James Hasik
« Lasers will save us all. If they ever work. | Main | Roscosmos in the US? The concerns for and the benefits of better GLONASS guidance »
Replacing Hellfire with Brimstone: the case for a limited off-the-shelf procurement.
Congressman Mac Thornberry's interview in today's Breaking Defense covers a lot of ground on what's wrong with oversight and legislation and process in the American military procurement system. But in contrast to Mac's emphasis and Ash Carter's memorable view, I find some of the problems cultural, and not merely administrative. Part of this resides in an almost chauvinistic assumption, well beyond legislated strictures like the Buy American Act, that every new American weapons should be designed in America from scratch. I've been arguing against American reinvent-the-wheel efforts like the Army's AMPV project. Here, I'll turn to the missile business.
Over the past week in The Defense Industrialist column at the Atlantic Council, I authored a two-part series on "avoiding another joint acquisition", in that refreshing line from a senior civil servant with the USAF. The second essay pivoted to a particular instance of joint acquisition gone awry, the now joint-in-name-only Joint Air-to-Ground Missile, or JAGM. While the US Army is continuing to pursue a replacement for the AGM-114 Hellfire missiles on its helicopters, the US Navy, the USMC, and the USAF still lack a small precision-attack missile for their fast jets. The Navy, at least, is starting to entertain the idea that it needn't ask American industry for another clean-sheet weapon design, when a firm in an allied country has a ready solution.
That is, a few weeks ago, I took in a briefing from the folks at MBDA UK about their effort to replace Hellfire with Brimstone. (I just love that line.) Their press coverage has been good over the past few weeks (see especially Colin Clark, "Eye On Fewer Drone Civilian Deaths, MBDA Challenges Lockheed, Raytheon With Brimstone Missile," Breaking Defense, 23 October 2013; and Sandra I. Erwin, "European Missile Manufacturer Eyes Bigger Share of U.S. Market," National Defense, November 2013) , but the story is worth recounting here. MBDA's argument to this potentially new customer rests substantially on four points:
Greater accuracy. The latest dual-mode Brimstone combines semi-active laser and millimeter-wave radar guidance for greater accuracy, and the results have been impressive. The Royal Air Force has reported a 98 percent strike rate in 300 firings over Afghanistan and Iraq. It is almost fair to say, as MBDA's business development director Douglas Denneny says, "that this missile does not miss."
More platforms, greater employment envelope. As noted, Brimstone is strengthened for launch from fast jets, which Hellfire is not, and JAGM will not be. I find it remarkable that the Navy, the USMC's, and the USAF's primary close air support weapons today are cannons for strafing, and bombs. That means either hazarding a fast jet at low altitude, or destroying small targets with very large blasts. It also means attacking targets with helicopters and propeller-driven drones when a high-altitude jet may be more suitable, or just the only thing that can get there in time.
Fairly, I must mention the AGM-65 Maverick missile. It's accurate, lethal, and has been proven in battle from the Vietnam and Yom Kippur Wars (1973) to the Campaign Against Qaddafi (2011). It just happens to weigh four to five times what a Brimstone does. As expensive as fast jets are, finding ways to load them with more rounds goes a long way to improving their effectiveness.
More focused effects. While the Hellfire "explodes and generates a large and deadly field of fragments" (and here I am quoting the press above), Brimstone "uses a shaped charge and destroys the target with a much contained explosion that generates relatively little debris." For the big targets, there will still be bombs with big blasts, or perhaps those Mavericks. I'll get back to this point below.
Multiple targets per pass. MBDA has an impressive video in which ship-launched Brimstones destroy multiple small craft without doubling-up and without cross-links. The technical solution is elegant: the N-th missile off the rail takes the target at the N-th distance from the centroid of the target area. Brimstones on Tornados can make up to six of these sorts of engagements per pass. While the missile was designed in the late 1990s, this requirement of a Fulda Gap sort is both an impressive achievement and a handy capability for defending naval vessels from swarming small boats.
(Fairly, the other side might develop tactics in which the swarming ingressors swap positions to confuse the outbound missiles. But this would be part of the back-and-forth of any development of technologically-spurred naval tactics.)
Now, combine all these features. Greater accuracy, the shaped-charge warhead, and the greater standoff of fast jets should generally mean fewer collateral casualties. As much work as modern militaries undertake to reduce collateral casualties, that's an important feature.
There is the question of cost. MBDA's competitor Raytheon asserts that Brimstone's price in the US will be somewhere between $150,000 and $170,000 per missile. In Britain, the price is about £105,000 each, or just about $170,000, for rather lower production lots than one might expect for the US. Still, that is rather above the going rate for a Hellfire, and the actual cost of a JAGM hasn't been settled. Brimstone's greater accuracy, however, means fewer rounds expended, and thus less money spent overall. It's also important to note that Her Majesty's Government is not requesting any funding of the development and integration effort. For those who pay attention to these things, MBDA is proposing to assemble the missiles in Alabama, and to source everything aft of the seeker in the US.
But most notably, whatever the cost, it's suitable for fast jets, and there's no equivalent in the US inventory today. Brimstone is in the inventory in Britain, it's in production, and it has been repeatedly proven in battle. From where I sit, if you can find the money for the purchase, this one should be worth a look, and not another not-invented-here dismissal.
Posted at 10:27 | Permalink
Buy America has restricted our operational flexibility in many cases. I know, I know, the business of DoD is really business and not war, which is a once in a while thing, and so keeping the in-house military-industrial-congressional complex thriving is, indeed, job one.
US tacair does have some current intermediate options between cannon and a 500# JDAM or LGB.
For the Navy/Marines, a 500# JDAM or LGB with the BLU-126 warhead is an option (about 550# overall for the all-up-round[AUR]). The -126 is mostly inert material with a wee-bit of HE (27#) in the tail end near the rear fuze well. There's so little "boom" that sometimes it is hard tell if the thing went high-order. Thus, you can put 27# (plus the explosive weight of the fuze) of HE, a lower energy frag/blast pattern, and all of the usual kinetic energy near a target with JDAM or LGB accuracy.
The USAF's F-15Es, and, theoretically at least, the F-22s, have the SDB I/GBU-39 (a bit under 300# for the AUR), which has about 50# of HE in its warhead. The SDB I is a screamer and can get thru a few feet of reienforced, standard compressive strength concrete - in cases of soft targets the warhead penetration can lead to some of the explosion attenuating in the ground - no prox fuze capability to my knowledge tough Boeing is advertising a Laser SDB (I?) with an airburst capability - I don't know if this system is fielded anywhere. The utility of a bit of offset for warhead initiation is well understood for many soft targets in many operational contexts
If you want an airburst from an LGB, you'll need Raytheon's Enhanced Paveway II.
JDAM can be fitted with the DSU-33 sensor. Boeing is advertising a development project for a prox sensor capability for Laser JDAM.
To acquire Brimstone, the U.S. tacair fleets will need to integrate that triple rack and modify their targeting software but the various air HQs should conduct a serious trade study w Brimstone against the previous JCM/JAGM target set and a suitable subset of the SDB II target set.
On the Brit's ASuW test with Brimstone - the U.S. Navy should take that seriously for LCS, among others. Surface-launched Griffin and Firescout-launched APKWS are not likely to perform as well in other than a 1v1 scenario, and even then...
Finally, don't forget to add the early 1990's JAWS missile to the ancestry; JAGM is the third in the line of failed replacements for TOW & Hellfire).
Posted by: Dave Foster | 19 November 2013 at 17:00
Hi James
There is also Brimstone 2 which includes a range of improvements and is currently contracted by the UK
http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2013/10/mbda-brimstone-2-anti-armour-boss-marches/
http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2013/06/brimstone-anti-fiac-salvo-fire/
I wrote a long piece on Brimstone...
http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2013/04/uk-complex-weapons-part-1-brimstone-missile/
Have you read about the Lightweight Multirole Missile
The Royal Navy will arm the Wildcat with them and hopefully, it will find its way on to surface vessels. What makes it interesting is the beam riding guidance that is designed to work against low reflective targets like rubber boats that present problems for semi active laser guidance
http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2013/04/uk-complex-weapons-part-3-lightweight-multirole-missile/
Posted by: Thinkdefence | 22 November 2013 at 17:31
http://procurement.uonbi.ac.ke/
Posted by: Elsie | 05 July 2016 at 06:52
I have read the piece on Brimstone the previous orator posted a link to, and it is relly intersting how it has changed over the years.
As for Brimstone 2, I really didn't know it is contracted by UK, thanks for the info.
I totally agree with David that the US fleets will have to modify their targeting software if they want to acquire it. I am currently interested in military software development, I believe it is a promising field and going to try it out with my team.
By the way, they conducted missile test in June, here is the report.
Posted by: Terry | 03 August 2016 at 03:30
More at The Defense Industrialist
Tweets by @DefIndustrial
Selective vertical integration can mean organizational learning—in industry and government
On the Defense Industry, Intellectual Property, the B-21 Bomber, and More
End Draft Registration. Now.
Going to war with the department store you have
One Revealing Perspective from Wharton Aerospace
Failed Offsets
Boeing has had enough of the American arms-export control regime
T-X: BZ USAF.
The Jones Act is Still Stupid.
"Prepare to Fight in Megacities". Or not.
Dave Foster on Going to war with the department store you have
Dave Foster on Boeing has had enough of the American arms-export control regime
James Hasik on Boeing has had enough of the American arms-export control regime
Sjoerd van Donk on A Dutch aircraft carrier? Some views on the value of 'Joint Support Ships'
Nate on DISA isn't getting the message on LPTA.
maryjane on Eight years of short studies on big bombers
maryjane on Rethinking the Business of Defense: Advice to the Trump Administration on bringing discipline to the defense enterprise
bt on An Excess of Buying and Hiring American
Michael Turner(actual Submariner) on A26, Soryu, or Virginia?
James Hasik is a senior fellow at the Center for Government Contracting in the School of Business at George Mason University, and a senior fellow at the Scowcroft Center on Strategy and Security at the Atlantic Council. Since September 2001, he has been studying global security challenges and the economic enterprises that provide the tools to address them.
James Hasik: Arms and Innovation: Entrepreneurship and Alliances in the Twenty-First Century Defense Industry
Michael Russell Rip and James Hasik: The Precision Revolution: GPS and the Future of Aerial Warfare
William H. Natter III and Jason Brooks, editors: American Strategy and Purpose: Reflections on Foreign Policy and National Security in an Era of Change
Alastair Finlan, editor: The Test of Terrorism: Responding to Political Violence in the Twenty-First Century
Paul Brister, William H. Natter III, and Robert R. Tomes, editors: Hybrid Warfare and Transnational Threats
Manolis Priniotakis, editor: Countering Insurgency and Promoting Democracy
Angela Sapp, editor: The Faces of Intelligence Reform: Perspectives on Direction and Form
On Conglomeration: When should government accede to conglomerate mergers in the defense industry?
in the Journal of Law, Economics, and Policy, 2019 (forthcoming)
Beyond the Third Offset: Matching Plans for Innovation to a Theory of Victory
in Joint Force Quarterly, October 2018 (no. 91; forthcoming)
Innovation Before Scale: A Better Model for Transnational Armaments Cooperation,
in RUSI Journal, October-November 2016 (vol. 161, no. 5)
Mimetic and Normative Isomorphism in the Establishment and Maintenance of Independent Air Forces,
in Defense and Security Analysis, September 2016 (vol. 32, no. 3)
Defense Entrepreneurship: How to Build Institutions for Innovation Inside the Military,
in Joint Force Quarterly, April 2016 (no. 81)
"Outside their Expertise"—the Implications of Field Manual 3-24 for the Professional Military Education of Non-Commissioned Officers,
in Small Wars and Insurgencies, October 2014 (vol. 25, no. 5/6)
Better Buying Power or Better Off Not? Purchasing Technical Data for Weapon Systems,
in Defense Acquisition Research Journal, July 2014 (vol. 21, no. 2), pp. 694–714
Beyond the Briefing: Theoretical and Practical Problems in the Works and Legacy of John Boyd,
in Contemporary Security Policy, December 2013 (vol. 34, no. 3), pages 583-599
Learning in Counterinsurgency: What Do We Really Know?
in Defense and Security Analysis, September 2013 (vol. 29, no. 3), pp. 203–217
Dream Teams and Brilliant Eyes: The SBIRS Low Program, Northrop Grumman's Acquisition of TRW, and the Implications for the Structure of the Military Space Industry,
in Defense and Security Analysis, January 2004 (vol. 20, no. 1), pp. 55-67
Better Three Than One, Usually
"I strongly suspect that GDLS [General Dynamics Land Systems] has done a great job of tailoring a solution, developed over time through successes in other programs, for exactly what the US Army wants," as expressed in roughly 100 detailed and rigid requirements, said George Mason scholar Jim Hasik. But, he said, that doesn't mean what the Army thinks it wants is the right solution, or that GD will deliver on budget and schedule. "I would prefer that two or three contractors were proceeding to some trials of truth at Aberdeen in some months," Hasik told me. "I do not single out GDLS; I just expect lower likelihood of success in non-competitive contracting. Any given bid may have problems of which even the bidder does not know." In Sydney J. Freedberg Jr., "Bradley Replacement: Army Risks Third Failure in a Row," Breaking Defense, 7 October 2019.
Battery-Powered Stealth Mode
...electric and hybrid-electric vehicles are quieter than conventionally fueled vehicles which is a huge advantage when it comes to stealth. "If people were rolling up in Bradleys… you knew it well in advance," [Hasik] said. However, if the military can get its electric combat vehicles to sound like "an overgrown Prius… rolling across the battlefield, at least for short distances, you hugely suppress your audible signature." Another benefit is onboard power. "You can operate power intensive sensors without actually having to light off a diesel engine. You can sit quietly without emitting a great deal of heat that an infrared weapon can hone in on.". In Yasmin Tadjdeh, "Army Driving Forward with Electric Vehicle Plans," National Defense, February 2019.
Why you're better off working through local industry
"There are large parts of the world in which 'military truck' means commercial truck painted green," [Hasik] said. That is not the case for many wealthy countries where a military system would be robust and advanced. But "if your armed forces don't have a whole lot of money, one way to save a bit that doesn't seem to have an obvious shortcoming is to … trade down to a commercial truck." Once a country has traded down to a commercial truck there are many more companies that can supply those than the handful of military truck builders in the United States. U.S.-made systems are often more expensive, he noted. Because of the higher price point, interested countries would likely be wealthy and industrialized and already have their own indigenous vehicle market, he added. "Why would I buy from the Americans? I can buy from somebody locally. It's not like fighter jets where… there aren't that many people that make them [so] I better call the Americans.". In Yasmin Tadjdeh, "Opportunities Abound for U.S. Military Vehicles," National Defense, February 2019.
Yet more on the brilliance of the feasible
Hasik said the underlying automotive technologies for armored vehicles aren't advancing rapidly, [so] it was prudent for the Marine Corps not to swing for the fences when it comes to capability. "When you're faced with that, it makes a whole lot of sense to bunt—to use a baseball analogy—in your efforts to develop a new weapon system... which is what the Marines have done" with the ACV program. In Jon Harper, "Marine Corps Taking Low-Risk Approach to Amphibious Combat Vehicle," National Defense, September 2018.
On Section 232 silliness
And as Trudeau repeats whenever interviewed on American television, Canadian aluminum still ends up in U.S. fighter aircraft and its steel is used in American tanks. James Hasik, senior fellow at the Brent Scowcroft Center on International Security at the Atlantic Council, said that nobody he knows in the national security community believes that invocation of the Section 232 national security clause has any substance. "I can't imagine the circumstances in which a Canadian federal government would try to choke off aluminum supplies to the U.S.," Hasik said. Trump to See National Security Threat in Canada Firsthand, in the Washington Post, 7 June 2018.
On what to watch
James Hasik, a professor at the National Defense University, said he would be keeping a close eye on how the autonomous Sea Hunter vehicle does during ongoing testing. DARPA recently transferred the Sea Hunter, designed to travel thousands of miles over open seas, for months at a time, without a crew member on board, over to the Navy for continued testing. "The economics of that concept are so compelling," Hasik said. If the concept proves out, it could have "some profound applications for fleet structure, some profound applications for warfighting." What to expect from AI, space and other tech over the next 18 months, in Defense News, 10 May 2018.
On market entry, in the long run
Oshkosh "might wind up with a run of many decades as having been the favorite for military trucks in North America. But it doesn't mean that they are guaranteed to keep it, because it's an industry in which entry into the military market segment is not as challenging as it is in other segments". Army Moves Forward with New Medium Truck Acquisition in National Defense, April 2018
More on the brilliance of the feasible
"The Army's failure to effect greater progress [in armored vehicle programs] may have seemed tragic, but retrospectively, it was almost fated: programs like FCS and GCV were doomed before they were begun. For had the future been more readily foreseen from within the department, technological trajectories like those would have called long ago for more modest investments. The Army's leadership is just recognizing the art of the possible, and investing accordingly." Army Accelerates Armor: Stryker, Trophy, MPF Race To Field in Breaking Defense, 16 October 2017
On the brilliance of the feasible
"There's actually no reason to dislike the program today. I haven't noticed yet any meaningful cost overruns on JLTV. I think with fixed-price contracts — as they have — you're not going to get them. From what I can tell it is a great deal. It does basically exactly what it's supposed to do, and at a pretty reasonable price." JLTV Program Could Serve as Acquisition Model, in National Defense magazine, 9 October 2017
On staying out of the way
"In 2014, Russian signals intelligence drones and Russian artillery worked quickly and efficiently to target Ukrainian troops by triangulating their radio emissions. And as the Ukrainians learned, emitting in any pattern that says headquarters will attract lots of cannon and rocket fire." Army seeks fixes to vulnerable satellite communications, in Space News, 28 September 2017
On dubious vertical integration
"Building boosters and satellites are very different businesses. No one seems to think that Elon Musk is in a world of hurt because he doesn't have his own satellites, but he's got contracts to lift a lot of them." Northrop Grumman Move to Acquire Rocket Maker Reflects Military Space Race, on Fox Business, 18 September 2017
Northrop Grumman Move to Acquire Rocket Maker Reflects Military Space Race, in the Wall Street Journal, September 2017
کارشناسان: ایران از پروازهای مسافرتی استفاده نظامی می‌کند , on the Voice of America Persian Service, September 2017
The First Space War, in The Age of Aerospace, Discovery Channel, September 2017
Army Improving Stryker's Lethality, Mobility, in National Defense, June 2017
JLTV Touted As Success, But Military Not Rushing to Buy, in National Defense, April 2017
Inauguration 2017: Fifteen smart locals on how Donald Trump could change Washington, in Washingtonian magazine, January 2017
Trump Steps Up Criticism of Corporate America, in the Wall Street Journal, 12 December 2016
F-35 Ready for Combat?, on Defense News TV (WJLA Washington DC), 21 August 2016
Lockheed's $1 Billion F-35 Payback, on Defense News TV (WJLA Washington DC), 21 August 2016
Stealth Bikes May Fill Troops' Need for Lighter, Faster Transportation, in National Defense, August 2016
SIGAR: Afghan National Army Vehicle Maintenance Program Cost Soars, in National Defense, 1 August 2016
Can We Defend What We Put in Space?, in Popular Science, 17 June 2016
Tactical Wheeled Vehicle Programs at Critical Juncture, in National Defense, April 2016
U.S. to Counter Putin by Sending Europe More Tanks, Copters, on Bloomberg Business, 8 March 2016
Hove: AM General is 'going to become a much more diverse company', in Inside Defense, 26 February 2016
Lockheed Drops JLTV Suit; DOT&E Knocks Reliability, in Breaking Defense, 18 February 2016
Jim Hasik: What's next for Air Force's Long Range Strike Bomber, on Federal News Radio (1500 AM, Washington DC) 4 November 2015
Industry concerned Pentagon is seeking too much technical data, in Inside Defense, 28 October 2015
USMC amphibious vehicle competition still wide open with crowded field, in Washington Business Journal, 21 October 2015
Lockheed Martin looking for margins as government service providers look for scale, in Washington Business Journal, 7 October 2015
Saudi deal for 'transport vehicles', not arms, says Harper, in the Ottawa Citizen, 6 October 2015
Joint Light Tactical Vehicle Award Shakes Up Industry , in National Defense, October 2015
BAE, Lockheed Protest Army Contract Awards On Same Day, in Defense News, 12 September 2015
Lockheed layoffs and bid protest pave way for defense giant's engineering future, in Washington Business Journal, 9 September 2015
JLTV Award Could Reorder Vehicle Industry, in Defense News, 23 August 2015
Navy Shipbuilder Huntington Ingalls Announces Layoffs, in the Wall Street Journal, 24 July 2015
US Army: Strykers Need Bigger Gun to Fight Russia, in Defense News, 24 July 2015
Oshkosh Corp. lands contract worth up to $780 million, in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, 19 June 2015
Army Aims for Bradley Replacement or Upgrade, in Defense News, 8 June 2015
Charge Of The Light Brigade: Army Seeks Air-Droppable Vehicles For Infantry, in Breaking Defense, 8 June 2015
Guided-Bomb Makers Anticipate GPS Jammers, in Defense News, 1 June 2015
A New Normal for Defense Contractors, in the Wall Street Journal, 29 March 2015
Who Killed The Ground Combat Vehicle? The Army's Answer Is Still Vexing, in Inside the Army, 27 February 2015
US Army Talks Tanks as Russia's Hit Ukraine , in Defense News, 19 February 2015
Abrams tank, Army vehicles come out ahead in defense budget bill, in Army Times, 11 December 2014; and Lawmakers Boost Budgets for Abrams, Army Vehicles in Defense Bill, in Defense News, 10 December 2014
Joint Vehicle Program Showcases The Tricky Math Of Intellectual Property, in Inside Defense, 25 November 2014
Canada brings '6-pack strategy' to air campaign against Islamic State in Iraq, in Military Times, 8 October 2014
Iraq-Syria war likely to sidestep mandatory budget cuts, in Stars & Stripes, 3 October 2014
Oshkosh prototype tactical vehicle completes Defense Department review, in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, 22 September 2014
Debating Independence, on Defense News with Vago Muradian, WJLA (ABC) Channel 7, 21 September 2014
US Army Floats Requirements For Three Light Vehicles, in Defense News, 15 September 2014
Analysts: New DOD Memo Addressing Competition Is Missing The Mark, in Inside Defense, 3 September 2014
The Atlantic Council: una veu amb una influència excepcional en la política americana, on VilaWeb (Catalonia), 28 July 2014
Pentagon Industrial Policy Chief Resigns, in the Wall Street Journal, 28 July 2014
International Partners Key To DoD's New R&D Strategy, in Defense News, 7 July 2014
Berlin Air Show Begins Amid Promises of Increased Spending, in Defense News, 19 May 2014
Can China's Defense Industry Catch Up?, in The Diplomat, 8 May 2014
Navy Awards New Contract for Presidential Helicopter, in the Wall Street Journal, 7 May 2014
DoD Reshapes R&D, Betting on Future Technology, in Defense News, 20 April 2014
Foreign sales could keep littoral combat ship program afloat, in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, 19 April 2014
A new group of Navy officials convened to find out: Where's the LCS headed?, in the Mobile Press-Register, 25 March 2014
Defense budget cuts could threaten growth at Austal, in the Mobile Press-Register, 28 February 2014
US military: Boots off the ground, in the Financial Times, 28 February 2014
Laissez Les Bons Temps Roullez [on the defense budget before Mardi Gras], in Politico Morning Defense, 25 February 2014
Vital Decisions Await US Army On Force Structure, Equipping, in Defense News, 18 February 2014
Budget cuts put defense contract jobs in jeopardy, in Crain's Detroit Business, 2 February 2014
Littoral shipbuilding in Marinette in jeopardy, in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, 27 January 2014
Group Warns of Aversion to Buying Commercial Products, in Defense News, 27 January 2014
Lockheed CEO Sees No Slack in Mideast, in the Wall Street Journal, 23 January 2014
Flood of US CEO Changes Signals Culture Shift, in Defense News, 23 January 2014
Hopes Dim for BAE's 'Green' Combat Vehicle, on DoD Buzz, 22 January 2014
Worrying Too Much About Sustaining the Industrial Base? in Defense Industry Daily, 22 November 2013
The overhaul of the Defense Department's acquisition system is almost here, on In Depth with Francis Rose, Federal News Radio, WTOP 1500 AM, Washington DC, 12 November 2013
Marines Tread Carefully in Search for New Amphibious Vehicle, in Defense News, 20 September 2013
Military surplus sale: unloading unused war equipment, interview on Fox News, 15 August 2013
Sequestration could stall plans for Humvee replacements, in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, 31 July 2013
The Littoral Combat Ship program is struggling with perceptions that it's not ready for prime time, on In Depth with Francis Rose, Federal News Radio, WTOP 1500 AM, Washington DC, 14 May 2013
Why Doesn't Seoul Have Iron Dome? in Foreign Policy, 9 April 2013
BAE Prods Congress For Bradley Funding Unwanted By Army, on Bloomberg, 1 April 2013
Dems, GOP converge in defense cut hypocrisy, on Bloomberg, 23 February 2013
BAE Develops Green Fighting Machine for $32 Billion Army Program, on Bloomberg, 15 January 2013
House sends fiscal cliff bill, sequestration delay to president in Federal Times, 1 January 2012
Are Offsets Becoming Unaffordable? in Defense News, 27 October 2012
In U.S. JLTV Contest, Which Team Has the Most To Lose?, in Defense News, 3 September 2012
Oshkosh wins role in Humvee replacement, in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, 23 August 2012
Riding the Waves—on an M-ATV: UAE Deal helps Oshkosh Weather US Defense Cuts, in Defense News, 5 August 2012
Washington Turns to Contractors for ISR Operations, in Defense News, 21 May 2012
Dispute Brews over Changes to Commercial Acquisition Process, in Defense News, 21 May 2012
Marinette-Built Navy Ship Hits Choppy Seas, in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, 12 February 2012
Oshkosh Contract to Turn Profit Sooner than Expected in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 9 January 2012