<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>U.S.Category: Procurement &#124; U.S. &#124; TIME.com</title>
	<atom:link href="http://nation.time.com/category/procurement/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://nation.time.com</link>
	<description>News, Headlines, Stories, Video from Around the Nation</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 20:51:22 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
<cloud domain='nation.time.com' port='80' path='/?rsscloud=notify' registerProcedure='' protocol='http-post' />

	<atom:link rel="search" type="application/opensearchdescription+xml" href="http://nation.time.com/osd.xml" title="U.S." />
	<atom:link rel='hub' href='http://nation.time.com/?pushpress=hub'/>
		<item>
		<title>F-35: Blade Bummer</title>
		<link>http://nation.time.com/2013/02/25/f-35-blade-bummer/</link>
		<comments>http://nation.time.com/2013/02/25/f-35-blade-bummer/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2013 13:38:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mark Thompson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Air Force]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Battleland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defense Contractors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marines]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Military Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pentagon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Procurement]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nation.time.com/?p=108372</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The news that the Pentagon&#8217;s fleet of 51 F-35 fighters has been grounded because of a half-inch crack in one of its engine&#8217;s turbine blade is one of those problems that can truly be called a teething issue: it&#8217;s something that happens on most every high-tech jet engine that is pushing the engineering envelope. Pentagon officials over the weekend suggested waiting for Pratt &#38; Whitney, the maker of the F-135 powerplant that powers the F-35, could take a week to 10 days. Sometimes such problems are natural; sometimes not. All involved want to make sure that whatever caused the crack is unique to that particular blade and not a threat to all F-35 engines. A single-engine warplane like the F-35 could be doomed by a disintegrating turbine blade. This isn&#8217;t a new problem with the F-35 powerplant; a similar blade cracked during testing in 2007. &#8220;Most likely root cause is resonant response to aerodynamic excitation by the upstream 54 vanes in STOVL operation,&#8221; an investigation into that earlier failure concluded. &#8220;No indication that defects in material properties or single crystal orientation significantly contributed to the failures.&#8221; News of the grounding comes at a sensitive time, as F-35 advocates try to convince the Australian government this week to stick to its original plan to buy 100 of the jets. The grounding is only the latest in a series of problems for the program, which has been plagued by delays and cost overruns. The U.S. military plans on spending $396 billion for 2,457 of the planes, making it the most costly weapons system in the history of the world (the planes, built by Lockheed Martin, are slated to cost $332 billion; Pratt&#8217;s price for the engines is projected to be $64 billion). But the program&#8217;s problems, and looming defense-spending cuts, are likely to cut the program, perhaps by as much as half, defense officials say privately. The grounding affects the F-35s being built for the Air Force, the Marines and the Navy because all three variants use the same engine (&#8220;Putting all<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=nation.time.com&#038;blog=20157722&#038;post=108372&#038;subd=timemilitary&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nation.time.com/2013/02/25/f-35-blade-bummer/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Procurement</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://nation.time.com/category/procurement/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/screen-shot-2013-02-24-at-5-16-23-pm.png?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/screen-shot-2013-02-24-at-5-16-23-pm.png?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/screen-shot-2013-02-24-at-5-16-23-pm.png?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Screen Shot 2013-02-24 at 5.16.23 PM</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/cf2658ecf5812f0fd988c6de2037c9d8?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">mt53</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sequestration is for Sissies: $6.9 Billion More for the F-22</title>
		<link>http://nation.time.com/2013/02/21/sequestration-is-for-sissies-6-9-billion-more-for-the-f-22/</link>
		<comments>http://nation.time.com/2013/02/21/sequestration-is-for-sissies-6-9-billion-more-for-the-f-22/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2013 11:47:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mark Thompson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Air Force]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Battleland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Military Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pentagon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Procurement]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nation.time.com/?p=107894</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Pentagon officials took to PBS and the Pentagon press room to warn Wednesday about the impending sequester&#8217;s impact on military spending. &#8220;We&#8217;re really trying to keep on protecting the country and delivering the defense under these circumstances,&#8221; Deputy Defense Secretary Ash Carter said on the PBS NewsHour Wednesday evening. &#8220;In some cases, that&#8217;s not going to be possible.&#8221; On March 1, assuming no White-House-congressional deal on a $1.2 trillion deficit reduction package over the coming decade, more than $500 billion in Pentagon cuts will kick in automatically, including a $46 billion cut between March 1 and October 1. &#8220;Two-thirds of the Army active combat brigade teams, other than those that are currently deployed, would be at below acceptable levels of readiness,&#8221; Pentagon money chief Robert Hale said. &#8220;It could affect their ability to deploy to a new contingency, if one occurred, or if this goes on long enough, even to Afghanistan.&#8221; Yet slightly more than an hour before Carter appeared on television, the Air Force slipped Lockheed Martin a little something extra to keep their fleet of F-22s flying: Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co., Fort Worth, Texas, is being awarded an indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract (FA8611-13-D-2850) with a ceiling of $6,900,000,000 for F-22 modernization…This award is a result of a sole source acquisition. One doesn&#8217;t know whether to laugh or cry. The F-22 program has become a parody of itself, and of all that is wrong and warped in the military-industrial complex. Let&#8217;s review the bidding: &#8211; The 188-plane program cost $67 billion, or more than $350 million per plane. &#8211; Just over two years ago, the Air Force awarded Lockheed a similar $7.4 billion contract &#8220;for the development of system upgrades to existing requirements, incorporate new requirements, add capability and enhance performance in the F-22 Weapon System.&#8221; &#8211; That&#8217;s apparently a total of $14.3 billion added to the initial cost of $67 billion &#8212; a 21% hike. &#8211; The F-22 became operational in 2005. &#8211; It has yet to fly a single combat mission, even as the nation has waged wars in<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=nation.time.com&#038;blog=20157722&#038;post=107894&#038;subd=timemilitary&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nation.time.com/2013/02/21/sequestration-is-for-sissies-6-9-billion-more-for-the-f-22/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Military Spending</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://nation.time.com/category/military-spending-2/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/130105-f-pb632-946.jpeg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/130105-f-pb632-946.jpeg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/130105-f-pb632-946.jpeg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Raptor in flight</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/cf2658ecf5812f0fd988c6de2037c9d8?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">mt53</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Picasso of Procurement</title>
		<link>http://nation.time.com/2012/10/24/the-picasso-of-procurement/</link>
		<comments>http://nation.time.com/2012/10/24/the-picasso-of-procurement/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2012 12:36:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mark Thompson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Air Force]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Battleland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defense Contractors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pentagon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Procurement]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nation.time.com/?p=90287</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Air Force Lieutenant Colonel – and occasional Battleland contributor – Dan Ward not only has a way with words. He is, according to his new The Comic Guide to Improving Defense Acquisitions, also the Picasso of Procurement. In a series of comic-book-like drawings, he points out how the perpetual push for better may be thwarting the U.S. military&#8217;s goal of buying the best. Check out what he has to say – um, draw – here. But just remember his warning: The views expressed in this comic are those of the author and do not represent the official policies of the United States Air Force, the Department of Defense or the U.S. Government yet.<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=nation.time.com&#038;blog=20157722&#038;post=90287&#038;subd=timemilitary&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nation.time.com/2012/10/24/the-picasso-of-procurement/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Military Spending</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://nation.time.com/category/military-spending-2/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/ward-art1.png?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/ward-art1.png?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/ward-art1.png?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">ward.art</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/cf2658ecf5812f0fd988c6de2037c9d8?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">mt53</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Kinder, Gentler War</title>
		<link>http://nation.time.com/2012/10/24/kinder-gentler-war/</link>
		<comments>http://nation.time.com/2012/10/24/kinder-gentler-war/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2012 12:01:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mark Thompson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Air Force]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Battleland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defense Contractors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Procurement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Weapons]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nation.time.com/?p=90302</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In the Pentagon&#8217;s continuing quest to destroy without hurting, Boeing announced this week that its CHAMP microwave-burst weapon successfully rendered electronic targets useless without wounding anyone. &#8220;We turned science fiction into science fact,&#8221; Keith Coleman, director of Boeing&#8217;s CHAMP program, said in an Oct. 22 statement. CHAMP stands for Counter-electronics High-powered Microwave Advanced Missile Project. &#8220;In the near future, this technology may be used to render an enemy&#8217;s electronic and data systems useless even before the first troops or aircraft arrive.&#8221; On Oct. 16, Boeing (which builds the missile), Raytheon Ktech (which builds the microwave generator) and the Air Force Research Lab&#8217;s directed-energy directorate &#8220;successfully knocked out&#8221; personal computers and other electronic systems during a test at the Utah Test and Training Range. As the CHAMP missile neared its target, it fired bursts of microwaves that basically fried the electronic innards of computers and other such gear inside a two-story building. Engineers cheered as a video feed showed the targeted screens going black, before CHAMP shut down the video cameras as well. &#8220;CHAMP provides the warfighter a non-lethal, low-collateral damage capability that can be used against targets currently on the kinetic-restricted target list,&#8221; the Air Force explained last year (&#8220;kinetic-restricted&#8221; means targets that can&#8217;t be bombed with conventional explosives, out of concern for civilian casualties or other collateral-damage considerations). &#8220;CHAMP supports Combatant Commands faced with increasing operational limitations by providing an option to achieve mission needs while keeping collateral damage and post-conflict reconstruction costs to a minimum.&#8221; You bet. No sense in blowing stuff up if the U.S. taxpayer is expected to foot the bill to glue the rubble back together. Cool video about CHAMP here. Think of CHAMP as the anti-neutron bomb – it kills things rather than people. For those of you too young to remember the glory years of the Cold War, 30 years ago the goal of the neutron bomb – also known as the enhanced radiation weapon &#8212; was to kill people but not things. Progress.<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=nation.time.com&#038;blog=20157722&#038;post=90302&#038;subd=timemilitary&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nation.time.com/2012/10/24/kinder-gentler-war/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>R&amp;D</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://nation.time.com/category/rd/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/screen-shot-2012-10-23-at-8-39-31-pm.png?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/screen-shot-2012-10-23-at-8-39-31-pm.png?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/screen-shot-2012-10-23-at-8-39-31-pm.png?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Screen shot 2012-10-23 at 8.39.31 PM</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/cf2658ecf5812f0fd988c6de2037c9d8?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">mt53</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Making All Our Troops Bulletproof</title>
		<link>http://nation.time.com/2012/10/22/making-all-our-troops-bulletproof/</link>
		<comments>http://nation.time.com/2012/10/22/making-all-our-troops-bulletproof/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Oct 2012 12:01:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rep. Niki Tsongas</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Army]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Battleland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marines]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Procurement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[R&D]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Troops]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nation.time.com/?p=89912</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Shoot, move, communicate. This was the clear, succinct analysis given by an Army major when asked to describe the key components of a military mission. In three words, the major illustrated the reality of modern war theatres &#8212; one in which a soldier’s safety and success relies as much on mobility as it does on strength. Clearly-drawn front lines have become a thing of the past, due to complex locations with ubiquitous enemy threats. In places like Afghanistan, the line is barely visible at all. Constant and pervasive danger makes agile movement a high priority for all soldiers, whether they are assigned directly to combat or not. It is surprising then that one of a soldier’s most basic and necessary pieces of equipment – body armor – can sometimes work in direct contradiction to that basic need. Several years ago during a House Armed Services Committee hearing, I asked a young sergeant if he were ever tempted to take off his protective gear. He hesitated and glanced sheepishly at the general sitting nearby before giving a confident reply: “Yes, ma’am.” He explained the armor was cumbersome, heavy and that sometimes it was just easier to maneuver without it. A visit to Afghanistan amplified the sergeant’s concerns. There, I met with a colonel who heaved off his armor and, rubbing his sore knees, spoke of the burden the gear’s weight put on his joints. Soldiers deployed to Afghanistan are outfitted with body armor that weighs as much as 40 pounds. When combined with the gear that troops must carry in the field, the total weight our soldiers carry can exceed 120 pounds. It can lead to long term muscular skeletal injuries and an elevated risk that armor may be removed in the field. Lightened body armor, which the military has made progress on, would mean increased safety and reduced risk for soldiers like the sergeant and the colonel. But for the major, the task of shoot, move, communicate is made even more difficult by the fact that the armor does not<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=nation.time.com&#038;blog=20157722&#038;post=89912&#038;subd=timemilitary&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nation.time.com/2012/10/22/making-all-our-troops-bulletproof/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Military Personnel</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://nation.time.com/category/military-personnel/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/fba-pic.jpeg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/fba-pic.jpeg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/fba-pic.jpeg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">fba pic</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/cf2658ecf5812f0fd988c6de2037c9d8?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">mt53</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/rand-chart.png" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">rand chart</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Exploding Budgets</title>
		<link>http://nation.time.com/2012/10/10/exploding-budgets/</link>
		<comments>http://nation.time.com/2012/10/10/exploding-budgets/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Oct 2012 13:19:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Joe Cirincione </dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Battleland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defense Contractors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Military]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Military Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pentagon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Procurement]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nation.time.com/?p=88412</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The government is set to spend $640 billion on nuclear weapons and related programs over the next ten years.

If you didn't know that, you are not alone. No one has put together a reliable estimate of these future budgets – until now.<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=nation.time.com&#038;blog=20157722&#038;post=88412&#038;subd=timemilitary&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nation.time.com/2012/10/10/exploding-budgets/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Nuclear Weapons</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://nation.time.com/category/nuclear-weapons-2/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/50611295.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/50611295.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/50611295.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Mushrm. cloud rising white, blotting hor</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/cf2658ecf5812f0fd988c6de2037c9d8?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">mt53</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Navy’s New Class of Warships: Big Bucks, Little Bang</title>
		<link>http://nation.time.com/2012/10/05/the-navys-new-class-of-warships-big-bucks-little-bang/</link>
		<comments>http://nation.time.com/2012/10/05/the-navys-new-class-of-warships-big-bucks-little-bang/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Oct 2012 14:19:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Sayen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Battleland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defense Contractors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Navy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pentagon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Procurement]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nation.time.com/?p=87472</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Navy’s new Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) is not only staggeringly overpriced and chronically unreliable but -- even if it were to work perfectly -- cannot match the combat power of similar sized foreign warships costing only a fraction as much. Let’s take a deep dive and try to figure out why.<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=nation.time.com&#038;blog=20157722&#038;post=87472&#038;subd=timemilitary&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nation.time.com/2012/10/05/the-navys-new-class-of-warships-big-bucks-little-bang/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Weapons</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://nation.time.com/category/weapons-2/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/120502-n-zz999-019.jpeg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/120502-n-zz999-019.jpeg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/120502-n-zz999-019.jpeg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">/Users/Photo2/Desktop/IPTC.IPT</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/cf2658ecf5812f0fd988c6de2037c9d8?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">mt53</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/120502-n-zz999-002.jpeg?w=360" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">/Users/Photo2/Desktop/IPTC.IPT</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/120917-n-dh124-051.jpeg?w=360" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">120917-N-DH124-051</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/120502-n-zz999-0092.jpeg?w=600" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">/Users/Photo2/Desktop/IPTC.IPT</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sky-High WiFi</title>
		<link>http://nation.time.com/2012/09/28/sky-high-wifi/</link>
		<comments>http://nation.time.com/2012/09/28/sky-high-wifi/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Sep 2012 12:07:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mark Thompson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Afghanistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Air Force]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Battleland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defense Contractors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Procurement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Troops]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nation.time.com/?p=86676</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If civilian passengers can now get the Internet on airplanes, shouldn’t troops be able to get it on the battlefield?

The Air Force has just awarded Northrop Grumman a $20 million contract to do just that, by adding new communications gear to its E-11A aircraft.<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=nation.time.com&#038;blog=20157722&#038;post=86676&#038;subd=timemilitary&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nation.time.com/2012/09/28/sky-high-wifi/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Logistics</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://nation.time.com/category/logistics/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/110822-f-zu607-071.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/110822-f-zu607-071.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/110822-f-zu607-071.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">110822-F-ZU607-071</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/cf2658ecf5812f0fd988c6de2037c9d8?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">mt53</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/110822-f-zu607-048.jpg?w=360" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">110822-F-ZU607-048</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Cloak Blade: First It Was Octo-Mom – Now It’s Octo-Rotor</title>
		<link>http://nation.time.com/2012/09/27/cloak-blade-first-it-was-octo-mom-now-its-octo-rotor/</link>
		<comments>http://nation.time.com/2012/09/27/cloak-blade-first-it-was-octo-mom-now-its-octo-rotor/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2012 11:53:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mark Thompson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Battleland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Military]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Navy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pentagon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Procurement]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nation.time.com/?p=86577</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Pentagon has unmanned aerial vehicles coming out its ears. Flying in the wake of the Predator and Reaper drones are all kinds of joystick gizmos. Cloak Blade is one of the latest. It’s an “inherently stealthy micro-copter” kept aloft – get this &#8212; by eight tiny rotor systems (now Dasher, now Dancer, now Prancer and Vixen? On Comet, on Cupid, on Donner and Blitzen?) Its mission: to fly from Navy ships and buzz suspect vessels, relaying video back to its mothership and even asking those on the mystery boat questions that can be sent back to the ship. Couldn’t that prove dangerous? What if the bad guys tried to follow Cloak Blade back home, or tried to shoot it down? Not to worry, Cloak Blade boosters told the Navy last week. (MORE: Betting Against a Drone Arms Race) Cloak Blade will utilize “ziggy” returns after snooping around suspicious vessels to “help prevent visual following of vehicle with binoculars.” If the enemy shoots at it, it will be capable of “evasive maneuvers” to maximize “small gunfire avoidance.” Such systems are gaining popularity in the Navy as threats to vessels proliferate, especially in confined spaces like the Strait of Hormuz. Designed by the non-profit Applied Physics Laboratory at the Johns Hopkins University, the goal is a small chopper that can fly at altitudes up to 3,000 feet for as long as four hours at speeds of 30 miles an hour. This is how it would work, according to the presentation: &#8211; Copter goes straight up to create instant SA [situational awareness] &#8211; Perform 360 degree sweep of area, locates unit of interest &#8211; Travel to unit of interest and Issue pre-planned commands, or Interrogate with Language Translator &#8211; Full Motion Video stream from encounter with unit of interest, data ingest to ICOP [ship-based Intelligence Carry On Package] &#8211; Maritime Threat ID by Unmanned Sensor Its goal: “help determine vessel (hostile) intentions.” Initially, the sailors would view Cloak Blade’s data on a handheld device, but the goal is to let sailors see it “embedded<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=nation.time.com&#038;blog=20157722&#038;post=86577&#038;subd=timemilitary&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nation.time.com/2012/09/27/cloak-blade-first-it-was-octo-mom-now-its-octo-rotor/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>R&amp;D</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://nation.time.com/category/rd/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/screen-shot-2012-09-26-at-5-26-03-pm.png?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/screen-shot-2012-09-26-at-5-26-03-pm.png?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/screen-shot-2012-09-26-at-5-26-03-pm.png?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Screen shot 2012-09-26 at 5.26.03 PM</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/cf2658ecf5812f0fd988c6de2037c9d8?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">mt53</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Playing Checkers in Kabul</title>
		<link>http://nation.time.com/2012/09/20/playing-checkers-in-kabul/</link>
		<comments>http://nation.time.com/2012/09/20/playing-checkers-in-kabul/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Sep 2012 11:00:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mark Thompson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Battleland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Counter-Insurgency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Defense Contractors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Military Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Procurement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taliban]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terrorism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nation.time.com/?p=85503</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It’s becoming increasingly clear that Afghanistan is like a giant checkerboard, and U.S. and NATO troops are the checkers, limited to the black squares.<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=nation.time.com&#038;blog=20157722&#038;post=85503&#038;subd=timemilitary&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://nation.time.com/2012/09/20/playing-checkers-in-kabul/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Afghanistan</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://nation.time.com/category/afghanistan-2/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/screen-shot-2012-09-19-at-5-49-52-pm.png?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/screen-shot-2012-09-19-at-5-49-52-pm.png?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/screen-shot-2012-09-19-at-5-49-52-pm.png?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Screen shot 2012-09-19 at 5.49.52 PM</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/cf2658ecf5812f0fd988c6de2037c9d8?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">mt53</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/hires_120418-a-lk610-051c.jpeg?w=360" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">hires_120418-a-lk610-051c</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
