aircraft/SOCOM Armed Overwatch Program

    Air Force OA-X Light Attack Aircraft/SOCOM Armed Overwatch Program

    Updated March 30, 2021 Air Force OA-X Light Attack Aircraft/SOCOM Armed Overwatch Program On October 24, 2019, the U.S. Air Force issued a final OA-X, its ability to operate with coalition partners, and to request for proposals declaring its intent to acquire a new initially evaluate candidate aircraft. The first phase included type of aircraft. The OA-X light attack aircraft is a small, four aircraft: the Sierra Nevada/Embraer A-29; two-seat turboprop airplane designed for operation in Textron/Beechcraft AT-6B; Air Tractor/L3 OA-802 relatively permissive environments. The announcement of a turboprops, variants of which are in service with other formal program followed a series of Air Force countries; and the developmental Textron Scorpion jet. “experiments” to determine the utility of such an aircraft. First-phase operations continued through August 2017. Following conclusion of the Air Force experiments, the program passed to U.S. Special Operations Command as Figure 1. Sierra Nevada/Embraer A-29 the “Armed Overwatch” program, with a goal of acquiring 75 aircraft. Why Light Attack? During 2018, then-Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson often expressed the purpose of a new light attack aircraft as giving the Air Force an ability to free up more sophisticated and expensive assets for other tasks, citing the example of using high-end F-22 jets to destroy a drug laboratory in Afghanistan as an inefficient use of resources. Per-hour operating costs for light attack aircraft are typically about 2%-4% those of advanced fighters. She and other officials have also noted that the 2018 Source: U.S.
  • Conventional Explosions and Blast Injuries 7

    Conventional Explosions and Blast Injuries 7

    Chapter 7: CONVENTIONAL EXPLOSIONS AND BLAST INJURIES David J. Dries, MSE, MD, FCCM David Bracco, MD, EDIC, FCCM Tarek Razek, MD Norma Smalls-Mantey, MD, FACS, FCCM Dennis Amundson, DO, MS, FCCM Objectives ■ Describe the mechanisms of injury associated with conventional explosions. ■ Outline triage strategies and markers of severe injury in patients wounded in conventional explosions. ■ Explain the general principles of critical care and procedural support in mass casualty incidents caused by conventional explosions. ■ Discuss organ-specific support for victims of conventional explosions. Case Study Construction workers are using an acetylene/oxygen mixture to do some welding work in a crowded nearby shopping mall. Suddenly, an explosion occurs, shattering windows in the mall and on the road. The acetylene tank seems to be at the origin of the explosion. The first casualties arrive at the emergency department in private cars and cabs. They state that at the scene, blood and injured people are everywhere. - What types of patients do you expect? - How many patients do you expect? - When will the most severely injured patients arrive? - What is your triage strategy, and how will you triage these patients? - How do you initiate care in victims of conventional explosions? Fundamental Disaster Management I . I N T R O D U C T I O N Detonation of small-volume, high-intensity explosives is a growing threat to civilian as well as military populations. Understanding circumstances surrounding conventional explosions helps with rapid triage and recognition of factors that contribute to poor outcomes. Rapid evacuation of salvageable victims and swift identification of life-threatening injuries allows for optimal resource utilization and patient management.
  • AIR FORCE Magazine / April 1998 42

    AIR FORCE Magazine / April 1998 42

    Data on these pages are drawn from several official and unofficial studies.The two principal sources are Gulf War Air Power Survey, Eliot A. Cohen, et al, USAF, Washington, 1993; and Airpower in the Gulf, James P. Coyne, the Aerospace Edu cation Foundation, Arlington, Va., 1992. Also consulted were studies from the US Air Force, Department of Defense, and Congress. 42 AIR FORCE Magazine / April 1998 USAF photo by Fernando Serna AIR FORCE Magazine / April 1998 43 Flight Operations Summary n USAF’s in-theater fighter, bomber, and attack aircraft numbered 693 at the height of the war, or 58 percent of US in-theater air assets. They flew 38,000 wartime sorties. n USAF aircraft dropped nearly 160,000 munitions on Iraqi targets, 72 percent of the US forces total. n Air Force aircraft dropped 91 percent of all precision bombs and 96 percent of precision missiles used in the war. n Air Force B-52 bombers flew 1,624 combat missions and dropped 72,000 bombs, or 26,000 tons of ordnance. This F-15D from the 1st Tactical Fighter Wing, Langley AFB, Va., was among the first US forces to arrive in the Persian Gulf after Iraq invaded Kuwait. n Before the ground battle began, the USAF–led air campaign against Iraqi ground forces destroyed 1,688 battle tanks (39 percent of total), 929 armored personnel carriers (32 percent), and 1,452 artillery tubes (47 percent). n USAF combat support aircraft Chronology numbered 487 at the height of the war, 54 percent of the US support 1990 assets in-theater.
  • P-38J Over Europe 1170 US WWII FIGHTER 1:48 SCALE PLASTIC KIT

    P-38J Over Europe 1170 US WWII FIGHTER 1:48 SCALE PLASTIC KIT

    P-38J over Europe 1170 US WWII FIGHTER 1:48 SCALE PLASTIC KIT intro The Lockheed P-38 Lightning was developed to a United States Army Air Corps requirement. It became famous not only for its performance in the skies of WWII, but also for its unusual appearance. The Lightning, designed by the Lockheed team led by Chief Engineer Clarence 'Kelly' Johnson, was a complete departure from conventional airframe design. Powered by two liquid cooled inline V-1710 engines, it was almost twice the size of other US fighters and was armed with four .50 cal. machine guns plus a 20 mm cannon, giving the Lightning not only the firepower to deal with enemy aircraft, but also the capability to inflict heavy damage on ships. The first XP-38 prototype, 37-457, was built under tight secrecy and made its maiden flight on January 27, 1939. The USAAF wasn´t satisfied with the big new fighter, but gave permission for a transcontinental speed dash on February 11, 1939. During this event, test pilot Kelsey crashed at Mitchell Field, NY. Kelsey survived the cash but the airplane was written off. Despite this, Lockheed received a contract for thirteen preproduction YP-38s. The first production version was the P-38D (35 airplanes only armed with 37mm cannon), followed by 210 P-38Es which reverted back to the 20 mm cannon. These planes began to arrive in October 1941 just before America entered World War II. The next versions were P-38F, P-38G, P-38H and P-38J. The last of these introduced an improved shape of the engine nacelles with redesigned air intakes and cooling system.
  • Addressing Corner Detection Issues for Machine Vision Based UAV Aerial Refueling

    Addressing Corner Detection Issues for Machine Vision Based UAV Aerial Refueling

    Graduate Theses, Dissertations, and Problem Reports 2006 Addressing corner detection issues for machine vision based UAV aerial refueling Soujanya Vendra West Virginia University Follow this and additional works at: https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/etd Recommended Citation Vendra, Soujanya, "Addressing corner detection issues for machine vision based UAV aerial refueling" (2006). Graduate Theses, Dissertations, and Problem Reports. 1723. https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/etd/1723 This Thesis is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by the The Research Repository @ WVU with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Thesis in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you must obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/ or on the work itself. This Thesis has been accepted for inclusion in WVU Graduate Theses, Dissertations, and Problem Reports collection by an authorized administrator of The Research Repository @ WVU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Addressing Corner Detection Issues for Machine Vision based UAV Aerial Refueling Soujanya Vendra Thesis submitted to the College of Engineering and Mineral Resources at West Virginia University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Aerospace Engineering Dr. Marcello R. Napolitano, Ph.D., Chair Dr. Giampiero Campa, Ph.D. Dr. Arun Ross, Ph.D Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Morgantown, West Virginia 2006 Keywords: machine vision, aerial refueling, feature extraction, corner detection ABSTRACT Addressing Corner Detection Issues for Machine Vision based UAV Aerial Refueling Soujanya Vendra The need for developing autonomous aerial refueling capabilities for an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) has risen out of the growing importance of UAVs in military and non-military applications.
  • The Secret History of Australia's Nuclear Ambitions

    The Secret History of Australia's Nuclear Ambitions

    Jim Walsh SURPRISE DOWN UNDER: THE SECRET HISTORY OF AUSTRALIAS NUCLEAR AMBITIONS by Jim Walsh Jim Walsh is a visiting scholar at the Center for Global Security Research at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. He is also a Ph.D. candidate in the Political Science program at MIT, where he is completing a dissertation analyzing comparative nuclear decisionmaking in Australia, the Middle East, and Europe. ustralia is widely considered tactical nuclear weapons. In 1961, of state behavior and the kinds of Ato be a world leader in ef- Australia proposed a secret agree- policies that are most likely to retard forts to halt and reverse the ment for the transfer of British the spread of nuclear weapons? 1 spread of nuclear weapons. The nuclear weapons, and, throughout This article attempts to answer Australian government created the the 1960s, Australia took actions in- some of these questions by examin- Canberra Commission, which called tended to keep its nuclear options ing two phases in Australian nuclear for the progressive abolition of open. It was not until 1973, when history: 1) the attempted procure- nuclear weapons. It led the fight at Australia ratified the NPT, that the ment phase (1956-1963); and 2) the the U.N. General Assembly to save country finally renounced the acqui- indigenous capability phase (1964- the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty sition of nuclear weapons. 1972). The historical reconstruction (CTBT), and the year before, played Over the course of four decades, of these events is made possible, in a major role in efforts to extend the Australia has gone from a country part, by newly released materials Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of that once sought nuclear weapons to from the Australian National Archive Nuclear Weapons (NPT) indefi- one that now supports their abolition.
  • The Viability of Drones As Maritime Patrol Aircraft

    The Viability of Drones As Maritime Patrol Aircraft

    THE AURORA REPLACEMENT: THE VIABILITY OF DRONES AS MARITIME PATROL AIRCRAFT Maj R.D. Freeman JCSP 44 PCEMI 44 Exercise Solo Flight Exercice Solo Flight Disclaimer Avertissement Opinions expressed remain those of the author and Les opinons exprimées n’engagent que leurs auteurs do not represent Department of National Defence or et ne reflètent aucunement des politiques du Canadian Forces policy. This paper may not be used Ministère de la Défense nationale ou des Forces without written permission. canadiennes. Ce papier ne peut être reproduit sans autorisation écrite. © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as © Sa Majesté la Reine du Chef du Canada, représentée par represented by the Minister of National Defence, 2018. le ministre de la Défense nationale, 2018. CANADIAN FORCES COLLEGE – COLLÈGE DES FORCES CANADIENNES JCSP 44 – PCEMI 44 2017 – 2018 EXERCISE SOLO FLIGHT – EXERCICE SOLO FLIGHT THE AURORA REPLACEMENT: THE VIABILITY OF DRONES AS MARITIME PATROL AIRCRAFT Maj R.D. Freeman “This paper was written by a student “La présente étude a été rédigée par un attending the Canadian Forces College stagiaire du Collège des Forces in fulfilment of one of the requirements canadiennes pour satisfaire à l'une des of the Course of Studies. The paper is a exigences du cours. L'étude est un scholastic document, and thus contains document qui se rapporte au cours et facts and opinions, which the author contient donc des faits et des opinions alone considered appropriate and que seul l'auteur considère appropriés et correct for the subject. It does not convenables au sujet. Elle ne reflète pas necessarily reflect the policy or the nécessairement la politique ou l'opinion opinion of any agency, including the d'un organisme quelconque, y compris le Government of Canada and the gouvernement du Canada et le ministère Canadian Department of National de la Défense nationale du Canada.
  • The Cost of Replacing Today's Air Force Fleet

    The Cost of Replacing Today's Air Force Fleet

    CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE The Cost of Replacing Today’s Air Force Fleet DECEMBER 2018 Notes The years referred to in this report are federal fiscal years, which run from October 1 to September 30 and are designated by the calendar year in which they end. All costs are expressed in 2018 dollars. For the years before 2018, costs are adjusted for inflation using the gross domestic product price index from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Costs for years after 2018 are adjusted for inflation using the Congressional Budget Office’s projection of that index. On the cover: An F-15C Eagle during takeoff. U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sergeant Joe W. McFadden. www.cbo.gov/publication/54657 Contents Summary 1 Today’s Air Force Aircraft and Their Replacement Costs 1 BOX 1. MAJOR AIRCRAFT IN THE AIR FORCE’S FLEET AND THEIR PRIMARY FUNCTIONS 2 How CBO Made Its Projections 5 Projected Costs of New Fighter Aircraft 6 F-35A 7 Light Attack Aircraft 7 Penetrating Counter Air Aircraft 8 Managing Procurement Costs in Peak Years 9 Appendix: Composition of the Current Air Force Fleet and CBO’s Estimate of Replacement Costs 11 List of Tables and Figures 18 About This Document 19 The Cost of Replacing Today’s Air Force Fleet Summary different missions (seeBox 1 and the appendix). They The U.S. Air Force has about 5,600 aircraft, which range range widely in age from the 75 new aircraft that entered in age from just-delivered to 60 years old.