by Darlene Y. Cowsert
Air Force Safety Center Public Affairs
12/6/2012 - KIRTLAND AIR FORCE BASE, N.M. -- National
Transportation Safety Board Member Robert L. Sumwalt visited the Air
Force Safety Center here on Nov. 27 to explain his perspective on the
safety management system (SMS), and discuss its application and
implementation. The visit came at the invitation of the center's SMS
development team that's researching best practices to guide
implementation across the Department of Defense. The Air Force is the
lead service for that implementation effort.
Sumwalt explained the four components of SMS - written policies,
procedures and guidelines; data collection and analysis; risk management
and safety culture.
"SMS is a business approach to managing safety," he said. "That
structure allows an organization to manage safety just as it does every
other vital function of an organization."
In the last six years, Sumwalt has served as the member on scene for 11
NTSB investigations of major transportation accidents. According to
Sumwalt, the NTSB investigations most often reveal that the impacted
organizations didn't have adequate written policies, procedures and
guidelines or didn't rigorously adhere to the ones they had.
Sumwalt directs much of his energy toward top-level organizational leaders to advocate for a strong safety culture.
"A safety culture is the fabric of an organization," he said. A safety
culture begins at the top, permeates throughout an organization and
emphasizes safety over competing goals, he added.
Sumwalt emphasized that a safety culture is more of a journey than a
destination and warned that some organizations become complacent when
they think they have a proper safety culture. He also explained the role
of trust in creating a "just culture" as an enabler of proactive safety
programs such as Military Flight Operations Quality Assurance, Aviation
Safety Action Program and Line of Operations Safety Audit.
A roundtable discussion among Sumwalt and the center's division
representatives highlighted topics of mutual interest to the safety
center and the NTSB. Among those were applying the NTSB's SMS aviation
model to all safety disciplines, standardization of terminology, using
SMS to transform safety increasingly toward proactive processes and how
to measure safety successes in order to repeat them.
"Member Sumwalt hit squarely on issues of particular interest to us -
fostering a safety culture, risk management processes and implementation
of SMS," said AFSEC Executive Director James Rubeor. "While Air Force
safety and the NTSB have similar processes, it's always healthy to look
at how other agencies are meeting new challenges and to explore their
paths to overcome those challenges."
Friday, December 7, 2012
Thursday, December 6, 2012
Ribbon-cutting marks first milestone for new mission-critical capability at AEDC's large military engine test facility
Arnold Engineering Development Complex Public Affairs
11/30/2012 - ARNOLD AIR FORCE BASE, Tenn. -- A ribbon-cutting celebrating the success of a $3.6 million investment project to modernize and expand the capabilities of the nation's largest military aircraft engine ground test facility, located at the Arnold Engineering Development Complex, was held Nov. 19, 2012.
"This is the first of the Advanced Large Military Engine Capability program projects to be completed," Rosemary Matty, AEDC's program manager for ALMEC, said. "The success of this project required many organizations across the base to pull together as a team."
Britt Covington, AEDC executive director, agreed with Matty's characterization of the collaborative nature of the project.
"Congratulations to the team -- the team obviously goes beyond just the folks who got the plaque here today -- I mean all 120 people who are involved in this project," he said. "This is the first of nine projects related to improving and modernizing this Aeropropulsion Systems Test Facility and the test cells that it supports. I applaud each of you for your contribution to this effort, which -- at $3.6 million -- is a pretty big project."
Matty said to fully appreciate this milestone it helps to understand the scope of the whole program.
"ALMEC will improve and modernize key Aeropropulsion Systems Test Facility mechanical and electrical controls, facility monitoring systems, process air distribution and exhaust inter-cooling systems," she said. "This ribbon-cutting ceremony marks the first leg of a multi-year Test Investment Planning and Programming effort that began in fiscal 2011 with a planned completion date set for fiscal 2017.
"The C1/C2 Temperature-controlled Cell Cooling project is the first effort to be completed under ALMEC and it adds critical test cell cooling capability to the large turbine engine altitude test cells during near sea level testing conditions."
According to ATA design engineer Phillip Krepp, the new C1 and C2 cell cooling system was based on successful design of AEDC's existing J1 and J2 test cell cooling system.
He said their team realized that retrofitting the C1 and C2 cell cooling system based on the J test cells' cooling system resulted in lower operating costs and satisfied capability requirements for a broader range of simulated flight conditions without sacrificing data quality.
"C1 and C2 test cells require cell cooling to protect instrumentation while conducting engine tests," he said. "The previous cell cooling system used either atmospheric in-bleed or the same air supply being provided to the test engine. This doesn't allow the customer the ability to set cell cooling temperatures.
"AEDC now has the capability to set true NSLT conditions in engine test cells C1 and C2 without running additional expensive exhauster equipment, resulting in reduced operating costs and increased plant efficiencies."
New alternate master clock arrives at Schriever
50th Space Wing Public Affairs
12/5/2012 - SCHRIEVER AIR FORCE BASE, Colo. -- After nearly a decade of planning and development, the first of three Rubidium Fountain Clocks arrived here Dec. 4 from the United States Naval Observatory in Washington D.C.
The USNO houses the nation's most precise and stable time pieces for not only the Department of Defense, but for the entire world. Atomic measurements from clocks in the U.S. account for roughly 30% of the composite clock used to calculate Coordinated Universal Time.
"The relationship between the USNO and the 2nd Space Operations squadron is symbiotic," said Lt. Col. Thomas Ste Marie, 2 SOPS commander. "USNO maintains Universal Time using a myriad composite of atomic clocks both in Washington DC and here at Schriever AFB. In fact, each GPS satellite and monitor station is a contributor to this composite clock. The GPS constellation broadcasts that time to billions of users worldwide. It's both this technical relationship and solid organizational partnership that allows for continually record breaking time-transfer performance and navigation accuracies."
Getting the new alternate master clock from a loading dock to its final resting place in the master clock room here was no easy feat. In order to minimize damage to the equipment the clock was floated, much like a hovercraft, across a series of mats until it reached its final destination. This form of movement was used in order to minimize any potential damage to the components.
According to their website, the USNO is responsible for determining precise time and managing the dissemination of that time. Modern communications systems, such as the satellite-based Global Positioning System, increasingly depend on precise time interval.
"This clock will be a component clock in our local mean, but it will do a lot more than just that for the alternate master clock," said Jim Skinner, USNO mathematician at Schriever. "It will give us a very stable long term reference that we can use to compare to its brothers in Washington via different forms of time transfer. That should help us study seasonal and other effects in our various forms of time transfer between USNO and AMC. In the long term allowing us to learn more about how we are currently disseminating time to users."
GPS, used by millions across the globe, uses an internal timing system derived from USNO clocks that steer its timing accuracy. Specifications state that users must be able to obtain a time transfer accuracy to UTC within 40 nanoseconds. According to Ste. Marie, the accuracy at Schriever has routinely been below 4ns.
UTC is more accurate than man-made time based on the earth's rotation, according to Chris Ekstrom, division chief for clock development at the USNO in Washington D.C.
"The arrival of this clock marks a quantum leap in the accuracy of the U.S. Naval Observatory's Alternate Master Clock, which continually provides the world with precise timing via the Global Positioning System," said Col. James Ross, 50th Space Wing commander. "We are pleased to help our mission partners from USNO realize this significant upgrade."
To call and hear the official time, dial 567-6742.
Air Force Space Command’s roots traced back to the 1940s
by 1st Lt. Connie Dillon
Air Force Space Command Public Affairs
12/6/2012 - PETERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Colo. -- The reasons for Air Force Space Command's activation lay in events and decisions that date back nearly four decades, but the command's missions can be traced back even farther, to the post-World War II period.
The end of the war brought with it a new age of technology. Since then the Air Force has been involved in the development of space-related systems.
"General Hap Arnold, who headed the Army Air Forces during the war, foresaw that the future of the Air Force lay in technology," said George Bradley III, historian for the command. "One of those technology threads was the very highest ground, which was space."
Following the war, under Operation Paperclip, the U.S. recruited German scientists and used equipment the Nazi regime developed, such as the V-1 and V-2 rockets, in experiments to develop a nascent U.S. space program The scramble for Nazi technology and scientists created a series of events that presaged the coming Cold War, causing the U.S. to not only be concerned with possible threats from the skies but also from space.
The Soviet launch of Sputnik, the first man-made satellite, in October 1957 was a major milestone in the history of space. As a result, American interest in space quickly grew and the U.S. accelerated plans to launch its own satellite, Explorer I, which happened on Jan. 31, 1958.
Subsequently, the U.S. began to reorganize its space program. In 1958, a civilian space program was established. NASA focused its priorities on civil and manned spaced ventures. Two years after the formation of NASA, the U.S. established the National Reconnaissance Office to oversee highly classified reconnaissance satellites. Each service, including the Air Force, continued their own space programs. In the 1960s and 1970s the Air Force developed military satellite systems in areas such as meteorology, communications, early warning, and navigation.
"Even before the creation of the command, it was apparent that the application of those systems was essential to the military," said Bradley. "For example, the military used space-based communications and meteorological systems for the first time as part of a major military operation during the Vietnam War."
The increased dependence of the military on spaced based systems was apparent throughout the Department of Defense and especially in the Air Force.
By the late 1970s, a number of Air Force leaders identified there was a need to address how the service organized for space. There were three primary factors that led the Air Force to begin considering the establishment of a major command for space.
One of those factors was the increased operational use of space systems by the military.
The second factor was that the Air Force had diffused its own internal management of space systems and various space systems were assigned to a number of different commands, such as the Air Force Communications Command, Air Force Systems Command and Strategic Air Command. Assignment to a command had been based on which organization had the greatest functional need for a particular space-based capability. This made an internal focus on space within the Air Force more difficult to achieve.
The dispersal of space systems among Air Force major commands challenged the coordination of specific requirements and operational concepts and forced the Air Staff to perform programmatic tasks that more appropriately belonged at a major-command level. Additionally, as space systems matured and became more sophisticated, some possessed multiple capabilities that made it more challenging to assign them to a specific command.
The third factor involved plans for a military version of a reusable launch system, the Space Transportation System, or as it is more commonly known, the Space Shuttle. In 1974, after President Richard Nixon announced NASA's development of the shuttle, the Air Force began looking at the shuttle as a way to put satellites into orbit on a more efficient and less costly basis. At least four Air Force major commands -- Strategic Air Command; Aerospace Defense Command (ADCOM), Air Force Systems Command and Military Airlift Command -- contended that they would be the logical choice to operate the shuttle for military purposes.
Decisions were made more difficult by discussions about whether the Department of Defense needed a Shuttle Operations and Planning Complex separate from NASA's Johnson Space Center. The DoD had already provided significant funding for the shuttle program, and as noted above, had plans to use the program to put satellites into space. A couple of those plans came to fruition as development of a launch complex for the military shuttle proceeded at Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif., and a Shuttle Operations and Planning Center was under development at Falcon Air Force Station, Colo.
All these issues led the Air Force to conduct a number of studies on its organization for space operations.
"Both the 'New Horizons II' study in 1975 and the more comprehensive 'Future Air Force Space Policy and Objectives' study in 1977 pointed out that the service's inefficient utilization of space assets was inadequate for the variety of space based systems that could assist the military throughout the world," said Bradley.
The need to focus space in one command was necessary, but how it was to be done was in question.
In early 1977, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force chartered a small group, the Creedon group, to look at how the Air Force was organized and if any elimination of major commands could be made to achieve manpower and money efficiencies. The group recommended the possibility of disestablishing ADCOM. Since the late 1950s, ADCOM had served as the focal point for the Air Force's ground-based space assets such as missile warning and space surveillance.
ADCOM leaders objected to the plan and pointed out that they should be the "foundation for current and future operational management of expanding space operations." In October 1978, General James Hill, ADCOM commander, appealed to fellow four-star generals at a Corona meeting for retention of ADCOM as the operator of Air Force space systems.
Despite these efforts, ADCOM was disestablished in October 1979 and ADCOM's air defense resources were transferred to Tactical Air Command with ADCOM missile warning and space surveillance resources going to Strategic Air Command. An Aerospace Defense Center remained from ADCOM remnants.
When Secretary of the Air Force John C. Stetson made the final decision to dissolve ADCOM, he also suggested that the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, General Lew Allen, look at how the Air Force could organize itself to better perform space operations.
With his suggestion came more studies. The "Space Missions Organizational Planning Study" of 1979, conducted by an executive committee, had a number of recommendations for reorganization, to include the establishment of a new major command for space operations. In 1980, the Air Force's "Summer Study on Space" highlighted organizational deficiencies that prevented the Air Force from fully realizing opportunities in space.
In 1981, Air Staff created the Directorate for Space Operations, which conducted an intensive study on space as a support tool in war fighting. This directorate was also a driving influence toward a better space organization for the Air Force.
"In 1981, the Commander of Air Force Systems Command, General Robert Marsh, and commander of NORAD and Aerospace Defense Center, General James Hartinger, agreed on the need for a better Air Force space organization," said Bradley. "They began working together to create an operational major command for space."
In February 1982, at Corona South, Marsh and Hartinger raised the issue of developing a new space command and General Allen directed them to develop a more detailed briefing on how to move towards an operational command for space.
In April 1982, Hartinger presented the briefing to Allen who directed Hartinger to begin planning for a new command, a space command. The formation of an Air Force major command for space, Space Command, was announced on June 21, 1982, and was activated on Sept. 1 1982, with Hartinger as its first commander.
Space Command assumed space assets from Aerospace Defense Center, Strategic Air Command, Air Force Systems Command, Air Force Communications Command and others, solving the lack of centralization of the space mission in the Air Force.
In 1985, the command was redesignated from Space Command to Air Force Space Command to reduce confusion with the newly activated unified command, United States Space Command.
Over the next 30 years, AFSPC became the central focus for space within the Air Force and acquired multiple assets with responsibilities to include space surveillance, missile warning sensors, space launch, space acquisitions, satellite command and control and a number of others. Today AFSPC not only retains the space mission but also has responsibility for the Air Force cyber mission.
Air Force Space Command Public Affairs
12/6/2012 - PETERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Colo. -- The reasons for Air Force Space Command's activation lay in events and decisions that date back nearly four decades, but the command's missions can be traced back even farther, to the post-World War II period.
The end of the war brought with it a new age of technology. Since then the Air Force has been involved in the development of space-related systems.
"General Hap Arnold, who headed the Army Air Forces during the war, foresaw that the future of the Air Force lay in technology," said George Bradley III, historian for the command. "One of those technology threads was the very highest ground, which was space."
Following the war, under Operation Paperclip, the U.S. recruited German scientists and used equipment the Nazi regime developed, such as the V-1 and V-2 rockets, in experiments to develop a nascent U.S. space program The scramble for Nazi technology and scientists created a series of events that presaged the coming Cold War, causing the U.S. to not only be concerned with possible threats from the skies but also from space.
The Soviet launch of Sputnik, the first man-made satellite, in October 1957 was a major milestone in the history of space. As a result, American interest in space quickly grew and the U.S. accelerated plans to launch its own satellite, Explorer I, which happened on Jan. 31, 1958.
Subsequently, the U.S. began to reorganize its space program. In 1958, a civilian space program was established. NASA focused its priorities on civil and manned spaced ventures. Two years after the formation of NASA, the U.S. established the National Reconnaissance Office to oversee highly classified reconnaissance satellites. Each service, including the Air Force, continued their own space programs. In the 1960s and 1970s the Air Force developed military satellite systems in areas such as meteorology, communications, early warning, and navigation.
"Even before the creation of the command, it was apparent that the application of those systems was essential to the military," said Bradley. "For example, the military used space-based communications and meteorological systems for the first time as part of a major military operation during the Vietnam War."
The increased dependence of the military on spaced based systems was apparent throughout the Department of Defense and especially in the Air Force.
By the late 1970s, a number of Air Force leaders identified there was a need to address how the service organized for space. There were three primary factors that led the Air Force to begin considering the establishment of a major command for space.
One of those factors was the increased operational use of space systems by the military.
The second factor was that the Air Force had diffused its own internal management of space systems and various space systems were assigned to a number of different commands, such as the Air Force Communications Command, Air Force Systems Command and Strategic Air Command. Assignment to a command had been based on which organization had the greatest functional need for a particular space-based capability. This made an internal focus on space within the Air Force more difficult to achieve.
The dispersal of space systems among Air Force major commands challenged the coordination of specific requirements and operational concepts and forced the Air Staff to perform programmatic tasks that more appropriately belonged at a major-command level. Additionally, as space systems matured and became more sophisticated, some possessed multiple capabilities that made it more challenging to assign them to a specific command.
The third factor involved plans for a military version of a reusable launch system, the Space Transportation System, or as it is more commonly known, the Space Shuttle. In 1974, after President Richard Nixon announced NASA's development of the shuttle, the Air Force began looking at the shuttle as a way to put satellites into orbit on a more efficient and less costly basis. At least four Air Force major commands -- Strategic Air Command; Aerospace Defense Command (ADCOM), Air Force Systems Command and Military Airlift Command -- contended that they would be the logical choice to operate the shuttle for military purposes.
Decisions were made more difficult by discussions about whether the Department of Defense needed a Shuttle Operations and Planning Complex separate from NASA's Johnson Space Center. The DoD had already provided significant funding for the shuttle program, and as noted above, had plans to use the program to put satellites into space. A couple of those plans came to fruition as development of a launch complex for the military shuttle proceeded at Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif., and a Shuttle Operations and Planning Center was under development at Falcon Air Force Station, Colo.
All these issues led the Air Force to conduct a number of studies on its organization for space operations.
"Both the 'New Horizons II' study in 1975 and the more comprehensive 'Future Air Force Space Policy and Objectives' study in 1977 pointed out that the service's inefficient utilization of space assets was inadequate for the variety of space based systems that could assist the military throughout the world," said Bradley.
The need to focus space in one command was necessary, but how it was to be done was in question.
In early 1977, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force chartered a small group, the Creedon group, to look at how the Air Force was organized and if any elimination of major commands could be made to achieve manpower and money efficiencies. The group recommended the possibility of disestablishing ADCOM. Since the late 1950s, ADCOM had served as the focal point for the Air Force's ground-based space assets such as missile warning and space surveillance.
ADCOM leaders objected to the plan and pointed out that they should be the "foundation for current and future operational management of expanding space operations." In October 1978, General James Hill, ADCOM commander, appealed to fellow four-star generals at a Corona meeting for retention of ADCOM as the operator of Air Force space systems.
Despite these efforts, ADCOM was disestablished in October 1979 and ADCOM's air defense resources were transferred to Tactical Air Command with ADCOM missile warning and space surveillance resources going to Strategic Air Command. An Aerospace Defense Center remained from ADCOM remnants.
When Secretary of the Air Force John C. Stetson made the final decision to dissolve ADCOM, he also suggested that the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, General Lew Allen, look at how the Air Force could organize itself to better perform space operations.
With his suggestion came more studies. The "Space Missions Organizational Planning Study" of 1979, conducted by an executive committee, had a number of recommendations for reorganization, to include the establishment of a new major command for space operations. In 1980, the Air Force's "Summer Study on Space" highlighted organizational deficiencies that prevented the Air Force from fully realizing opportunities in space.
In 1981, Air Staff created the Directorate for Space Operations, which conducted an intensive study on space as a support tool in war fighting. This directorate was also a driving influence toward a better space organization for the Air Force.
"In 1981, the Commander of Air Force Systems Command, General Robert Marsh, and commander of NORAD and Aerospace Defense Center, General James Hartinger, agreed on the need for a better Air Force space organization," said Bradley. "They began working together to create an operational major command for space."
In February 1982, at Corona South, Marsh and Hartinger raised the issue of developing a new space command and General Allen directed them to develop a more detailed briefing on how to move towards an operational command for space.
In April 1982, Hartinger presented the briefing to Allen who directed Hartinger to begin planning for a new command, a space command. The formation of an Air Force major command for space, Space Command, was announced on June 21, 1982, and was activated on Sept. 1 1982, with Hartinger as its first commander.
Space Command assumed space assets from Aerospace Defense Center, Strategic Air Command, Air Force Systems Command, Air Force Communications Command and others, solving the lack of centralization of the space mission in the Air Force.
In 1985, the command was redesignated from Space Command to Air Force Space Command to reduce confusion with the newly activated unified command, United States Space Command.
Over the next 30 years, AFSPC became the central focus for space within the Air Force and acquired multiple assets with responsibilities to include space surveillance, missile warning sensors, space launch, space acquisitions, satellite command and control and a number of others. Today AFSPC not only retains the space mission but also has responsibility for the Air Force cyber mission.
Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Electronic beacons track pallets
by Staff Sgt. Patrick Harrower
60th Air Mobility Public Affairs
12/3/2012 - TRAVIS AIR FORCE BASE, Calif. -- They can be seen everywhere a service member travels. They can have a month's worth of water stored on them in Afghanistan or form the walls of a shack in Haiti. They have been used to transport thousands of vehicles in the Department of Defense or just reutilized as makeshift flooring for a tent on a forward-operating base. They are the 463L cargo pallet and up until recently, there was no way to track them.
There are only 124,000 of these pallets in the Department of Defense, costing approximately $1,200 each. The pallets are not being produced anymore, so it has become critical to take care of the ones in the inventory and track them as they move around the world.
The Airmen from 60th Aerial Port Squadron cargo net and pallet section spent the last week attaching radio frequency identification trackers to 3,000 pallets. Travis is the second test base for the RFIDs and will track them throughout Air Mobility Command and Pacific Air Forces.
"We will test the trackers for nine months and, if everything goes good, we will install them on pallets across the entire DoD," said Tech. Sgt. Creighton King, AMC. "The goal is to find wherever a pallet was last seen so we can recover it. The RFIDs will allow us to maintain tracking and inventory control of our pallet supply."
The trackers don't even have to be individually scanned, said Airman 1st Class Daniel Hall, 60th APS cargo net and pallet section technician. Due to the radio frequency they transmit, their tracking number can be located up to 300 yards away with their computer systems.
"There is even an automatic scanner that picks them up when they arrive on base via truck," Hall said. "Then we know exactly where every pallet is as we send them out to places like Guam, Hickam and PACAF."
Because the pallets travel so much and are frequently moved between aircraft and hangars via forklifts, they had to be installed to be tough, Hall said.
The Airmen removed a small portion of paint on each pallet before applying a primer. They then applied an epoxy to the tracker and used tape in between. The trackers can withstand 3,000 pounds of force with this technique.
"We want to be able to track a pallet no matter where it goes," King said. "A pallet can go to the (Area of Responsibility), a FOB or to (Federal Emergency Management Agency) and we will know exactly where it is."
60th Air Mobility Public Affairs
12/3/2012 - TRAVIS AIR FORCE BASE, Calif. -- They can be seen everywhere a service member travels. They can have a month's worth of water stored on them in Afghanistan or form the walls of a shack in Haiti. They have been used to transport thousands of vehicles in the Department of Defense or just reutilized as makeshift flooring for a tent on a forward-operating base. They are the 463L cargo pallet and up until recently, there was no way to track them.
There are only 124,000 of these pallets in the Department of Defense, costing approximately $1,200 each. The pallets are not being produced anymore, so it has become critical to take care of the ones in the inventory and track them as they move around the world.
The Airmen from 60th Aerial Port Squadron cargo net and pallet section spent the last week attaching radio frequency identification trackers to 3,000 pallets. Travis is the second test base for the RFIDs and will track them throughout Air Mobility Command and Pacific Air Forces.
"We will test the trackers for nine months and, if everything goes good, we will install them on pallets across the entire DoD," said Tech. Sgt. Creighton King, AMC. "The goal is to find wherever a pallet was last seen so we can recover it. The RFIDs will allow us to maintain tracking and inventory control of our pallet supply."
The trackers don't even have to be individually scanned, said Airman 1st Class Daniel Hall, 60th APS cargo net and pallet section technician. Due to the radio frequency they transmit, their tracking number can be located up to 300 yards away with their computer systems.
"There is even an automatic scanner that picks them up when they arrive on base via truck," Hall said. "Then we know exactly where every pallet is as we send them out to places like Guam, Hickam and PACAF."
Because the pallets travel so much and are frequently moved between aircraft and hangars via forklifts, they had to be installed to be tough, Hall said.
The Airmen removed a small portion of paint on each pallet before applying a primer. They then applied an epoxy to the tracker and used tape in between. The trackers can withstand 3,000 pounds of force with this technique.
"We want to be able to track a pallet no matter where it goes," King said. "A pallet can go to the (Area of Responsibility), a FOB or to (Federal Emergency Management Agency) and we will know exactly where it is."
Cyber Pro Discusses Mobile Network Security Challenges
By Amaani Lyle
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Dec. 5, 2012 – With more than 680,000 mobile devices in use across the Defense Department, they are quickly emerging as a critical component of military communications -- bringing a plethora of new security risks, a defense official told attendees at the Defense Logistics 2012 conference yesterday.
Dr. Robert Young, cybersecurity director in the DOD office of the chief information officer, outlined some of the devices in use and the ongoing importance of vulnerability counter-measures such as back-ups, the cloud, authentication and secure applications.
“We need to be thinking about how we can we do mobile computing with security,” Young said.
“Your mobile device is going to replace your laptop [and contain] unclassified and classified information … so we have to start thinking of the [operational security] piece of this.”
According to Young, threats and challenges faced by mobile device users include loss of device, data recovery, collection over the air, vulnerability applications, malware and tracking.
Devices and platform variations also create unique challenges in building a secure, impenetrable network -- something that’s especially daunting due to limited lead time in the production cycle, he said.
“Sixty days from now, the devices being made in Taiwan, China, Singapore, wherever, will not be supported anymore,” Young said. “They’ll be the next model and the next model … so we need to stop looking at the device and … start looking at the data.”
Young also noted that BlackBerry, while effective for encryption, is, as of yet, the only platform used for secure communications, which in and of itself creates vulnerabilities.
“We don’t want to have just one operating system,” Young said. “And every device is different … solutions, logistics and acquisitions are not one-size-fits-all.”
The ubiquity and affordability of cell phones in the hands of hackers and adversaries creates a considerable threat, Young explained. He cited an example of villagers in Afghanistan who can ride into town, send their data, charge their phones then shut down and leave without a trace.
“There are 48 million people in the world who have mobile phones who don’t have electricity at home,” Young said. “How are you going to find this individual [or] find the footprint?”
Even iPhones for sale in Afghanistan can pose risks, Young said, adding that the devices could actually trigger an improvised explosive device.
“I could make a designer bomb if I know the [mobile equipment identity number] of your iPhone or iPad,” Young said. “I just look for the signal that’ll ping out.”
Equally dire are the consequences of a compromised database such as mobile device electronic serial numbers, he added.
“Once it pinged and I saw [the MEID], I would know where your soldier, sailor or Marine is deployed,” Young said.
As smart phones become even smarter, users will soon see mobile devices do much more than transfer data. Young described the use of iPhones in medical settings, where the devices can now enhance triage efficacy by checking vital signs including pulse and body temperature.
“That’s smart use of [technology] -- knowing how not to waste resources and who I’m going to treat,” Young said.
Still, the DOD must remain vigilant in mobile device management to buffer hackers that can range in age, location or intent, but are typically obsessive-compulsive about penetrating a system, Young said. He shared a recent experiment about his efforts to identify and understand such activity.
“My tasking was to find a 13-year-old kid and give him an iPhone, [with him] using on-the-web devices and on-the-web [applications] to hack and crack into our [system],” Young said. “He did it.”
With “for official use only,” secret and top secret platforms cohabitating on mobile devices with the appropriate encryptions, physical and virtual security must remain a priority, Young asserted.
Currently no personal or “BYOD” devices are approved for use with for official use only data, but major pilot programs using iOS, Android and BlackBerry are in the works, Young said.
International Cyber-Fraud Ring Responsible for Millions of Dollars in Fraud Dismantled
WASHINGTON – In a coordinated international takedown, law enforcement
officials in Romania, the Czech Republic, the United Kingdom and Canada,
acting on provisional arrest requests made by the United States,
arrested six Romanian nationals today for their alleged involvement in a
sophisticated multimillion dollar cyber fraud scheme that targeted
consumers on U.S.-based Internet marketplace websites, announced
Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer of the Justice Department’s
Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Loretta E. Lynch of the Eastern
District of New York and FBI Assistant Director in Charge George
Venizelos of the New York Field Office.
“As a result of extensive cooperation between U.S. and European law enforcement officials, the defendants have been charged with a scheme to defraud unsuspecting Americans of millions of dollars,” said Assistant Attorney General Breuer. “The Department of Justice is committed to finding and prosecuting Internet fraud aggressively, wherever it happens and however hard the perpetrators work to conceal their crimes.”
“Thanks to our international law enforcement partnerships, even the most sophisticated criminal organizations are not beyond our reach, and we will continue our efforts to protect American consumers from these fraud schemes on Internet marketplace websites,” said U.S. Attorney Lynch.
“The FBI is committed to protecting the American public from predatory conduct whether it originates here or abroad,” said FBI Assistant Director in Charge Venizelos. “The international nature of many organized crime groups makes it essential for us to work with our partners here and overseas – as we did in this investigation – to rein in the alleged criminals.”
A criminal complaint unsealed today in U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of New York charges Romanian nationals Emil Butoi, 34, Aurel Cojorcaru, 43, Nicolae Ghebosila, 43, Cristea Mircea, 30, Ion Pieptea, 36, and Nicolae Simion, 37, and Albanian national Fabian Meme, 42, each with one count of wire fraud conspiracy and one count of money laundering conspiracy. Butoi, Cojocaru, Meme, Mircea, Pieptea and Simion are also each charged with one count of passport fraud conspiracy.
Butoi, Cojorcaru, Ghebosila, Mircea, Pieptea and Simion were arrested today. Meme is already incarcerated in the Czech Republic.
The government will seek the defendants’ extradition to the United States pursuant to the relevant international treaties.
As alleged in the complaint, the defendants were responsible for saturating Internet marketplace websites including eBay, Cars.com, AutoTrader.com and CycleTrader.com with detailed advertisements for cars, motorcycles, boats and other high-value items generally priced in the $10,000 to $45,000 range.
Unbeknownst to the buyers, however, the merchandise did not exist. The defendants allegedly employed co-conspirators who corresponded with victim buyers by email, sending fraudulent certificates of title and other information designed to lure the victims into parting with their money. Sometimes, the defendants allegedly pretended to sell cars from nonexistent auto dealerships in the United States and even created phony websites for these fictitious dealerships. In at least one transaction involving Ghebosila, the “seller” allegedly pretended to be the widow of an Iraq war veteran who was selling her family’s mobile home so that she could care for her children. In other transactions, the defendants allegedly duped victims into sending tens of thousands of dollars for non-existent vehicles, including Lexus, Audi, Ford, Chevrolet, Dodge, Toyota, Mercedes, Porsche and BMW cars; Big Dog Mastiff and Ninja motorcycles; a Fleetwood Storm motor home; and boats.
As part of the scheme, Cojocaru, Meme, Butoi and others produced high-quality fake passports so that foreign national co-conspirators in the United States, known as “arrows,” could use the passports as identification to open American bank accounts. The complaint alleges that Cojocaru was recorded on video during the investigation displaying new holograms that he was using to create more authentic-looking passports.
According to the complaint, after the “sellers” reached an agreement with the victim buyers, they would often email them invoices purporting to be from Amazon Payments, PayPal or other online payment services, with wire transfer instructions. However, the defendants and their co-conspirators allegedly used counterfeit service marks in designing the invoices so that they would appear identical to communications from legitimate payment services. The fraudulent invoices directed the buyers to send money to the American bank accounts that had been opened by the “arrows.” Finally, the arrows would allegedly collect the illicit proceeds and send them to the defendants in Europe by wire transfer and other methods. For example, the arrows allegedly forwarded Pieptea $18,000 cash in fraud proceeds hidden inside hollowed-out audio speakers. Other arrows allegedly used the proceeds to purchase expensive Audemars Piguet watches, and then sent the watches to the defendants abroad.
According to the complaint, it is estimated that the defendants earned over $3 million from the fraudulent scheme.
If convicted, the defendants each face a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison on the wire fraud conspiracy and money laundering conspiracy counts, and 10 years in prison on the passport fraud conspiracy count.
The charges in the complaint are merely allegations, and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
The government’s case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Cristina Posa, Vamshi Reddy and Claire Kedeshian of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York, and Trial Attorney Carol Sipperly of the Criminal Division’s Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section.
The offices of the FBI Legal Attachés in Romania, the Czech Republic, the United Kingdom, Canada and Hungary were instrumental in coordinating efforts with the United States’ international partners, and the Justice Department Criminal Division’s Office of International Affairs worked with its counterparts in these countries to effect the provisional arrests and requests for mutual legal assistance, including the forfeiture of illegal proceeds of these crimes. The Department of Justice’s Asset Forfeiture and Money Laundering Section also provided assistance in the forfeitures.
The U.S. government thanks the Romanian government, in particular the Ministry of Justice, the Directorate for Combating Organized Crime and the Romanian Intelligence Service, for their collaborative efforts throughout this long-term investigation, as well as the Czech National Police, Hungarian National Bureau of Investigation, Metropolitan Police Service in England, Montreal Police Service, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, International Organized Crime Intelligence and Operations Center, Internet Crime Complaint Center, Costa Mesa, Calif., Police Department, Orange County, Calif., District Attorney’s Office and the New York City Police Department for their assistance.
“As a result of extensive cooperation between U.S. and European law enforcement officials, the defendants have been charged with a scheme to defraud unsuspecting Americans of millions of dollars,” said Assistant Attorney General Breuer. “The Department of Justice is committed to finding and prosecuting Internet fraud aggressively, wherever it happens and however hard the perpetrators work to conceal their crimes.”
“Thanks to our international law enforcement partnerships, even the most sophisticated criminal organizations are not beyond our reach, and we will continue our efforts to protect American consumers from these fraud schemes on Internet marketplace websites,” said U.S. Attorney Lynch.
“The FBI is committed to protecting the American public from predatory conduct whether it originates here or abroad,” said FBI Assistant Director in Charge Venizelos. “The international nature of many organized crime groups makes it essential for us to work with our partners here and overseas – as we did in this investigation – to rein in the alleged criminals.”
A criminal complaint unsealed today in U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of New York charges Romanian nationals Emil Butoi, 34, Aurel Cojorcaru, 43, Nicolae Ghebosila, 43, Cristea Mircea, 30, Ion Pieptea, 36, and Nicolae Simion, 37, and Albanian national Fabian Meme, 42, each with one count of wire fraud conspiracy and one count of money laundering conspiracy. Butoi, Cojocaru, Meme, Mircea, Pieptea and Simion are also each charged with one count of passport fraud conspiracy.
Butoi, Cojorcaru, Ghebosila, Mircea, Pieptea and Simion were arrested today. Meme is already incarcerated in the Czech Republic.
The government will seek the defendants’ extradition to the United States pursuant to the relevant international treaties.
As alleged in the complaint, the defendants were responsible for saturating Internet marketplace websites including eBay, Cars.com, AutoTrader.com and CycleTrader.com with detailed advertisements for cars, motorcycles, boats and other high-value items generally priced in the $10,000 to $45,000 range.
Unbeknownst to the buyers, however, the merchandise did not exist. The defendants allegedly employed co-conspirators who corresponded with victim buyers by email, sending fraudulent certificates of title and other information designed to lure the victims into parting with their money. Sometimes, the defendants allegedly pretended to sell cars from nonexistent auto dealerships in the United States and even created phony websites for these fictitious dealerships. In at least one transaction involving Ghebosila, the “seller” allegedly pretended to be the widow of an Iraq war veteran who was selling her family’s mobile home so that she could care for her children. In other transactions, the defendants allegedly duped victims into sending tens of thousands of dollars for non-existent vehicles, including Lexus, Audi, Ford, Chevrolet, Dodge, Toyota, Mercedes, Porsche and BMW cars; Big Dog Mastiff and Ninja motorcycles; a Fleetwood Storm motor home; and boats.
As part of the scheme, Cojocaru, Meme, Butoi and others produced high-quality fake passports so that foreign national co-conspirators in the United States, known as “arrows,” could use the passports as identification to open American bank accounts. The complaint alleges that Cojocaru was recorded on video during the investigation displaying new holograms that he was using to create more authentic-looking passports.
According to the complaint, after the “sellers” reached an agreement with the victim buyers, they would often email them invoices purporting to be from Amazon Payments, PayPal or other online payment services, with wire transfer instructions. However, the defendants and their co-conspirators allegedly used counterfeit service marks in designing the invoices so that they would appear identical to communications from legitimate payment services. The fraudulent invoices directed the buyers to send money to the American bank accounts that had been opened by the “arrows.” Finally, the arrows would allegedly collect the illicit proceeds and send them to the defendants in Europe by wire transfer and other methods. For example, the arrows allegedly forwarded Pieptea $18,000 cash in fraud proceeds hidden inside hollowed-out audio speakers. Other arrows allegedly used the proceeds to purchase expensive Audemars Piguet watches, and then sent the watches to the defendants abroad.
According to the complaint, it is estimated that the defendants earned over $3 million from the fraudulent scheme.
If convicted, the defendants each face a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison on the wire fraud conspiracy and money laundering conspiracy counts, and 10 years in prison on the passport fraud conspiracy count.
The charges in the complaint are merely allegations, and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
The government’s case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Cristina Posa, Vamshi Reddy and Claire Kedeshian of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York, and Trial Attorney Carol Sipperly of the Criminal Division’s Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section.
The offices of the FBI Legal Attachés in Romania, the Czech Republic, the United Kingdom, Canada and Hungary were instrumental in coordinating efforts with the United States’ international partners, and the Justice Department Criminal Division’s Office of International Affairs worked with its counterparts in these countries to effect the provisional arrests and requests for mutual legal assistance, including the forfeiture of illegal proceeds of these crimes. The Department of Justice’s Asset Forfeiture and Money Laundering Section also provided assistance in the forfeitures.
The U.S. government thanks the Romanian government, in particular the Ministry of Justice, the Directorate for Combating Organized Crime and the Romanian Intelligence Service, for their collaborative efforts throughout this long-term investigation, as well as the Czech National Police, Hungarian National Bureau of Investigation, Metropolitan Police Service in England, Montreal Police Service, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, International Organized Crime Intelligence and Operations Center, Internet Crime Complaint Center, Costa Mesa, Calif., Police Department, Orange County, Calif., District Attorney’s Office and the New York City Police Department for their assistance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
