3.5 Billion People Could Live in 'Sahara Desert-Like Heat' by 2070 Thanks to Climate Change As the world’s temperature continues to rise, along with the population, the study determined that large strips of Africa, Asia, South America and Australia would likely be mired in the Sahara-like temperature range by 2070. The people who would be most affected are the middle class and the poor. by Ethen Kim Lieser

If current climate trends don’t quickly change, an estimated 2 billion to 3.5 billion people will be forced to live in Sahara Desert-like heat in about 50 years.

The study, which was published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, said with every 1.8 degree increase in global average annual temperature from man-made climate change, about a billion people will end up in areas too hot to be habitable without some kind of cooling technology.

Exactly how many people will be affected largely depends on how much of the heat-trapping carbon dioxide emissions are reduced and how quickly the global population grows.

A team of international scientists studied humans like they usually do animals and birds to pinpoint the “climate niche” where populations and civilizations thrive. They were able to peer back 6,000 years to come up with a temperature sweet spot—between 52 and 59 degrees.

The scientists pointed out that humans do live in warmer and colder places than those temperature ranges, but farther they get from those figures, the tougher their lives will be.

“We show that in a business-as-usual climate change scenario, the geographical position of this temperature niche is projected to shift more over the coming 50 years than it has moved (in the past 6,000 years),” the study said.

Today, roughly 20 million people live in regions that have an annual average temperature greater than 84 degrees, which is far above the aforementioned sweet spot. That area makes up less than 1% of the entire planet’s land surface, and it is mostly located near the Sahara Desert.

According to the team’s projections, this near-unlivable area could expand to cover 19 percent of the global land surface within 50 years if current emission levels aren’t reduced.

As the world’s temperature continues to rise, along with the population, the study determined that large strips of Africa, Asia, South America and Australia would likely be mired in the Sahara-like temperature range by 2070. The people who would be most affected are the middle class and the poor.

All is not lost, however, as concerted actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions could save millions of people from such extreme heat.

“The good news is that these impacts can be greatly reduced if humanity succeeds in curbing global warming,” the study’s co-author Tim Lenton, director of the Global Systems Institute at the University of Exeter, said in a release.

“Our computations show that each degree warming above present levels corresponds to roughly 1 billion people falling outside of the climate niche. It is important that we can now express the benefits of curbing greenhouse gas emissions in something more human than just monetary terms.”

U.S. Air Force Just Deployed F-35 Stealth Fighters on Russia’s Doorstep F-35 stealth fighters just landed in Alaska. by David Axe

Two F-35 stealth fighters just landed in Alaska. 

The F-35s’ arrival at Eielson Air Force Base in the Alaskan interior marks the beginning of a major expansion of U.S. air power just east of Russia.

The two single-engine F-35As flew directly from Lockheed Martin’s factory in Fort Worth, Texas to Eielson. An array of Alaska-based Air Force aircraft met the F-35s over the northern state, including a KC-135 tanker, three F-16s and two F-22s.

The Air Force has stood up a fighter squadron to operate the F-35s in Alaska. The re-establishment of the 356th Fighter Squadron at Eielson puts the radar-evading warplanes within reach of Russian air space.

It might not be long before F-35s join Alaska-based F-22s in intercepting Russian bombers and other warplanes that frequently probe American defenses. The F-35s also quickly could deploy in the event of a major war in the Asia-Pacific region.

The 356th Fighter Squadron flew P-51s during World War II and F-100, F-4 and A-7 fighters during the Vietnam War and the Cold War. The squadron deployed A-10 attack planes for the Gulf War in 1991 but fell victim to budget cuts in 1992.

The Air Force decided to reestablish the 356th and another squadron for F-35 operations as well as to expand the flying branch’s presence in Alaska. Squadrons in the state could be among the first to head west in the event of a major conflict with Russia or China.

The 356th is authorized 24 fighters. After its sister unit stands up, Eielson could house as many as 54 F-35s. The Air Force altogether hopes to acquire around 1,700 F-35s through the 2030s, replacing hundreds of F-16s and A-10s and helping the service to grow its force structure.

By 2022 Eielson and nearby Elmendorf Air Force Base together could host four squadrons of stealth fighters. Elmendorf’s 3rd Wing flies two squadrons with around 40 F-22 Raptors and has been on the cutting edge of tactics-development for the twin-engine jet.

In addition to four squadrons together growing to around 100 stealth fighters, Air Force and Air National Guard units in Alaska fly C-17 and C-130 airlifters, E-3 radar planes, HC-130 rescue planes and HH-60 rescue helicopters.

A squadron of F-16s at Eielson acts as an “aggressor” force, playing the enemy in war games. The base is lucky to have the F-16s. Twice since 2013 the Air Force has mulled shutting down the squadron. But preparations for high-end warfare have increased demand for aggressor services.

The Air Force expects private companies to meet most of that demand. Alaska will be one of the few states with a military-run aggressor force. Co-locating aggressors with F-35s at Eielson could help the F-35 pilots to prepare for major warfare against a high-tech enemy.

“We are strategically placed here in Alaska to prepare and project fifth-generation stealth fighter capabilities, working with our program partners and allies in the Pacific and to be ready, if called, to deploy around the world,” said Lt. Col. James Christensen, commander of the 356th Fighter Squadron.

Adding two F-35 squadrons requires a major expansion of Eielson’s facilities. Base population could double to around 4,000 personnel.

Laser-Guided Bombs Could Soon Be Chasing Moving Vehicles The Army sees a vehicle-chasing bomb as key to its long-range fires program. by Michael Peck

For users like special operations forces, who may be tasked with missions like eliminating a terrorist leader, the ability to hit a target in a moving vehicle—rather than waiting for it to stop—would be useful. So would the capability for conventional forces to launch long-range weapons at targets like moving tanks. 

Someday an enemy tank or a terrorist pickup truck will zoom down the road, with a smart bomb hot on its tail like a bloodhound.

It’s an almost comical thought. But the U.S. Army wants a guidance system that will allow laser-guided bombs to hit moving targets.

The goal is to develop hardware “capable of beam steering a laser designator on moving targets during typical handheld operations when coupled to a sighting optic,” according to the Army’s research solicitation.

The problem is a mismatch between laser-guided bombs and the laser designators that mark the targets for the bombs to home in on. Most targeting situations are static: the targets are stationary and the designator is resting on a platform. But smart bombs are capable of maneuvering in flight after being launched, which means they should be able to track moving vehicles.

“In order to capitalize on the munitions capability, technology must be developed to not only stabilize the beam but lock and track moving targets as well,” says the Army.

The goal is a device that can be pair with a camera to track and designate for 30 seconds a 50-square-foot moving at 35 kilometers (22 miles) per hour at a range of 3 kilometers (1.9 miles), and ideally a target moving at 45 kilometers (28 miles) per hour at a range of 5 kilometers (3.1 miles). The device should weigh no more than 3.3 pounds.

The Army sees a vehicle-chasing bomb as key to its long-range fires program. “This device would support primarily the Long Range Precision Fires CFT [cross-functional team] by providing increased standoff distance to aircraft/munition platforms by providing Laser Guided Bombs (LGBs) greater ‘fire and forget’ capability against mobile threats,” according to the research solicitation. “The expanded ability for guiding LGBs from the ground provides improved Multi-Domain Operations, with a tactical, layered approach possible when encountering a more mobile adversary. In addition, this effort directly supports the Lethality CFT as well by increasing Lethality (expanded Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures [TTPs] across air and sea assets), Mobility (less required equipment; less weight), and Protection (expanded direct overwatch).”

Phase one of the project will involve devising a feasible design that can address factors such as the motion of a handheld device, meeting tight size, weight and power thresholds, beam steering mechanisms, and pairing the device with a camera with appropriate resolution and frame rates. Phase two will involve delivering a working prototype.

The technology may be useful for more than blowing up moving vehicles. “Commercially, this could be used as part of a laser deterrent system for border patrol or police force when used with different laser wavelengths,” the Army says. What kind of deterrent this would be for law enforcement wasn’t specified.

The project seems to be tackling the issue of smart weapons whose full capabilities exceed what is offered by the sensors that guide them to their targets. For users like special operations forces, who may be tasked with missions like eliminating a terrorist leader, the ability to hit a target in a moving vehicle—rather than waiting for it to stop—would be useful. So would the capability for conventional forces to launch long-range weapons at targets like moving tanks.

Going Robotic, The Navy Wants Its Unmanned Ships To Speak 'Human' The goal is to enable human bridge crews to converse with robot ships using normal speech over VHF radio. by Michael Peck

The fact is that many human beings distrust intelligent robots. But an autonomous ship that can talk in human – or at least human-like speech – might make flesh-and-blood sailors less nervous about encountering robot vessels at sea. 

Concerned that the advent of unmanned surface ships can result in collisions with manned vessels, the Navy wants technology that will enable robot ships that talk like humans.

The goal is to enable human bridge crews to converse with robot ships using normal speech over VHF radio.

 “The nautical rules of the road (COLREGS) provide clear guidance for encounters between two vessels, but they do not directly specify what should happen when three or more vessels come in close proximity to each other at nearly the same time,” according to the Navy research solicitation. “Mariners commonly deal with such situations by communicating via VHF Bridge-to-Bridge radio. Current Unmanned Surface Vehicles (USVs) have COLREGS reasoning engines, but they cannot incorporate information from Bridge-to-Bridge conversations, nor can they reply to simple maneuver proposals.”

Technology already exists to convert voice to text and vice versa, while unmanned ships have COLREGS programmed into their AI to enable them to follow the maritime rules of the road. And the Navy wants to use all of this to create virtual sailors that will communicate like real ones.

“The Navy seeks an integrated solution that will enable a USV to act much like a human mariner,” the Navy said. “In particular, the USV should be able to understand secure Bridge-to-Bridge radio transmissions, incorporate their meaning into its world model, develop appropriate maneuvering plans, and respond via voice on the Bridge-to-Bridge radio.”

Phase I of the project calls for a system that can respond to a routine signal such as, “Sea Hunter, this is Sun Princess; propose a port-to-port passage.” It will feature English-language transmissions from native speakers. Sea Hunter happens to be the Navy’s experimental yacht-sized robot ship, designed to autonomously detect and track ultra-quiet diesel submarines.

Phase II will tackle the tricky problem of non-native speakers communicating in English, which is  common occurrence at sea. The goal is to “recognize English spoken by non-native speakers, and generate English replies to proposed maneuvers.” Cognizant of safety concerns about autonomous ships, the Navy specifies that “Phase II testing may be accomplished on a manned surrogate vessel with a stand-alone autonomy system running on a laptop or other computer but not actually controlling the vessel’s movements. Phase II testing may also be accomplished on a USV that is temporarily manned for evaluation and safety reasons.

Phase III will see limited at-sea trials with an eye toward fitting the technology on several Navy programs to develop unmanned surface ships, including the Medium Unmanned Surface Vehicle (MUSV) and the Large Unmanned Surface Vehicle (LUSV).

The Navy suggests that talking robots will also be useful to commercial ships. “The civilian market for unmanned vessels appears poised for take-off, and such vessels will need to be able to function even when satellite links to remote oversight facilities ashore are inoperative. Additionally, this technology can be used on minimally manned vessels and pleasure craft as an aid to a human operator.”

What’s interesting here isn’t just the notion of robot ships that talk like humans. The fact is that many human beings distrust intelligent robots. But an autonomous ship that can talk in human – or at least human-like speech – might make flesh-and-blood sailors less nervous about encountering robot vessels at sea.

This Jet Explains Why Finland May Not Pick the F-35 Stealth Fighter Sweden's Gripen. by Charlie Gao

The F-35A is rumored to be favored as it’s truly a next-generation aircraft and has a growing European user community (especially following the Polish purchase). But it does come at a higher cost, and seeing how the Polish deal did not include weapons, the overall cost of an F-35A purchase may be significantly higher than the Saab or Boeing bundles. 

In late January, the Saab JAS-39E Gripen arrived in Finland for its flight evaluation as part of the “HX Challenge,” Finland’s search for its next fighter aircraft to augment and slowly replace its fleet of F/A-18C/D Hornets. Saab’s offering, as some commentators have remarked, is the last “eurocanard” to be evaluated in the HX program. It also comes “bundled” with the GlobalEye Airborne Early Warning & Control (AEW&C) aircraft, which Saab markets as a force multiplier for the Gripen.

The complete systems, maintenance, and aircraft package that the Saab is selling has many potential bonuses for its potential selection as the HX aircraft, since Finland is looking for substantial domestic repair capability and possible technology transfer. If more systems are sold, it could mean more technology is transferred, leading to further potential development of Finnish industry. Despite the requirement in the HX program, Finnish industry seems pretty lukewarm to the idea of producing Gripen parts domestically. However, Saab has pushed the idea pretty hard, stating that some Patria plants could even produce and overhaul engines domestically.

Another interesting aspect of the Gripen offer is the inclusion of dedicated electronic warfare pods in addition to the Gripen’s already supposedly formidable on-board jamming capabilities. This, in Saab’s words, is “probably the most advanced EW suite” carried by a fighter, which would make the Gripen a considerable asset for Suppression or Destruction of Enemy Air Defense (SEAD/DEAD) missions. However, Boeing is including a dedicated and proven electronic warfare aircraft, the EA-18G Growler in its HX program bid, so the JAS-39, while possibly formidable is outclassed in that aspect.

Unfortunately for Saab, the Gripen didn’t actually fly and proper “verification flights” (though the GlobalEye aircraft were able to) in its time in Finland, leading to snarky media commentary that the Gripen couldn’t fly in the snow. This is, of course, not true. There were standard weather conditions for flights, and the snowy conditions did not fit them, so the plane did not fly.

Two more planes remain to be evaluated for the HX Challenge, Lockheed Martin’s F-35A and Boeing’s F/A-18E/F Super Hornet. The F-35A’s evaluation period is in mid-February. Both have their unique share of advantages and disadvantages: the Super Hornet will likely be an easy transition for the Finnish Air Force, which already operated legacy Hornets. But the F-35A has the advantage of low observability, advanced datalink systems and it’s onboard opto-electronic packages. The F-35A is rumored to be favored as it’s truly a next-generation aircraft and has a growing European user community (especially following the Polish purchase). But it does come at a higher cost, and seeing how the Polish deal did not include weapons, the overall cost of an F-35A purchase may be significantly higher than the Saab or Boeing bundles.

Regardless, the HX Challenge is one of the most interesting comparative and transparent fighter selection programs in the running, with a wide variety of European and American fighters in the running.

Two more planes remain to be evaluated for the HX Challenge, Lockheed Martin’s F-35A and Boeing’s F/A-18E/F Super Hornet. The F-35A’s evaluation period is in mid-February. Both have their unique share of advantages and disadvantages: the Super Hornet will likely be an easy transition for the Finnish Air Force, which already operated legacy Hornets. But the F-35A has the advantage of low observability, advanced datalink systems and it’s onboard opto-electronic packages. The F-35A is rumored to be favored as it’s truly a next-generation aircraft and has a growing European user community (especially following the Polish purchase). But it does come at a higher cost, and seeing how the Polish deal did not include weapons, the overall cost of an F-35A purchase may be significantly higher than the Saab or Boeing bundles.

Regardless, the HX Challenge is one of the most interesting comparative and transparent fighter selection programs in the running, with a wide variety of European and American fighters in the running.

This New Radar Is The Navy's Answer To China's Anti-Ship Missiles But is it enough? by Kris Osborn

 This multi-beam integration is what helps facilitate the simultaneous tracking of several threats at once, as it can synthesize horizon scanning and precision tracking with wide-area volume search and Ballistic Missile Defense discrimination. Discrimination is of course a vital advantage associated with increased radar sensitivity, as it can discern threat objects from other less-relevant items such as friendly platforms or flying debris. 

The Navy is moving quickly to integrate a new family of tailored radar systems across the fleet as part of a coordinated effort to stop dangerous attacks from farther distances and stop multiple attacks at the same time. The service is integrating its emerging AN/SPY-6 family of radar systems onto its Flight III DDG 51 destroyers and also tailoring variants of the technology for amphibs, Frigates and Carriers.

There are many attack scenarios wherein anti-ship missiles, aircraft and even ballistic missiles can be fired by enemies in a coordinated fashion, requiring defensive technologies to detect and discriminate multiple threats at one time.

The new radars are much more sensitive, longer range, and engineered to discriminate threats from one another. The current SPY-6 integration initiative, now underway at a rapid pace, is changing Navy surface warfare tactics, according to The Navy’s Above Water Sensors Program Manager, Capt. Jason Hall.

Hall said multiple track functionality, signal processing and increased sensitivity provide “the heart” of how SPY-6 radars change tactics for ocean warfare.

“We are looking at how you get after the increased capability that it (SPY-6 radar) brings, vs. the SPY-1 (current AN/SPY-1) legacy system. We have run the gamut as to what this radar can do,” Hall said in January of this year at the Surface Navy Association Symposium, Arlington, Va.

Hall further explained that the SPY-6 radar systems, combined with fire control and an advanced software-ballistic missile defense system called Aegis Baseline 10, set the technical foundation for the fleet. “We will be leveraging this combat system as we look at Frigate, amphibs and carriers,” Hall said.

Multiple-track sensing and detection is expected to bring the desired radar detection strategy, as SPY-6 radars combine air-warfare and ballistic missile defense into a single system. When it comes to application, the SPY-6 radar systems streamline otherwise disparate fire-control and detection technologies; the SPY-6 can cue short-range, closer-in interceptors as well as longer-range ballistic missile interceptors such as an SM-3. This shortens the sensor-to-shooter time and offers war commanders a longer window with which to make decisions about which countermeasure is needed. This integration is precisely the kind of defense needed to counter a multi-pronged, coordinated enemy attack potentially combining ballistic missiles with cruise missiles, drone attacks...and more.

The SPY-6 family moves beyond existing AN/SPY-1 ship-integrated radar system and, according to an interesting essay in "Microwave Journal"..."handles 30 times more targets and has 30-times greater sensitivity than the SPY-1D(V).” (“Radar and Phased Array Breakthroughs,” Eli Booker)

Digital Beam Forming, according to Navy and Raytheon developers, can make multiple-track radar applications possible. An interesting essay in a publication called "RadarTutorial" explains how “multiple independent, narrow beams steered in all directions can be formed in the digital beamforming processor. This brings improved dynamic range controlling

The essay further describes that “adaptive digital beamforming and radar signal processing functionality further improve the radar’s ability to function in adverse conditions.”

Interestingly, the Microwave Journal essay specifically cites some of Raytheon’s digital beamforming technology… stating:

"….Raytheon is developing a mixer-less system with direct RF analog-to-digital conversion that has greater than 400 MHz instantaneous bandwidth and is reconfigurable, able to switch between S- and X-Band... -- Microwave Journal, “Radar and Phased Array Breakthroughs” (Eli Booker)

Hall addressed this synergy between multiple beams as involving “S-band radar, X-band radar and a Radar Suite Controller (RSC). RSC coordinates S and X band interfaces.” S-band, according to “Radartutorial,” provides wide-area volume search, target tracking, Ballistic Missile Defense discrimination and missile tracking. X-band, the essay describes, “provides horizon search, precision tracking, missile communications and final illumination of guidance to targets.”

This multi-beam integration is what helps facilitate the simultaneous tracking of several threats at once, as it can synthesize horizon scanning and precision tracking with wide-area volume search and Ballistic Missile Defense discrimination. Discrimination is, of course, a vital advantage associated with increased radar sensitivity, as it can discern threat objects from other less-relevant items such as friendly platforms or flying debris.

Raytheon’s SPY-6 radar transmitter uses a material known as military-grade Gallium Nitride (GaN), a substance explained by Raytheon developers as up to 1,000-times more efficient that the existing Gallium Arsenide used today.

“GaN converts electrical power into radar, creating greater efficiency which allows us to see a smaller object,” Scott Spence, Director for Naval Radar Systems for Integrated Defense Systems, Raytheon, told Warrior in an interview.

Alongside the SPY-6 (V)1, Raytheon and the Navy are now integrating several additional SPY-6 variants for carriers and amphibs, specifically tailored to their respective mission scopes. The SPY-6 (V) 2, for instance, is a smaller rotating radar and a SPY-6 (V) 3 has three fixed radar faces on the deckhouses. These variants will go on both Nimitz class and Ford-class carriers. The (V) 3 has nine radar module assemblies. The (V)3 has three fixed spaces looking out at a different angle, covering 360-degrees with 120-degree panels each. Finally, there is a SPY-6 (V)4 which will be integrated onto existing DDG 51 IIA destroyers during a mid-life upgrade. The (V) 4 has 24 Radar Module Assemblies, compared to the (V) 1, which has 37.

The use of a scalable antenna, composed of 2ft X 2ft X 2ft Radar Module Assembly building blocks, enables developers to engineer tailored, mission-specific, radar applications for different platforms.

A 2017 Pentagon Selected Acquisition Report, written earlier in the development process of the SPY-6 radar, explains that each RMA is comprised of four Line Replaceable Units (LRU). “Each LRU can be replaced in less than 6 minutes.The back-end radar controller is fully programmable and uses commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) 86 processors, which allows adapting to future threats, easy upgrades with future COTS processors and no obsolescence.” (Air and Missile Defense Radar (AMDR) As of FY 2017 President's Budget Selected Acquisition Report (SAR).

COTs processing equipment refresh “upgrades will be implemented using a ‘refresh by attrition’ approach… software updates,” the SAR Report states.

“We moved to a modular maintenance concept so that is a real big change. We are able to break down the elements themselves into modular structures …. then you can adjust form factor to whatever size you want,” Hall explained.

What all of this amounts to is … more time and options for Commanders tasked with ship defense. For instance, an approaching ballistic missile might likely require a longer-range SM-3 interceptor missile….a sea-skimming cruise missile might require an Evolved Sea Sparrow Block II interceptor …..and approaching enemy aircraft, helicopter or drone might require an SM-6, deck-mounted guns or even laser weapons...and fast-approaching small boats might require the Close-In-Weapons system -- all of which comprise different elements of a ship’s layered defenses. Advanced automation, and even human-controlled AI-enabled processing, sensors and networked fire control might quickly allow Navy ships to employ many of these to operate simultaneously in response to multiple tracks detected by SPY-6 radar.

The radar is built in a 30,000 square foot automated facility in Andover, Mass; Raytheon leads an industry team of more than 125 suppliers that build SPY-6. Virtual Tour HERE

Finally, it goes without saying that increased networking, computing speeds and signal processing require extensive “hardening” of networks, a reason why Hall stressed that the Navy is working closely with industry on cybersecurity.