• Теги
    • избранные теги
    • Люди6
      • Показать ещё
      Компании23
      • Показать ещё
      Разное18
      • Показать ещё
      Страны / Регионы20
      • Показать ещё
      Издания4
      Международные организации1
Мэрилин Хьюсон
15 октября, 13:56

Общество: Американцы предложили Mitsubishi вместе освоить стелс-технологии

Японский концерн Mitsubishi получил предложение о всестороннем сотрудничестве от давнего партнера – американской Lockheed Martin. Речь идет о совместном создании истребителя-невидимки пятого поколения, который планируется поставить ВВС в течение 10 лет. Япония может стать четвертой страной (после США, России и Китая), которая начала испытания собственного истребителя пятого поколения. Концерн Mitsubishi Heavy Industries получил предложение от американской Lockheed Martin о совместной разработке истребителя-невидимки. «Мы предоставили им необходимую информацию (по проекту) в соответствии со сделанным в августе запросом. Японская аэрокосмическая промышленность обладает большим потенциалом. Мы готовы к всестороннему сотрудничеству», – цитирует главу американской компании Мэрилин Хьюсон «Коммерсантъ». Эти два концерна когда-то уже создали вместе истребители F-4 и F-2, которые теперь минобороны Японии планирует заменить как устаревшие. Сейчас на вооружении японских сил самообороны находится порядка 130 таких машин. В качестве замены рассматривается истребитель с проектным названием Advanced Technology Demonstrator X. Окончательное решение по разработке ожидается не раньше 2018 года, а введение в эксплуатацию в таком случае ожидается не ранее чем через 10 лет. Отметим, что Mitsubishi в апреле уже демонстрировала свой самолет пятого поколения X-2. Япония стала четвертой страной (после России, США и Китая), которая начала испытания собственного истребителя пятого поколения. На прототипе X-2 планируется отработать различные технологии будущего самолета: стелс-технологии, а также планер и двигатель, которые должны обеспечить чрезвычайно высокую маневренность, другие системы. Проигрывает Т-50 по всем параметрам Точные характеристики прототипа японского истребителя пятого поколения ATD-X Shinshin, продемонстрированного Японией, пока не известны. Однако, исходя из имеющихся в наличии у японцев ресурсов, высказывались мнения, что новый японский истребитель будет уступать российскому аналогу – Т-50 (ПАК ФА) – по таким параметрам, как малозаметность, крейсерская сверхзвуковая скорость полета, современное радиоэлектронное оборудование, включая РЛС с АФАР, всеракурсный обстрел целей и сверхманевренность. К тому же, если Россия планирует поставить Т-50 на вооружение уже в следующем году, то японский истребитель превратится из прототипа в реальную боевую машину гораздо позже. Напомним, 14 октября главнокомандующий Воздушно-космическими силами генерал-полковник Виктор Бондарев сообщил, что в следующем году ВКС ожидают уже первые пять Т-50. «В следующем году мы завершаем его испытания», – цитировал Бондарева «Интерфакс». Как известно, первый испытательный полет ПАК ФА состоялся 29 января 2010 года в Комсомольске-на-Амуре. ПАК ФА – одноместный ударный самолет, в конструкции которого широко применяются композитные материалы. Согласно открытым данным, он будет отвечать следующим требованиям, предъявляемым ВКС для истребителей 5-го поколения: сверхзвуковой полет без форсажа, малая заметность для радиолокационных, оптических, акустических и иных систем обнаружения, сверхманевренность и способность совершать относительно короткие взлет и посадку. Летно-технические характеристики самолета официально не раскрываются. На данный момент единственными находящимися на вооружении истребителями пятого поколения являются американские самолеты F-22 Raptor и F-35. Японцы в состоянии создать подобный самолет Заместитель главного редактора журнала «Арсенал Отечества» Дмитрий Дрозденко напоминает, что предоставленный японцами в апреле прототип был достаточно общим, судить о каких-то характеристиках будущего истребителя пятого поколения сил самообороны Японии пока рано. Можно говорить лишь о финансовых и технологических возможностях японских авиастроителей. «Начнем с того, что истребитель ВВС пятого поколения должен иметь ряд определенных тактико-технических характеристик: двигатель этого самолета должен иметь способность поддерживать крейсерскую звуковую скорость без использования форсажных камер, сам аппарат должен использовать технологию стелс, то есть технологию частичной невидимости для определенного типа радаров, и, наконец, обладать комплексом современного вооружения. Все остальные характеристики вносятся разными производителями по усмотрению. Так, Россия добавляет к характеристике собственного истребителя еще и «сверхманевренность», – рассказал Дрозденко газете ВЗГЛЯД. Что касается японцев, то, по мнению эксперта, они обладают доступом к современным технологиям, а авиационная промышленность Японии еще со времен Второй мировой войны обладает огромным потенциалом, кроме того, финансовых ресурсов у них достаточно. «Учитывая то, что американская компания Lockheed Martin обладает технологиями пятого поколения, создать подобный истребитель Японии по силам. Сочетание ресурсов Mitsubishi, американских технологий и японского упорства поможет создать истребитель пятого поколения», – полагает он. Видимые американские «невидимки» Дрозденко также отмечает, что сравнивать будущее чудо японского авиапрома с российскими и американскими аналогами сложно, тем более пока что в эксплуатации находятся только американские самолеты. «На очереди китайский истребитель, но его бы я тоже назвал пока только летающей декларацией. К тому же, не стоит забывать многочисленные истории с поломками F-22 и F-35, когда на эксплуатацию самолетов накладывались ограничения по радиусу использования», – отметил эксперт.   Эксперт напомнил: хотя F-22 вроде бы и принимали участие в операциях США в Ираке и Сирии, но учитывая то, как бережно американцы относятся к своей новейшей технике, сложно судить о реальном опыте их боевого применения. «Не случайно наш командующий ВКС в Сирии говорил о «западных фантазерах» в связи именно с самолетами-невидимками. Американские истребители пока что являются скорее психологическим, чем боевым оружием», – рассказал он. Дрозденко сообщил, что стелс-технологии создавались американцами на основе советских исследований и позволяют самолету оставаться невидимым для радаров определенной системы. «Когда оказалось, что использование волн другой длины и технологий пассивной радиолокации позволяет сделать «невидимку» видимым, США сняли с вооружения свои первые истребители-невидимки», – напомнил эксперт.   Теги:  Япония, боевая авиация, военные технологии, ВПК, истребители

15 октября, 10:26

Lockheed Martin предложила Mitsubishi совместную разработку самолетов-невидимок

Американская компания Lockheed Martin предложила японскому концерну Mitsubishi Heavy Industries совместно разрабатывать истребители с технологией «стелс», сообщил глава американской компании Мэрилин Хьюсон. «Мы предоставили им необходимую информацию (по проекту) в соответствии со сделанным в августе запросом. Японская аэрокосмическая промышленность обладает большим потенциалом. Мы готовы к всестороннему сотрудничеству», - передает его слова «Коммерсант». На данный момент министерство обороны Японии планирует заменить устаревшие истребители F-4 и F-2 совместной разработки Mitsubishi Heavy Industries и Lockheed Martin. На вооружении японских сил самообороны состоит около 130 таких машин. В качестве замены этим самолетам рассматривается истребитель с проектным названием Advanced Technology Demonstrator X, но его введение в эксплуатацию ожидается не ранее, чем через 10 лет. Окончательное решение по разработке будет принято в 2018 году. Отметим, что компания Mitsubishi в апреле уже продемонстрировала свой самолет пятого поколения X-2. Япония стала четвертой страной (после России, США и Китая), которая начала испытания истребителя пятого поколения собственного производства. На прототипе X-2 планируется отработать различные технологии будущего самолета: стелс-технологии, а также планер и двигатель, которые должны обеспечить чрезвычайно высокую маневренность, другие системы.

Выбор редакции
15 октября, 08:21

Mitsubishi может начать разработку самолетов-невидимок совместно с американской компанией

Американская компания Lockheed Martin предложила японскому концерну Mitsubishi Heavy Industries совместно разрабатывать истребители-невидимки. «Мы предоставили им необходимую информацию (по проекту) в соответствии со сделанным в августе запросом. Японская аэрокосмическая промышленность обладает большим потенциалом. Мы готовы к всестороннему сотрудничеству»,— приводит Nikkei слова главы американской компании Мэрилин Хьюсон.

17 августа, 16:53

Lockheed (LMT) Merges IT Business with Leidos Subsidiary

Lockheed Martin Corp. (LMT) has completed the spin-off of its Information Systems & Global Solutions ("IS&GS") business segment and combined it with a Leidos Holdings, Inc. (LDOS) subsidiary.

26 июля, 16:19

There's No Business Like The Arms Business

Weapons 'R' Us (But You'd Never Know It) Cross-posted with TomDispatch.com When American firms dominate a global market worth more than $70 billion a year, you’d expect to hear about it.  Not so with the global arms trade.  It’s good for one or two stories a year in the mainstream media, usually when the annual statistics on the state of the business come out. It’s not that no one writes about aspects of the arms trade. There are occasional pieces that, for example, take note of the impact of U.S. weapons transfers, including cluster bombs, to Saudi Arabia, or of the disastrous dispensation of weaponry to U.S. allies in Syria, or of foreign sales of the costly, controversial F-35 combat aircraft.  And once in a while, if a foreign leader meets with the president, U.S. arms sales to his or her country might generate an article or two. But the sheer size of the American arms trade, the politics that drive it, the companies that profit from it, and its devastating global impacts are rarely discussed, much less analyzed in any depth. So here’s a question that’s puzzled me for years (and I’m something of an arms wonk): Why do other major U.S. exports -- from Hollywood movies to Midwestern grain shipments to Boeing airliners -- garner regular coverage while trends in weapons exports remain in relative obscurity?  Are we ashamed of standing essentially alone as the world’s number one arms dealer, or is our Weapons “R” Us role such a commonplace that we take it for granted, like death or taxes? The numbers should stagger anyone.  According to the latest figures available from the Congressional Research Service, the United States was credited with more than half the value of all global arms transfer agreements in 2014, the most recent year for which full statistics are available. At 14%, the world’s second largest supplier, Russia, lagged far behind.  Washington’s “leadership” in this field has never truly been challenged.  The U.S. share has fluctuated between one-third and one-half of the global market for the past two decades, peaking at an almost monopolistic 70% of all weapons sold in 2011.  And the gold rush continues. Vice Admiral Joe Rixey, who heads the Pentagon’s arms sales agency, euphemistically known as the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, estimates that arms deals facilitated by the Pentagon topped $46 billion in 2015, and are on track to hit $40 billion in 2016. To be completely accurate, there is one group of people who pay remarkably close attention to these trends -- executives of the defense contractors that are cashing in on this growth market.  With the Pentagon and related agencies taking in “only” about $600 billion a year -- high by historical standards but tens of billions of dollars less than hoped for by the defense industry -- companies like Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and General Dynamics have been looking to global markets as their major source of new revenue. In a January 2015 investor call, for example, Lockheed Martin CEO Marillyn Hewson was asked whether the Iran nuclear deal brokered by the Obama administration and five other powers might reduce tensions in the Middle East, undermining the company’s strategy of increasing its arms exports to the region.  She responded that continuing “volatility” in both the Middle East and Asia would make them “growth areas” for the foreseeable future.  In other words, no worries.  As long as the world stays at war or on the verge of it, Lockheed Martin’s profits won’t suffer -- and, of course, its products will help ensure that any such “volatility” will prove lethal indeed. Under Hewson, Lockheed has set a goal of getting at least 25% of its revenues from weapons exports, and Boeing has done that company one better.  It’s seeking to make overseas arms sales 30% of its business. Good News From the Middle East (If You’re an Arms Maker) Arms deals are a way of life in Washington.  From the president on down, significant parts of the government are intent on ensuring that American arms will flood the global market and companies like Lockheed and Boeing will live the good life.  From the president on his trips abroad to visit allied world leaders to the secretaries of state and defense to the staffs of U.S. embassies, American officials regularly act as salespeople for the arms firms.  And the Pentagon is their enabler.  From brokering, facilitating, and literally banking the money from arms deals to transferring weapons to favored allies on the taxpayers' dime, it is in essence the world’s largest arms dealer.  In a typical sale, the U.S. government is involved every step of the way.  The Pentagon often does assessments of an allied nation’s armed forces in order to tell them what they “need” -- and of course what they always need is billions of dollars in new U.S.-supplied equipment.  Then the Pentagon helps negotiate the terms of the deal, notifies Congress of its details, and collects the funds from the foreign buyer, which it then gives to the U.S. supplier in the form of a defense contract.  In most deals, the Pentagon is also the point of contact for maintenance and spare parts for any U.S.-supplied system. The bureaucracy that helps make all of this happen, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, is funded from a 3.5% surcharge on the deals it negotiates. This gives it all the more incentive to sell, sell, sell. And the pressure for yet more of the same is always intense, in part because the weapons makers are careful to spread their production facilities to as many states and localities as possible.  In this way, they ensure that endless support for government promotion of major arms sales becomes part and parcel of domestic politics. General Dynamics, for instance, has managed to keep its tank plants in Ohio and Michigan running through a combination of add-ons to the Army budget -- funds inserted into that budget by Congress even though the Pentagon didn’t request them -- and exports to Saudi Arabia.  Boeing is banking on a proposed deal to sell 40 F-18s to Kuwait to keep its St. Louis production line open, and is currently jousting with the Obama administration to get it to move more quickly on the deal.  Not surprisingly, members of Congress and local business leaders in such states become strong supporters of weapons exports. Though seldom thought of this way, the U.S. political system is also a global arms distribution system of the first order.  In this context, the Obama administration has proven itself a good friend to arms exporting firms.  During President Obama’s first six years in office, Washington entered into agreements to sell more than $190 billion in weaponry worldwide -- more, that is, than any U.S. administration since World War II.  In addition, Team Obama has loosened restrictions on arms exports, making it possible to send abroad a whole new range of weapons and weapons components -- including Black Hawk and Huey helicopters and engines for C-17 transport planes -- with far less scrutiny than was previously required. This has been good news for the industry, which had been pressing for such changes for decades with little success. But the weaker regulations also make it potentially easier for arms smugglers and human rights abusers to get their hands on U.S. arms. For example, 36 U.S. allies -- from Argentina and Bulgaria to Romania and Turkey -- will no longer need licenses from the State Department to import weapons and weapons parts from the United States.  This will make it far easier for smuggling networks to set up front companies in such countries and get U.S. arms and arms components that they can then pass on to third parties like Iran or China.  Already a common practice, it will only increase under the new regulations. The degree to which the Obama administration has been willing to bend over backward to help weapons exporters was underscored at a 2013 hearing on those administration export “reforms.”  Tom Kelly, then the deputy assistant secretary of the State Department's Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, caught the spirit of the era when asked whether the administration was doing enough to promote American arms exports.  He responded: “[We are] advocating on behalf of our companies and doing everything we can to make sure that these sales go through... and that is something we are doing every day, basically [on] every continent in the world... and we’re constantly thinking of how we can do better.” One place where, with a helping hand from the Obama administration and the Pentagon, the arms industry has been doing a lot better of late is the Middle East.  Washington has brokered deals for more than $50 billion in weapons sales to Saudi Arabia alone for everything from F-15 fighter aircraft and Apache attack helicopters to combat ships and missile defense systems. The most damaging deals, if not the most lucrative, have been the sales of bombs and missiles to the Saudis for their brutal war in Yemen, where thousands of civilians have been killed and millions of people are going hungry.  Members of Congress like Michigan Representative John Conyers and Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy have pressed for legislation that would at least stem the flow of the most deadly of the weaponry being sent for use there, but they have yet to overcome the considerable clout of the Saudis in Washington (and, of course, that of the arms industry as well). When it comes to the arms business, however, there’s no end to the good news from the Middle East.  Take the administration’s proposed new 10-year aid deal with Israel.  If enacted as currently planned, it would boost U.S. military assistance to that country by up to 25% -- to roughly $4 billion per year. At the same time, it would phase out a provision that had allowed Israel to spend one-quarter of Washington’s aid developing its own defense industry.  In other words, all that money, the full $4 billion in taxpayer dollars, will now flow directly into the coffers of companies like Lockheed Martin, which is in the midst of completing a multi-billion-dollar deal to sell the Israelis F-35s. “Volatility” in Asia and Europe  As Lockheed Martin’s Marillyn Hewson noted, however, the Middle East is hardly the only growth area for that firm or others like it.  The dispute between China and its neighbors over the control of the South China Sea (which is in many ways an incipient conflict over whether that country or the United States will control that part of the Pacific Ocean) has opened up new vistas when it comes to the sale of American warships and other military equipment to Washington’s East Asian allies.  The recent Hague court decision rejecting Chinese claims to those waters (and the Chinese rejection of it) is only likely to increase the pace of arms buying in the region. At the same time, in the good-news-never-ends department, growing fears of North Korea’s nuclear program have stoked a demand for U.S.-supplied missile defense systems.  The South Koreans have, in fact, just agreed to deploy Lockheed Martin’s THAAD anti-missile system.  In addition, the Obama administration’s decision to end the longstanding embargo on U.S. arms sales to Vietnam is likely to open yet another significant market for U.S. firms. In the past two years alone, the U.S. has offered more than $15 billion worth of weaponry to allies in East Asia, with Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea accounting for the bulk of the sales. In addition, the Obama administration has gone to great lengths to build a defense relationship with India, a development guaranteed to benefit U.S. arms exporters.  Last year, Washington and New Delhi signed a 10-year defense agreement that included pledges of future joint work on aircraft engines and aircraft carrier designs.  In these years, the U.S. has made significant inroads into the Indian arms market, which had traditionally been dominated by the Soviet Union and then Russia.  Recent deals include a $5.8 billion sale of Boeing C-17 transport aircraft and a $1.4 billion agreement to provide support services related to a planned purchase of Apache attack helicopters. And don’t forget “volatile” Europe.  Great Britain’s recent Brexit vote introduced an uncertainty factor into American arms exports to that country. The United Kingdom has been by far the biggest purchaser of U.S. weapons in Europe of late, with more than $6 billion in deals struck over the past two years alone -- more, that is, than the U.S. has sold to all other European countries combined. The British defense behemoth BAE is Lockheed Martin’s principal foreign partner on the F-35 combat aircraft, which at a projected cost of $1.4 trillion over its lifetime already qualifies as the most expensive weapons program in history.  If Brexit-driven austerity were to lead to a delay in, or the cancellation of, the F-35 deal (or any other major weapons shipments), it would be a blow to American arms makers.  But count on one thing: were there to be even a hint that this might happen to the F-35, lobbyists for BAE will mobilize to get the deal privileged status, whatever other budget cuts may be in the works. On the bright side (if you happen to be a weapons maker), any British reductions will certainly be more than offset by opportunities in Eastern and Central Europe, where a new Cold War seems to be gaining traction.  Between 2014 and 2015, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, military spending increased by 13% in the region in response to the Russian intervention in Ukraine. The rise in Poland’s outlays, at 22%, was particularly steep. Under the circumstances, it should be obvious that trends in the global arms trade are a major news story and should be dealt with as such in the country most responsible for putting more weapons of a more powerful nature into the hands of those living in “volatile” regions.  It’s a monster business (in every sense of the word) and certainly has far more dangerous consequences than licensing a Hollywood blockbuster or selling another Boeing airliner. Historically, there have been rare occasions of public protest against unbridled arms trafficking, as with the backlash against “the merchants of death” after World War I, or the controversy over who armed Saddam Hussein that followed the 1991 Persian Gulf War.  Even now, small numbers of congressional representatives, including John Conyers, Chris Murphy, and Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, continue to try to halt the sale of cluster munitions, bombs, and missiles to Saudi Arabia. There is, however, unlikely to be a genuine public debate about the value of the arms business and Washington’s place in it if it isn’t even considered a subject worthy of more than an occasional media story.  In the meantime, the United States continues to hold onto the number one role in the global arms trade, the White House does its part, the Pentagon greases the wheels, and the dollars roll in to profit-hungry U.S. weapons contractors. William D. Hartung, a TomDispatch regular, is the director of the Arms and Security Project at the Center for International Policy and a senior advisor to the Security Assistance Monitor. He is the author of Prophets of War: Lockheed Martin and the Making of the Military-Industrial Complex. Follow TomDispatch on Twitter and join us on Facebook. Check out the newest Dispatch Book, Nick Turse’s Next Time They’ll Come to Count the Dead, and Tom Engelhardt's latest book, Shadow Government: Surveillance, Secret Wars, and a Global Security State in a Single-Superpower World. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

26 июля, 16:19

There's No Business Like The Arms Business

Weapons 'R' Us (But You'd Never Know It) Cross-posted with TomDispatch.com When American firms dominate a global market worth more than $70 billion a year, you’d expect to hear about it.  Not so with the global arms trade.  It’s good for one or two stories a year in the mainstream media, usually when the annual statistics on the state of the business come out. It’s not that no one writes about aspects of the arms trade. There are occasional pieces that, for example, take note of the impact of U.S. weapons transfers, including cluster bombs, to Saudi Arabia, or of the disastrous dispensation of weaponry to U.S. allies in Syria, or of foreign sales of the costly, controversial F-35 combat aircraft.  And once in a while, if a foreign leader meets with the president, U.S. arms sales to his or her country might generate an article or two. But the sheer size of the American arms trade, the politics that drive it, the companies that profit from it, and its devastating global impacts are rarely discussed, much less analyzed in any depth. So here’s a question that’s puzzled me for years (and I’m something of an arms wonk): Why do other major U.S. exports -- from Hollywood movies to Midwestern grain shipments to Boeing airliners -- garner regular coverage while trends in weapons exports remain in relative obscurity?  Are we ashamed of standing essentially alone as the world’s number one arms dealer, or is our Weapons “R” Us role such a commonplace that we take it for granted, like death or taxes? The numbers should stagger anyone.  According to the latest figures available from the Congressional Research Service, the United States was credited with more than half the value of all global arms transfer agreements in 2014, the most recent year for which full statistics are available. At 14%, the world’s second largest supplier, Russia, lagged far behind.  Washington’s “leadership” in this field has never truly been challenged.  The U.S. share has fluctuated between one-third and one-half of the global market for the past two decades, peaking at an almost monopolistic 70% of all weapons sold in 2011.  And the gold rush continues. Vice Admiral Joe Rixey, who heads the Pentagon’s arms sales agency, euphemistically known as the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, estimates that arms deals facilitated by the Pentagon topped $46 billion in 2015, and are on track to hit $40 billion in 2016. To be completely accurate, there is one group of people who pay remarkably close attention to these trends -- executives of the defense contractors that are cashing in on this growth market.  With the Pentagon and related agencies taking in “only” about $600 billion a year -- high by historical standards but tens of billions of dollars less than hoped for by the defense industry -- companies like Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and General Dynamics have been looking to global markets as their major source of new revenue. In a January 2015 investor call, for example, Lockheed Martin CEO Marillyn Hewson was asked whether the Iran nuclear deal brokered by the Obama administration and five other powers might reduce tensions in the Middle East, undermining the company’s strategy of increasing its arms exports to the region.  She responded that continuing “volatility” in both the Middle East and Asia would make them “growth areas” for the foreseeable future.  In other words, no worries.  As long as the world stays at war or on the verge of it, Lockheed Martin’s profits won’t suffer -- and, of course, its products will help ensure that any such “volatility” will prove lethal indeed. Under Hewson, Lockheed has set a goal of getting at least 25% of its revenues from weapons exports, and Boeing has done that company one better.  It’s seeking to make overseas arms sales 30% of its business. Good News From the Middle East (If You’re an Arms Maker) Arms deals are a way of life in Washington.  From the president on down, significant parts of the government are intent on ensuring that American arms will flood the global market and companies like Lockheed and Boeing will live the good life.  From the president on his trips abroad to visit allied world leaders to the secretaries of state and defense to the staffs of U.S. embassies, American officials regularly act as salespeople for the arms firms.  And the Pentagon is their enabler.  From brokering, facilitating, and literally banking the money from arms deals to transferring weapons to favored allies on the taxpayers' dime, it is in essence the world’s largest arms dealer.  In a typical sale, the U.S. government is involved every step of the way.  The Pentagon often does assessments of an allied nation’s armed forces in order to tell them what they “need” -- and of course what they always need is billions of dollars in new U.S.-supplied equipment.  Then the Pentagon helps negotiate the terms of the deal, notifies Congress of its details, and collects the funds from the foreign buyer, which it then gives to the U.S. supplier in the form of a defense contract.  In most deals, the Pentagon is also the point of contact for maintenance and spare parts for any U.S.-supplied system. The bureaucracy that helps make all of this happen, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, is funded from a 3.5% surcharge on the deals it negotiates. This gives it all the more incentive to sell, sell, sell. And the pressure for yet more of the same is always intense, in part because the weapons makers are careful to spread their production facilities to as many states and localities as possible.  In this way, they ensure that endless support for government promotion of major arms sales becomes part and parcel of domestic politics. General Dynamics, for instance, has managed to keep its tank plants in Ohio and Michigan running through a combination of add-ons to the Army budget -- funds inserted into that budget by Congress even though the Pentagon didn’t request them -- and exports to Saudi Arabia.  Boeing is banking on a proposed deal to sell 40 F-18s to Kuwait to keep its St. Louis production line open, and is currently jousting with the Obama administration to get it to move more quickly on the deal.  Not surprisingly, members of Congress and local business leaders in such states become strong supporters of weapons exports. Though seldom thought of this way, the U.S. political system is also a global arms distribution system of the first order.  In this context, the Obama administration has proven itself a good friend to arms exporting firms.  During President Obama’s first six years in office, Washington entered into agreements to sell more than $190 billion in weaponry worldwide -- more, that is, than any U.S. administration since World War II.  In addition, Team Obama has loosened restrictions on arms exports, making it possible to send abroad a whole new range of weapons and weapons components -- including Black Hawk and Huey helicopters and engines for C-17 transport planes -- with far less scrutiny than was previously required. This has been good news for the industry, which had been pressing for such changes for decades with little success. But the weaker regulations also make it potentially easier for arms smugglers and human rights abusers to get their hands on U.S. arms. For example, 36 U.S. allies -- from Argentina and Bulgaria to Romania and Turkey -- will no longer need licenses from the State Department to import weapons and weapons parts from the United States.  This will make it far easier for smuggling networks to set up front companies in such countries and get U.S. arms and arms components that they can then pass on to third parties like Iran or China.  Already a common practice, it will only increase under the new regulations. The degree to which the Obama administration has been willing to bend over backward to help weapons exporters was underscored at a 2013 hearing on those administration export “reforms.”  Tom Kelly, then the deputy assistant secretary of the State Department's Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, caught the spirit of the era when asked whether the administration was doing enough to promote American arms exports.  He responded: “[We are] advocating on behalf of our companies and doing everything we can to make sure that these sales go through... and that is something we are doing every day, basically [on] every continent in the world... and we’re constantly thinking of how we can do better.” One place where, with a helping hand from the Obama administration and the Pentagon, the arms industry has been doing a lot better of late is the Middle East.  Washington has brokered deals for more than $50 billion in weapons sales to Saudi Arabia alone for everything from F-15 fighter aircraft and Apache attack helicopters to combat ships and missile defense systems. The most damaging deals, if not the most lucrative, have been the sales of bombs and missiles to the Saudis for their brutal war in Yemen, where thousands of civilians have been killed and millions of people are going hungry.  Members of Congress like Michigan Representative John Conyers and Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy have pressed for legislation that would at least stem the flow of the most deadly of the weaponry being sent for use there, but they have yet to overcome the considerable clout of the Saudis in Washington (and, of course, that of the arms industry as well). When it comes to the arms business, however, there’s no end to the good news from the Middle East.  Take the administration’s proposed new 10-year aid deal with Israel.  If enacted as currently planned, it would boost U.S. military assistance to that country by up to 25% -- to roughly $4 billion per year. At the same time, it would phase out a provision that had allowed Israel to spend one-quarter of Washington’s aid developing its own defense industry.  In other words, all that money, the full $4 billion in taxpayer dollars, will now flow directly into the coffers of companies like Lockheed Martin, which is in the midst of completing a multi-billion-dollar deal to sell the Israelis F-35s. “Volatility” in Asia and Europe  As Lockheed Martin’s Marillyn Hewson noted, however, the Middle East is hardly the only growth area for that firm or others like it.  The dispute between China and its neighbors over the control of the South China Sea (which is in many ways an incipient conflict over whether that country or the United States will control that part of the Pacific Ocean) has opened up new vistas when it comes to the sale of American warships and other military equipment to Washington’s East Asian allies.  The recent Hague court decision rejecting Chinese claims to those waters (and the Chinese rejection of it) is only likely to increase the pace of arms buying in the region. At the same time, in the good-news-never-ends department, growing fears of North Korea’s nuclear program have stoked a demand for U.S.-supplied missile defense systems.  The South Koreans have, in fact, just agreed to deploy Lockheed Martin’s THAAD anti-missile system.  In addition, the Obama administration’s decision to end the longstanding embargo on U.S. arms sales to Vietnam is likely to open yet another significant market for U.S. firms. In the past two years alone, the U.S. has offered more than $15 billion worth of weaponry to allies in East Asia, with Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea accounting for the bulk of the sales. In addition, the Obama administration has gone to great lengths to build a defense relationship with India, a development guaranteed to benefit U.S. arms exporters.  Last year, Washington and New Delhi signed a 10-year defense agreement that included pledges of future joint work on aircraft engines and aircraft carrier designs.  In these years, the U.S. has made significant inroads into the Indian arms market, which had traditionally been dominated by the Soviet Union and then Russia.  Recent deals include a $5.8 billion sale of Boeing C-17 transport aircraft and a $1.4 billion agreement to provide support services related to a planned purchase of Apache attack helicopters. And don’t forget “volatile” Europe.  Great Britain’s recent Brexit vote introduced an uncertainty factor into American arms exports to that country. The United Kingdom has been by far the biggest purchaser of U.S. weapons in Europe of late, with more than $6 billion in deals struck over the past two years alone -- more, that is, than the U.S. has sold to all other European countries combined. The British defense behemoth BAE is Lockheed Martin’s principal foreign partner on the F-35 combat aircraft, which at a projected cost of $1.4 trillion over its lifetime already qualifies as the most expensive weapons program in history.  If Brexit-driven austerity were to lead to a delay in, or the cancellation of, the F-35 deal (or any other major weapons shipments), it would be a blow to American arms makers.  But count on one thing: were there to be even a hint that this might happen to the F-35, lobbyists for BAE will mobilize to get the deal privileged status, whatever other budget cuts may be in the works. On the bright side (if you happen to be a weapons maker), any British reductions will certainly be more than offset by opportunities in Eastern and Central Europe, where a new Cold War seems to be gaining traction.  Between 2014 and 2015, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, military spending increased by 13% in the region in response to the Russian intervention in Ukraine. The rise in Poland’s outlays, at 22%, was particularly steep. Under the circumstances, it should be obvious that trends in the global arms trade are a major news story and should be dealt with as such in the country most responsible for putting more weapons of a more powerful nature into the hands of those living in “volatile” regions.  It’s a monster business (in every sense of the word) and certainly has far more dangerous consequences than licensing a Hollywood blockbuster or selling another Boeing airliner. Historically, there have been rare occasions of public protest against unbridled arms trafficking, as with the backlash against “the merchants of death” after World War I, or the controversy over who armed Saddam Hussein that followed the 1991 Persian Gulf War.  Even now, small numbers of congressional representatives, including John Conyers, Chris Murphy, and Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, continue to try to halt the sale of cluster munitions, bombs, and missiles to Saudi Arabia. There is, however, unlikely to be a genuine public debate about the value of the arms business and Washington’s place in it if it isn’t even considered a subject worthy of more than an occasional media story.  In the meantime, the United States continues to hold onto the number one role in the global arms trade, the White House does its part, the Pentagon greases the wheels, and the dollars roll in to profit-hungry U.S. weapons contractors. William D. Hartung, a TomDispatch regular, is the director of the Arms and Security Project at the Center for International Policy and a senior advisor to the Security Assistance Monitor. He is the author of Prophets of War: Lockheed Martin and the Making of the Military-Industrial Complex. Follow TomDispatch on Twitter and join us on Facebook. Check out the newest Dispatch Book, Nick Turse’s Next Time They’ll Come to Count the Dead, and Tom Engelhardt's latest book, Shadow Government: Surveillance, Secret Wars, and a Global Security State in a Single-Superpower World. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

13 июля, 10:20

Lockheed Martin решил производить истребители F-16 в Индии

Корпорация Lockheed Martin подписала соглашение о выпуске своих истребителей F-16 в Индии, «многомиллиардная» сделка заключена в Дели во время визита главы компании Мэрилин Хьюсон. Об этом пишет The Hindu, ссылаясь на высокопоставленный источник, участвующий в переговорах.

03 июля, 14:46

Lockheed's top government affairs official not registered as lobbyist

His decision not to register goes against both company precedent and the practices of other top defense firms.

10 июня, 16:35

White House United State of Women Summit

Tuesday, June 14, 2016 Walter E. Washington Convention Center, Washington, DC   Please see below for an agenda and speakers for the upcoming United State of Women Summit. A full list of speakers is available HERE. Visit www.theunitedstateofwomen.org more information and a livestream of the day’s events. 8:30AM        FIRST PLENARY - Violence Against Women and Health and Wellness Opening Remarks Valerie Jarrett, Senior Advisor to the President and Chair, White House Council on Women and Girls Tina Tchen, Chief of Staff to the First Lady and Executive Director of the White House Council on Women and Girls Carol Gstalder, SVP Consumer Insights North America, Nielsen U.S. Secretary Thomas Perez, U.S. Department of Labor with Kakenya Ntaiya Heather Anne Higginbottom, Deputy Secretary of State, U.S. Department of State with Ginny Quillen Walter Isaacson, President & CEO, The Aspen Institute   9:10AM         THE VICE PRESIDENT delivers remarks on Violence Against Women                     Introducer: Meghan Yap, It’s On Us Champion of Change Pillar: Violence Against Women Speakers include: Mariska Hargitay, Founder & President, Joyful Heart Foundation Ideas for Action Presentations: Violence Against Women Quentin Walcott, Co-Executive Director, CONNECT NYC Matt McGorry, Actor Joanne Smith, Executive Director, Girls for Gender Equity and Co-Chair New York Young Women’s Initiative Kristin Avery, Director, It's On Us Shaquil Keels, It’s On Us Activist Jessica Davidson, It’s On Us Activist Jaha Dukureh, Founder and CEO, Safe Hands for Girls Bamby Salcedo, President  & CEO, The TransLatin@ Coalition Pillar: Health and Wellness Speakers include: Connie Britton, Actress Cecile Richards, President, Planned Parenthood Federation of America Grecia Magdaleno, Planned Parenthood Federation of America Ideas for Action Presentations: Health and Wellness Jo Ann Jenkins, CEO, AARP Carolyn Miles, President and CEO, Save the Children Dr. Carol Brown, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Dr. Sonia Vallabh and Dr. Eric Minikel, Co-Founders, Prion Alliance Darren Walker, President of the Ford Foundation   10:50AM        SOLUTIONS SEMINARS Education: Investing in Early Childhood Education Economic Opportunity: Breaking the Cycle of Poverty: Economic Empowerment for Women and Families Economic Opportunity: Solutions to Increasing Women’s Workplace Participation Civic Engagement, Leadership and Visibility: Building Inclusive Movements and Engaged Citizens Entrepreneurship: Ideas with Us in Mind: Innovations that Create Social Impact Entrepreneurship: Getting Credit: Expanding Women’s Access to Capital Health: Healthy and Mighty: Empowering Women and Girls to Connect to Healthcare Health: Addressing HIV/AIDS in Women and Girls: Lessons Learned at Home and Abroad Violence Against Women: From Grassroots to Global: Breaking Cycles of Violence Violence Against Women: From the Margins to the Center: Solutions to Stopping Violence in All Communities Crosscutting: From Surviving to Thriving: Tools to Empowering ALL Girls Crosscutting: Revolutionizing Gender Norms   12:30PM       SECOND PLENARY - Economic Opportunity and Entrepreneurship & Innovation  Pillar: Economic Opportunity Speakers include: Patricia Arquette, Actress Heather Boushey, Executive Director and Chief Economist, Washington Center for Equitable Growth Mary Kay Henry, President, SEIU Lilly Ledbetter, Equal Pay Champion Charmaine Davis, Chapter Director, 9 to 5 Betzaida Ventura, Personal Care Attendant, SEIU Kevin Burton, Assistant Director, NECA/IBEW Local Union #26 Joint Apprenticeship & Training Pillar: Entrepreneurship & Innovation Speakers include: Laurie Fabiano, President, Tory Burch Foundation Warren Buffett, Chairman & CEO, Berkshire Hathaway Ayo Megbope, CEO, No Left Overs Carla Walker-Miller, President and CEO, Walker-Miller Energy Services, LLC Dina Habib Powell, Head of Goldman Sachs' Impact Investing Business and President of the Goldman Sachs Foundation, Goldman Sachs Kerry Washington, Actress Ideas for Action Presentations: Entrepreneurship & Innovation Julie Hanna, Executive Chair of the Board, Kiva Alex Gorsky, CEO & Chairman, Johnson & Johnson Seina Lee, Johnson & Johnson Ideas for Action Presentations: Economic Opportunity Angela Glover Blackwell, President and CEO, PolicyLink Lakshmi Puri, Deputy Executive Director, UN Women Prosperity Together Coalition Elizabeth Shuler, Secretary-Treasurer, AFL-CIO Ariana Davis, United Food and Commercial Workers U.S. Representative Nancy Pelosi, House Democratic Leader   2:30PM           THE PRESIDENT delivers remarks                       Introducer: Mikaila Ulmer, Founder and CEO, Me & the Bees Lemonade   2:55PM           SOLUTIONS SEMINARS Education: Cracking the Code: Access to STEM for all Women and Girls Education: Transcending Barriers to Girls’ Education Globally Economic Opportunity: Get Fair Pay: How to Achieve Pay Equity Economic Opportunity: Valuing Caregiving in the 21st Century Civic Engagement, Leadership and Visibility: A Conversation with Trailblazers: Making the Case for Gender Diversity Across Industries and Sectors Civic Engagement, Leadership and Visibility: "Reel" Change: Advancing Equity and Opportunity in Media Entrepreneurship: How to One up the Start Up: Successes in Growing Women-Owned Businesses Health: What Works: Strategies to Address Unplanned Pregnancy Violence Against Women: Changing the Culture to End Violence Against Women Violence Against Women: Away from Slavery and Towards Human Rights: Ending Trafficking of Women and Girls Crosscutting: Creating Pathways towards Equity: Advancing Opportunity for Women and Girls of Color Crosscutting: Second Chances for Success: Women, Girls and the Justice System    4:10PM           THIRD PLENARY - Civic Engagement, Leadership and Visibility Pillar: Civic Engagement, Leadership and Visibility Speakers include: Sophia Bush, Actress Marley Dias, Founder, #1000BlackGirlBooks Billie Jean King, Founder, Billie Jean King Leadership Initiative & the Women’s Sports Foundation Jennifer Welter, First Female NFL Coach Video from DR. JILL BIDEN General Lori Robinson, NORAD and USNORTHCOM Jenn Brown, Executive Director, Civic Nation Shonda Rhimes, Content Creator, ShondaLand Amani Al-Khatahtbeh, Founder & Editor-In-Chief, Muslim Girl Amy Poehler, Co-Founder & President, Amy Poehler's Smart Girls Ideas for Action Presentations: Civic Engagement, Leadership and Visibility Kemba Smith Pradia, Author, Public Speaker, Criminal Justice Advocate, Kemba Smith Foundation Girls at the Margin Alliance Ideas for Action Presentations: Education Reshma Saujani, Founder & CEO, Girls Who Code Angélique Kidjo, Founder, Batonga Foundation and Ambassador, UNICEF Charlene Espinoza, Founder & CEO, Bosh Bosh Marillyn Hewson, Chairman, President and CEO, Lockheed Martin   5:20PM           Armchair Coversation on Trailblazing the Path for the Next Generation of Women with THE FIRST LADY and Ms. Oprah Winfrey Introducers: Dorothee Mulumba, High School Student and Mpumi Nobiva, Graduate Student   6:10PM           Closing Remarks Speakers include: Valerie Jarrett, Senior Advisor to the President and Chair, White House Council on Women and Girls Tina Tchen, Chief of Staff to the First Lady and Executive Director of the White House Council on Women and Girls

01 июня, 23:33

Defense Stock Roundup: Boeing Scores Multi-Billion-Dollar Contract, Loses on KC-46 Tanker Delivery Delay

Over the past one week, though defense primes smarted under market depreciations, it did not stop them from picking up big ticket programs from the Pentagon's funding list.

18 марта, 18:00

Гиперзвуковой самолёт со скоростью 7000 км/ч

Глава американской оборонной корпорации Lockheed Martin Мэрилин Хьюсон объявила о том, что работа над гиперзвуковым военным самолётом HTV-3X идёт полным ходом.

17 марта, 18:45

Lockheed Martin, Making Money the Old-Fashioned Way

Lockheed Martin held its annual media day this week, and CEO Marillyn Hewson assured those attending that the company was financially sound and poised to lead the industry in developing the next generation of military technology, from military lasers to hypersonic weapons. But the bulk of the company's revenues rely on old-fashioned techniques - buying up other companies, profiting from the sale of big-ticket weapons systems, and pushing foreign sales. The news of the year was the company's purchase of Sikorsky from United Technologies, a move that will make Lockheed Martin the primary source of helicopters for the U.S. military. It was the company's largest acquisition since the 1990s, when Lockheed and Martin Marietta merged, aided by hundreds of millions in taxpayer subsidies to pay for such questionable items as golden parachutes for executives impacted by the merger. Lockheed Martin wasn't the only company to grow through merger during that era - Boeing bought McDonnell Douglas, Northrop and Grumman merged, and dozens of other deals were made. At the time, the argument for allowing - and subsidizing - these combinations was that it would reduce overhead and result in better weapons prices for the U.S. government. But as former Pentagon official Lawrence Korb noted at the time, "past history indicates that these mergers end up costing rather than saving the government money." And so it has been, as Lockheed Martin has racked up multi-billion dollar cost overruns on major programs like the F-35 combat aircraft and the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS). Rather than saving money, the mergers created industrial behemoths with greater leverage over the Pentagon. With only a handful of major firms to turn to in the procurement of major weapons systems, the Department of Defense's ability to keep a lid on mushrooming weapons costs has been diminished. And a company like Lockheed Martin, which has $46 billion in revenues and claims to have a presence in every state in the union, has enormous financial and political clout. This gives Lockheed Martin the ability to prolong programs that serve its corporate interests whether or not they are in the national interest. A case in point is the F-35 program. If it goes forward as planned, Lockheed Martin will end up being the only supplier of fighter aircraft to the U.S. government, leaving the taxpayers in a "take it or leave it" position with regard to the company's product. A recent analysis by the Project on Government Oversight has catalogued the myriad performance problems with the F-35. Most importantly, even as the Pentagon accelerates spending on F-35s and assures us that the plane is ready for prime time, the Pentagon's office of independent testing has noted that it won't even be known whether the aircraft will be sustainable in combat until 2022. Thus far, test aircraft at Edwards Air Force Base have only been able to fly about six sorties per month due to excessive down time for maintenance. The high tech testing simulator that is supposed to assess the F-35s capabilities has itself had serious development problems. And the aircraft coming off the assembly line now have even more problems than the ones that came before. Given this reality, entrusting the entire future of this segment of the combat aircraft industry to this one company makes no sense. This is particularly true when one considers that, as a 2015 report by the National Security Network has shown, the F-35 is destined to be inferior to the aircraft it is replacing. Despite all of the above, the Pentagon wants to push forward a 400-plane "block buy" of F-35s that would put billions of dollars in Lockheed Martin's coffers without providing evidence to suggest that the aircraft being purchased will perform as advertised. Over the next few years, Lockheed Martin will almost certainly put more effort into securing this funding bonanza than it will to creating innovative new products. Rather than throwing all of its eggs in one basket, the Pentagon should scale back the F-35 program and fill in any gaps in fighter numbers with upgraded versions of current generation F-16s and F-18s. Not only would this save billions of dollars per year, but it would dilute Lockheed Martin's emerging monopoly over the fighter aircraft market and provide an insurance policy in case the F-35 continues to have debilitating problems that raise questions about its ability to serve as the aircraft of the future for the Air Force, Navy and Marines. Expect Lockheed Martin to fight any movement in this direction tooth and nail. Instead, the company will lobby get even more F-35s funded than the Pentagon is requesting. One of Marillyn Hewson's proud proclamations at this week's media day was that fact that Congress appropriated funds for 11 more F-35s last year than the number called for in the president's original budget request. Expect more of the same this year. Defense companies thrive when global conflicts drive up military expenditures, and Lockheed Martin is no exception. The company has made increasing its exports a top priority. In her media day speech, Hewson pointed to turbulence in Europe, the Middle East and Asia as good signs for Lockheed's export prospects. She wasn't so crass as to point out that war is good for business. Instead, she said that "It's clearly a complex threat environment our customers are facing, and we want to remain well-positioned to help them address these unprecedented challenges." One step in helping its customers cope with "a complex threat environment" has been the expansion of production facilities for the company's Hellfire missile system, which is used on Predator and Reaper drones as well as on helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft. Lockheed Martin has no expectation that peace will break out and undercut this burgeoning market. As company vice-president Frank St. John put it in an interview with Defense One, "I don't see events in the world changing dramatically over the next couple of years . . . [T]he conflicts that are requiring the use of our systems are lingering, so anticipate that we'll be producing at a pretty high level for some period of time." The Hellfires are just the tip of the iceberg in terms of Lockheed Martin's foreign sales. Attack helicopters and combat ships for Saudi Arabia and missile defense systems for European allies are the biggest moneymakers on the horizon. Pushing costly, untested weapons systems and profiting from foreign conflicts is hardly innovative. If we are going to realign Pentagon spending with the realities of current challenges and rein in dangerous arms transfers to regions of conflict, Lockheed Martin will have to adjust its financial strategies accordingly. Explaining how it will do so would be an excellent topic for one of the company's future media days. William D. Hartung is the director of the Arms and Security Project at the Center for International Policy and the author of "Prophets of War: Lockheed Martin and the Making of the Military-Industrial Complex." -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

11 марта, 02:18

Canadian stars dot the state dinner guest list

President Barack Obama is welcoming Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his wife to the White House for dinner Thursday night – but he’s also inviting some big Canadian stars. Actor Michael J. Fox, "Saturday Night Live" showrunner Lorne Michaels, actor Mike Myers, actress Sandra Oh and actor Ryan Reynolds will all be dining at the White House.The group of Canadian entertainers will join administration officials, members of Congress, journalists, philanthropists, the commissioner of the National Hockey League and others, according to a list released by the White House.Guests will dine on Alaskan halibut "casseroles," apricot galette with Appalachian cheese, baby lamb chops and Maple pecan cake, with entertainment from American singer Sara Bareilles, the American Youth Philharmonic Orchestra and the Washington Performing Arts Children of the Gospel Choir.The full guest list, as provided by the White House:THE PRESIDENT AND MRS. OBAMA PRIME MINISTER TRUDEAU AND MRS. GRÉGOIRE TRUDEAUMs. Naomi Aberly, PhilanthropistMr. Larry LebowitzMr. David Abney, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, United Parcel ServiceMs. Sherry AbneyThe Honorable Adewale Adeyemo, Deputy Assistant to the President & Deputy National Security Advisor for International Economics, National Security Council, The White HouseMs. Heather WongMr. Michael Alter, President, The Alter GroupMs. Ellen AlterMr. Robert Anderson, AuthorMr. Eric HarlandThe Honorable Navdeep Bains, Minister of Innovation, Science & Economic Development of CanadaMs. Sara Bareilles, SingerMs. Jennifer BareillesMr. Bruce Bastian, Co-Founder, WordPerfect CorporationMr. Clinton FordMr. Gary Bettman, Commissioner, National Hockey LeagueMr. William Daly IIIThe Honorable Marie-Claude Bibeau, Minister of International Development & La Francophonie of CanadaThe Honorable Tony Blinken, Deputy Secretary of State, U.S. Department of State The Honorable Evan RyanMs. Angela Bogdan, Chief of Protocol of Canada Mr. Jeremy Broadhurst, Deputy to the Chief of Staff & Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister of CanadaMr. Stephen Bronfman, Canadian Business Representative & PhilanthropistMs. Ursula Burns, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, Xerox CorporationMr. Lloyd BeanMr. Gerald Butts, Principal Secretary, Office of the Prime Minister of CanadaThe Honorable Kristie Canegallo, Assistant to the President & Deputy Chief of Staff for Implementation, The White House Ms. Simi ShahThe Honorable Ashton Carter, Secretary of Defense, U.S. Department of Defense Ms. Cynthia DeFeliceThe Honorable Susan Collins, U.S. Senator (Maine)Mr. Peter VigueMs. Audie Cornish-Emery, National Public RadioMr. Theodore EmeryThe Honorable Susan Davis, U.S. Representative (California)Dr. Steven J. DavisThe Honorable Mark Dayton, Governor of Minnesota The Honorable Anita Decker Breckenridge, Assistant to the President & Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations, The White House Mr. Russell BreckenridgeThe Honorable Brian Deese, Assistant to the President & Senior Advisor, The White HouseMs. Kara DeeseThe Honorable Stéphane Dion, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Canada Ms. Karen Dixon, Attorney & Executive Committee Member, Lambda LegalDr. Nan SchafferMs. Juliet Eilperin, The Washington PostMr. Andrew LightMr. Adam Entous, The Wall Street JournalMs. Sandra MedinaMr. Mark Feierstein, Senior Director for Western Hemisphere Affairs, National Security Council, The White HouseMs. Tiffany StoneMr. Michael J. Fox, ActorMs. Tracy PollanThe Honorable Chrystia Freeland, Minister of International Trade of CanadaThe Honorable Michael Froman, Ambassador, United States Trade RepresentativeMs. Nancy GoodmanMs. Anna Gainey, President of the Liberal Party of Canada & PhilanthropistMr. Mark Gallogly, Co-founder & Managing Principal, Centerbridge PartnersMs. Elizabeth StricklerThe Honorable Suzy George, Deputy Assistant to the President & Executive Secretary & Chief of Staff of the National Security Council, The White HouseMs. Devon George-EghdamiThe Honorable Ralph Goodale, Minister of Public Safety & Emergency Preparedness of CanadaMr. Jean Grégoire, Father of Mrs. Sophie Grégoire TrudeauMrs. Estelle Blais, Mother of Mrs. Sophie Grégoire TrudeauThe Honorable Avril Haines, Assistant to the President & Deputy National Security Advisor, National Security Council, The White HouseMr. David DavighiMr. John Hannaford, Foreign & Defense Policy Advisor to the Prime Minister & Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet Privy Council Office of CanadaThe Honorable Orrin G. Hatch, President Pro Tempore of the U.S. Senate (Utah) Ms. Wendy HatchMs. Marillyn Hewson, Chairman, President, & Chief Executive Officer, Lockheed MartinMr. James HewsonThe Honorable Bruce Heyman, U.S. Ambassador to Canada Ms. Vicki HeymanMr. Grant Hill, Former Basketball Player, Member of The President’s Council on Fitness, Sports & NutritionMs. Tamia HillDr. Irwin Jacobs, Co-founder, Qualcomm & Chair of the Board of Trustees, Salk InstituteMs. Joan JacobsThe Honorable Roberta Jacobson, Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs, U .S. Department of StateMr. Jonathan JacobsonThe Honorable Valerie Jarrett, Senior Advisor & Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Affairs & Public Engagement, The White HouseMr. Anthony BalkissoonThe Honorable Jeh Johnson, Secretary of Homeland Security, U.S. Department of Homeland SecurityMs. Susan DiMarcoThe Honorable Mélanie Joly, Minister of Canadian HeritageMr. Wayne Jordan, Executive, Founder & Principal, Jordan Real Estate InvestmentsMs. Quinn DelaneyMr. Jonathan Kaplan, Founder & Chief Executive Officer, The MeltMs. Marci GlazerThe Honorable Derek Kilmer, U.S. Representative (Washington)Ms. Jennifer KilmerThe Honorable Angus King, U.S. Senator (Maine)Ms. Kathryn RandMr. Robert Klein II, President, Klein Financial Corporation & Chairman Emeritus, California Institute of Regenerative MedicineMr. Robert Klein IIIThe Honorable Amy Klobuchar, U.S. Senator (Minnesota)Mr. John BesslerThe Honorable Patrick Leahy, U.S. Senator (Vermont) Ms. Marcelle LeahyMs. Twila Legare, Letter WriterMr. Marc Legare The Honorable Jacob Lew, Secretary of the Treasury, U.S. Department of the TreasuryMr. Charles Lewis, Chairman, Lewis-Sebring Family FoundationMs. Penny SebringMr. Andrew Liveris, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, The Dow Chemical CompanyMs. Paula LiverisMr. Alexander Macgillivray, Deputy Chief Technology Officer, The White HouseMs. Shona CrabtreeHis Excellency David MacNaughton, Ambassador of Canada to the United States of AmericaMrs. Leslie NobleThe Honorable Denis McDonough, Assistant to the President & Chief of Staff, The White HouseMs. Karin McDonoughThe Honorable Catherine McKenna, Minister of Environment & Climate Change of CanadaMr. Lorne Michaels, Executive Producer, Saturday Night Live Ms. Alice MichaelsThe Honorable Lisa Monaco, Assistant to the President for Homeland Security & Counterterrorism, National Security Council, The White HouseMr. Mark MonacoThe Honorable Ernest Moniz, Secretary of Energy, U.S. Department of EnergyMs. Katya Frois-MonizMr. Dennis Muilenburg, Chairman, President, & Chief Executive Officer, The Boeing CompanyMr. Gregory SmithThe Honorable Shailagh Murray, Assistant to the President & Senior Advisor, The White HouseMr. Neil KingMr. Mike Myers, ActorMs. Kelly MyersThe Honorable Marvin Nicholson, Special Assistant to the President, Trip Director & Personal Aide to the President, The White HouseMs. Helen PajcicDr. Konrad Ng, Executive Director, Shangri La, Doris Duke Foundation for Islamic ArtDr. Maya Soetoro-NgMs. Sandra Oh, Actress Mr. Lev RukhinMr. John Owens, Chairman of the Board, MediGuide InternationalMs. Missy OwensThe Honorable Nancy Pelosi, Democratic Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives (California)Mr. Paul PelosiThe Honorable Amy Pope, Deputy Assistant to the President & Deputy Homeland Security Advisor, National Security Council, The White HouseMr. Neil AllisonThe Honorable Samantha Power, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Mr. Cass SunsteinThe Honorable Penny Pritzker, Secretary of Commerce, U.S. Department of Commerce Mr. John Poorman Mr. Thomas Pritzker, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, The Pritzker OrganizationMs. Margot PritzkerMs. Kate Purchase, Director of Communications, Office of the Prime Minister of CanadaMs. Roberta Rampton, ReutersMr. Peter RamptonMr. Ryan Reynolds, Actor Ms. Blake Lively The Honorable Ben Rhodes, Assistant to the President & Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications & Speechwriting, National Security Council, The White HouseMs. Ann NorrisThe Honorable Steven Ricchetti, Assistant to the President & Chief of Staff to the Vice President, The White HouseMs. Amy RicchettiThe Honorable Susan Rice, National Security Advisor, National Security Council, The White HouseMr. Ian CameronDr. Martine Rothblatt, Chairman and Co-Chief Executive Officer, United Therapeutics CorporationMrs. Bina RothblattThe Honorable Harjit Sajjan, Minister of National Defense of CanadaThe Honorable Peter Selfridge, Chief of Protocol, U.S. Department of State Ms. Parita Shah SelfridgeThe Honorable Jeanne Shaheen, U.S. Senator (New Hampshire)Mr. William ShaheenMs. Beth Shaw, Personal Finance Commentator & Member of the President’s Advisory Council on Financial Capability for Young AmericansMr. Adam ShawMr. Adam Silver, Commissioner, National Basketball AssociationMs. Maggie GriseMr. Ian Simmons, Co-Founder & Principal, Blue Haven InitiativeMs. Liesel SimmonsThe Honorable Todd Stern, Special Envoy for Climate Change, U.S. Department of State Ms. Jennifer KleinMrs. Michéle Taylor, Member, United States Holocaust Memorial CouncilDr. Kenneth TaylorThe Honorable Tina Tchen, Assistant to the President & Chief of Staff to the First Lady, The White House Ms. Katie Telford, Chief of Staff, Office of the Prime Minister of CanadaThe Honorable Jon Tester, U.S. Senator (Montana)Ms. Sharla TesterThe Honorable Hunter Tootoo, Minister of Fisheries, Oceans & the Canadian Coast Guard of CanadaMrs. Margaret Trudeau, Mother of Prime Minister TrudeauMr. Michael Wernick, Clerk of the Privy Council & Secretary to the Cabinet Privy Council Office of CanadaThe Honorable Melissa Winter, Deputy Assistant to the President & Senior Advisor to the First Lady, The White House Mr. David Zaslav, President & Chief Executive Officer, Discovery CommunicationsMs. Pam Zaslav

23 февраля, 19:13

Lockheed Martin Streamlines Space Unit To Cut Costs, Bolster Growth

In the three years since Marillyn Hewson took over as CEO (and now Chairman) of Lockheed Martin, the world's biggest weapons maker has performed remarkably well.Earnings per share and dividends have increased steadily, while the company's share price has more than doubled. Not bad when you consider that Pentagon spending [...]