I am a political economist studying innovation, industry, and international security. Since September 2001, I have been advising industries and ministries on their issues of strategy, planning, and policy. My work aims to inform investors, industrialists, technologists, and policy-makers on how to effect, economically, a secure future.

Recent Articles

« Replacing Hellfire with Brimstone: the case for a limited off-the-shelf procurement. | Main | Why the Pentagon's budget will drop by a third »

20 November 2013

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Jim,

As to improving ICBM accuracy with GPS (or other satnav), I'm not sure the near environment missile-atmosphere effects wouldn't significantly interfere with signal reception. This would depend on the placement of the aperture and the properties of it's covering material. Putting the antenna on the tailend would be sensible for terminal navigation but then again that's the hot side on the boost phase. I presume such consequences of missile speed to signal reception have been investigated but I imagine the engineering challenges are greater than for subsonic missile systems.

Good post/thanks.

Greater! Yes. I have these problems every time I try to design a hypersonic reentry vehicle.

Indeed.

Jim,

Congress is doing more than huffing and puffing, it appears:

"A proposed Senate amendment (No. 2185) to S. 1197 would limit the construction of satellite positioning ground monitoring stations controlled by any foreign government on U.S. soil. Such construction would require certification by the Defense Secretary and Director of National Intelligence that the stations could not be used to gather intelligence or improve foreign weapons systems. The proposed amendment would also impose a new reporting requirement on DOD, DNI, and USSTRATCOM."

http://www.gps.gov/policy/funding/2014/#NDAA

http://beta.congress.gov/amendment/113th-congress/senate-amendment/2185/

The comments to this entry are closed.

Accolades

  • Read only the first few pages. The clarity and eloquence of them is highly unusual. Extremely un-boring. Everything that one does not need to know seems to have been removed before publication.
    — Attorney, politician, academic, and strategist
  • I'm continually amazed and impressed with what appears to me to be some magical ability you have to synthesize a tremendous sweep of ideas and sources and to cogently streamline into a tight and, most importantly, readable essay.
    — Test engineer, Naval Air Systems Command
  • One of the most insightful analysts on issues of defense economics...
    — Senior defense industry equities analyst
  • I need a Jim.
    — DC think tank director
  • Simply outstanding.
    — Deputy Under Secretary at the Pentagon, on recent analyses of future force structure requirements
  • You and Aboulafia are the only two publicly-quoted defense consultants worth paying attention to.
    — Public policy advocate
  • You’re one of the few guys who brings me real numbers. Most people just try to blow smoke...
    — President of a major military trucks and armored vehicles manufacturer
  • You are an impressive madman whom I am glad to know.
    — Vice President and M&A practice leader with an aerospace & defense consultancy
  • One of the best strategic moves we could have made, short of starting another war.
    — General Manager, leading weapons manufacturer, regarding recommendations for using the lessons of the campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq to plan the future of the company’s product lines
  • Exactly what we needed.
    — CEO of a defense buy-out firm, on market insights and financial projections regarding an acquisition target
  • Your ability to infer from open sources is wonderful.
    — Vice President for Corporate Strategy, leading armored vehicles manufacturer, on recent studies of fatality patterns in military vehicles in Afghanistan and Iraq
  • We should have done [this] a year ago, but I could never find someone like you with the right perspective.
    — Vice President for Business Development at a fast-growing manufacturing firm, on recommendations for managing the company’s problematic alliance with a Fortune 500 defense contractor