F-35 (AF3) another new pic....

F-35A AF-3 taxis to the runway at NAS JRB Fort Worth for its seventh flight on 2 December 2010. Lockheed Martin test pilot Bill Gigliotti is at the controls for the mission, which was the first for the aircraft with fully compliant low-observable coatings.

Company (2) of the week. AVX.

This is a repeat of sorts but I'm really cheering for these guys and hope that their concept gets a fair hearing.  I seriously doubt it with all the success of the Piasecki Speed Hawk and it struggling for financing but the AVX OH-58D is just a great looking bit of kit.

If anyone knows where they're at in the conversion process, please send an e-mail or note my way...

Sikorsky Frontlines spotlights the S-97 Raider.

Frontlines_Q4_2010_issue22

Weep and Whine Haters...the F-35B lives!

This via Bloomberg (read the entire article here)

Defense Secretary Robert Gates will recommend giving the Marine Corps as much as two additional years to develop its version of Lockheed Martin Corp.’s F-35 fighter to correct technical and manufacturing glitches that have delayed testing, according to two defense officials.
Gates told General James Amos, the Marine Corps commandant, of the decision in a Dec. 3 meeting on the fiscal 2012 budget, according to the officials, who asked not to be identified because the session wasn’t public.

We won't get our birds in 2012 but the Harrier will do until then...good news...now we just have to save the EFV and all is well in procurement.

F-35A (AF3) takes off...

F-35A AF-3 takes off on its seventh flight on 2 December 2010 with Lockheed Martin test pilot Bill Gigliotti at the controls. The aircraft is the first fully low-observable compliant F-35.

Harrier GR9 fans...do I have a site for you....

MJAviation.co.uk is a treasure chest of awesome GR9 photos.  Check'em out.

Dingo 2 not loved by Norway's Troops.

Thanks Jonathan!

via Defense News...

“

In Norway, Anger Over Dingo Vehicle Buy

By GERARD O’DWYER

HELSINKI — The Norwegian govern­ment’s decision to “rush through” an order for 20 Dingo 2 armored personnel vehicles has drawn accu­sations from opposition parties that the Ministry of Defense (MoD) picked a vehicle type spurned by its ground forces in Afghanistan.

On Nov. 18, the opposition con­servative party, Høyre, sent 13 ques­tions to the ministry, expressing doubts that the Dingo 2 would offer adequate protection.

“We want to know why so much money was spent on a vehicle which our troops in Afghanistan do not feel safe in,” said Ivar Kristiansen, a Høyre representative on the Norwe­gian parliament’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee. “There is also the risk that the Dingo 2 may be used as a route-clearing vehicle. It has never been used by any force in such a role.” In a Nov. 26 written response, De­fense Minister Grete Faremo de­fended the decision but conceded that defense chief Gen. Harald Sunde had expressed a preference for U.S. company Oshkosh’s MRAP all-terrain vehicle (M-ATV).

Faremo said the selection was made by Forsvarets Logistikkorgan­isasjon (FLO), Norway’s defense lo­gistics organization, and endorsed by Forsvarets Operative Hoved­kvarter, the armed forces’ opera­tional headquarters.

She said the Dingo 2 was the best available vehicle for improving Norwegian forces’ overall protection against improvised bombs and oth­er explosives. Delaying the purchase would expose Norwegian soldiers to an unnecessary and unacceptable high risk, she said.

“This has been a rapid acquisition under severe time pressure, and I’m happy with the result,” Faremo said in her statement. “I recognize that not all our soldiers in Afghanistan agree with the choice of vehicle, but I must emphasize that the Dingo 2 was the only acceptable option that could be deployed now.” Faremo said the FLO would test the Dingo 2’s suitability for clearing routes.
On Oct. 29, the MoD signed an ini­tial $25 million contract for 20 Din­go 2s with Germany’s Krauss-Maffei Wegmann. Three weeks later, the first vehicle entered service with Norway’s troops in Afghanistan.

The quick move angered opposi­tion groups and divided military opinion, said Jan Arild Ellingsen, the Progress Party’s spokesman on defense.

“The jury is out on whether the Dingo 2 is the best armored vehicle in Afghanistan of its type,” Ellingsen said. “This seems like a costly tem­porary solution. We have received honest feedback from our troops in Afghanistan, and the general feeling is that they do not have confidence in this vehicle.” He said the Army’s weapons test­ing center wrote to the MoD on Oct. 18 advising the government against the purchase of the Dingo 2, Ellingsen said.

The Armed Forces Command, in response, stated that the testing cen­ter has changed its position after re­ceiving additional technical data on the Dingo 2 from the FLO and now supports the purchase.

Ellingsen said the MoD should have considered the Oshkosh M-ATV, the armored fighting vehicle designed for U.S. Army use among the prevailing threats and moun­tainous terrain in Afghanistan.

Faremo said the MoD was in­formed by U.S. Central Command that the vehicle would not be avail­able to purchase or lease before 2012.

The operational headquarters com­mander, Maj. Gen. Bernt Brovold, confirmed that the military had been interested in the M-ATV but that U.S. officials said it was not yet available. Brovold said Norwegian forces in Afghanistan needed an armored ve­hicle quickly, and the Dingo 2’s V­shaped hull and elevated chassis would do the job.

“The Dingo 2 is a maneuverable heavy vehicle with a surprisingly quick acceleration,” he said. “It pro­vides improved protection for our soldiers.” Ellingsen said the “rushing through” of the Dingo 2 purchase represents a knee-jerk response to rising Norwegian casualties in Afghanistan.

AFC figures reveal around 200 separate attacks on Norwegian forces in the first 10 months of 2010. These include around 20 roadside bombs, including a June blast that killed four soldiers traveling in an Iveco light multirole vehicle on pa­trol in Faryab province.

Nine Norwegian soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan since 2004.

“Our soldiers deserve the best ar­mored vehicle protection,” Ellingsen said. “This means using the same ve­hicles that the Americans do. We should buy or lease. What is very clear is that Army personnel and the military’s weapons testing unit are not convinced by the Dingo 2.” Faremo said such critical com­ments and assessments were based on general opinions and inaccurate data that failed to take full account of the Dingo 2’s absolute technical qualities and capabilities.

Belgium, which has ordered 220 Dingo 2 units, already deploys the vehicle in Afghanistan. It is also in service with the militaries of Ger­many, Austria, Luxembourg and the Czech Republic.

from the electronic version of DefenseNews.com

Wow.  I always had a neutral opinion of the Dingo 2 and at worst thought it was as good as the other MRAPs out there.  Now I'm not so sure.  Hopefully a European reader will be able to let us know if this is politics or an actual issue.