Chicago, IL, October 05, 2009 — UPDATE TO SEPTEMBER 30, 2009 RELEASE: Among several 2010 Budget items discussed in the White House Statement of Administration Position (SAP) released last week was Boeing’s C-17 Globemaster III Strategic/Tactical airlifter, and yet again a desire was voiced to shut down production of this critical aircraft citing “DoD analyses”.

In clear indication of a last minute ramping up of efforts to terminate C-17 production, an amendment was introduced on September 29 by those in opposition to the aircraft’s continued existence. Lawmakers defeated that effort by a 64/36 margin.

A second amendment presented with the intent to strip the 2010 Defense Budget of USD2.5 billion covering 10 more C-17s, will be considered Wednesday, October 7, 2009,

“We were in full expectation of this move,” says Myron D. Stokes, Managing Member of Global HeavyLift Holdings, LLC, a Florida incorporated, Bloomfield Hills, MI based DLA-listed firm (www.ccr.gov) , “And it is precisely why we restated our position via the 9/28 and 9/30 releases.

“Since those opposed to C-17 continue to cite “internal DoD analyses” we ask, respectfully, that they produce same. We are, of course, cognizant of the fact that a certain mythological place of intense heat would be altered by cryogenic intervention before such data were produced. Short story: It does not exist.”

An “Intellectual” Assault

“What many who support C-17 don’t really understand,” says Stokes, “Is that an intellectual assault was launched against this aircraft beginning with the GAO and Congressionally debunked 2005/2006 Mobility Capabilities Studies (MCS) and the 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) which repeated MCS assertions of there were ‘enough’ C-17s, coupled with ancient and notoriously unreliable C-5 Galaxys. The GAO found the study analytics were profoundly flawed, and based on unsustainable, unrealistic conflict assumptions post 9/11.

“We must re-emphasize this is the only data to which opposition parties can be possibly referring.

“The brilliance of this type of assault,” Stokes continued,” is that it’s resistant, if not invulnerable, to typical responses. It must be understood that the only effective response is a response in kind. Meaning, it was most appropriate to craft and use the still officially unreleased Department of Commerce C-17 Industrial Base Impacts Study; it was approriate to present ‘Transformational Recapitalization’ architecture as a means to forever eliminate traditional budgetary wrangling; it was appropriate to highlight the findings of the McCaffrey Report. All of these documents resoundly neutralize the arguments of the SECDEF, the SECAF, the good Senator, and all those who are in support of this ill-advised activity againt C-17.

“We say again, these efforts are designed to make the world safe for retro-fitted C-5s and yet-to-fly Airbus/EADS A-400M, the latter of which EADS desperately hopes will be acquired by the USAF. Unfortunately, the only way that Lockheed-Martin and EADS will get their wish is if Boeing C-17, and perhaps Boeing itself (a very real possibility if the Tanker deal is given to the Europeans) is killed.

“An ‘inconvenient truth’, if you will.”

The McCaffrey Report 2007

“As we noted in our May 28, 2009 release, C-17 is not only absolutely essential to current and anticipated force projection requirements in a world wherein conventional and asymmetric conflict potential exists concomitantly,” said Stokes, “but to our plans implementing a US/NATO controlled Heavy and Outsized (HOM) industry utilizing modestly modified variants of this superlative airlifter.

“I daresay that data from several and quite significant resources, inclusive of the limited availability 2005/2006 Department of Commerce C-17 Industrial Base Impacts Study, strongly, if not overwhelmingly, suggests the direction and viewpoints articulated by our Washington colleagues relative to C-17′s continued existence is at best flawed, and at worst, not reflective of the great responsibilities conferred upon them by the office in which they serve.

“It should be noted that while we have the greatest respect for the offices of the SECDEF, SECAF and those to whom they report, we feel it necessary to again invoke the wisdom, past and present, of DoD personnel such as the late VADM Arthur K. Cebrowski, whose vast experience and knowledge cannot be ignored. In this instance, we feel it appropriate to highlight the conclusions of decorated U.S. Army 4-Star General (Ret’d) Barry R. McCaffrey, Adjunct Professor of International Affairs, United States Military Academy (USMA) West Point, as outlined in an “After Action” Report following visits to Nellis and Scott Air Force Bases 14-17 August, 2007.”

The report was designed to summarize assessments of USAF capabilities and resources in the face of current, emergent and projected threats to national security. General McCaffrey’s comments on C-17 are as follows:

2nd — The C-17 Globemaster III.

• We must create the strategic national military airlift and air-to-air refuel capability (600+ C-17 aircraft) to project national military and humanitarian power in the global environment. We currently have an inadequate capability with 150 aircraft supported by an aging refueling fleet. The C-5 aircraft must be retired—these planes are shot. The Army must back off the dubious proposition that they will size their ground combat force around the volume and lift metrics of the C-130 — and instead use the C-17 as the sizing template.

• The Rumsfeld doctrine postulated bringing home deployed Army and Air Force capabilities from Europe, Okinawa, and Korea. This seismic strategic shift was unexamined and not debated by Congress or the American people. We are bringing home ground and air strike assets thousands of miles— from basing infrastructure paid for by allies— to unprepared US launch platforms. If we are to pose a serious deterrent capability in the dangerous world arena— then we must credibly be able to project power back into future combat areas to sustain allies at risk.

• The C-17 represents the capacity to carry out this strategic power projection mission —as well as providing intra-theater logistics and humanitarian lift for pin point distribution of thousands of truck load equivalents of supply per day.

• The C-17 is a global national transportation asset— not merely a military or Air Force system.

The whole of the report is accessible via the link

http://www.mccaffreyassociates.com/pages/documents…

and should be considered a “must read” by all concerned.

Knowledge is Power

“I will respond preemptively to those who are quick to dismiss the views and analytics crafted by retired DoD personnel as ‘irrelevant and inapplicable’, by saying that such assertions are sophomoric, unsustainable, without merit and wholly dismissive of the Dr. W. Edwards Deming advocated pursuit of profound knowledge,” says Stokes. “To be sure, we benefit from applying accumulated knowledge, as has been evident since humankind first saw the need to record and preserve what was learned. The Library of Alexandria is an ancient and extraordinary example of this premise.”

Tanker Procurement Process Observations

Further commenting on the recent re-release of USAF Tanker competitive requirements after Boeing’s successful protest to the GAO against EADS/Airbus, Stokes conveys the viewpoints of several academic, government and industrial associates that the need to preserve C-17 is as critically important as the necessity of having the tanker requirement fulfilled by a true US firm. “It must be designed, developed, engineered, manufactured and sustained in the United States. This is not jingoism, this is not nationalism, this is not representative of a disturbing naivete as concerns the so-called “new globality”, but rather, a recognition that the country’s industrial base must be maintained. Moreover, it must be OWNED and controlled by American firms with a strongly supportive role by the US government as is common practice by other industrialized nations.

“This is to say, even if the A330-based Tanker were indeed designed, engineered and manufactured here, the question at the end of the day is ‘Where does the money go?’ Answer: To overseas bank accounts. Also, ‘Would there be any guarantees that manufacturing and design would remain on these shores in the event of a global economic schism (again) thereby resulting in calls by company stakeholders to shrink the company’s global footprint in the interests of ‘fiduciary responsibility?’

Based on the recorded activities of international corporations, the answer is no.

“The idea that obvious illegalities in the form of WTO disallowed EU subsidies designed to give EADS/Airbus ( Northrop-Grumman, with its extraordinary history of aircraft development, is nothing more than, sadly, a front to give the illusion of “Americaness” to their overtures) a competitive advantage in price is dismissed by DoD procurement officers as irrelevant or “having no bearing in the ultimate decision” (paraphrased) is suggesting a departure from logic, reason, conventional wisdom and a complete lack of of understanding that the US defense and industrial bases are one and the same.”

Stokes suggests a much needed expansion of the DoD’s paraphrased assertion that “we are in pursuit of the best value for the warfighter” would include ‘…,the American worker and taxpayer.”

“To be sure,” Stokes further states, “No other country on earth, neither Germany, France, Italy, Belgium, Spain, Japan, South Korea, China… no one would give away a core element of its critical industrial base which this Tanker, as built by Boeing with its clearly superior aircraft build skillsets, represents.”

The content of the May 28 release follows:

Following previous releases in February 2006 and March 2007, Global Heavylift Holdings, LLC, a Florida incorporated and Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) listed entity with principal offices in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, will continue its pursuit of an USD18.4B capital raise to implement a US/NATO-controlled Heavy and Outsized (H&O) air cargo industry utilizing new and used modestly modified variants of C-17 for commercial missions, while still meeting USAF operational standards as part of Civil Reserve Air Fleet (CRAF) organic airlift augmentation. (GOOGLE SEARCH: Global HeavyLift Holdings, LLC; also Commercial Application of Military Airlift Aircraft (CAMAA) )

” The current and real threat to C-17 line continuance concomitant with the core role this aircraft plays in our existent and long-term plans for wresting control of the H&O air cargo industry from our Russian and Ukrainian friends, whilst allowing them to maintain a symbiotic role with the heavylift market-proving Antonov AN-124 Ruslan, serves as a strong impetus to assist in the preservation of C-17, not for just the next 2 years, but for the next two decades”, says Myron D. Stokes, Managing Member. “A status, mind you, that C-17 richly deserves as an aircraft unparalleled in its tactical/strategic airlift capacity. And, given the fact there is no replacement on any horizon for an airlifter with capabilities anywhere near C-17, proposing its termination approaches the realm of the irresponsible.”

As for Secretary of the Air Force Donley’s comment to the extent if the AF needed more airlift, “They could always retrofit more [35-42 year old] C-5s”, Stokes observes that without complete control of the air in a battlespace -the intended role of F-22- very large, minimally maneuverable C5s (not to mention requiring significant air operations infrastructure) would be nothing more than fodder for the cannons and missiles of enemy fighter craft.

Stokes also stated his team will support Antonov’s late 2009 efforts to restart AN-124 production at Ulyanovsk, Ukraine, through as yet undisclosed means. The DoD continues to contract Russian/Ukrainian government controlled entities operating AN-124 to make up for in-theater airlift capacity shortfalls in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The company is right now in process of establishing aircraft operations offices (to anchor four global epicenters in the US, Europe. Middle East and Asia) with one of its strategic air partners in Oakland and Washtenaw counties, Michigan.

“Our strategy, as announced in February 2006, outlined a non-traditional business model involving a primary focus on acquisition of the necessary intellectual resources from within industry and government to craft a blueprint for a new global industry. It continues to evolve in content and depth, but has remained largely intact owing to built-in project execution flexibility architecture”, says Stokes.

“In light of the on-going fight, and it is a fight, if not out and out political war, for preservation of C-17, whose production constitutes so large an economic foot print as confirmed by the Department of Commerce (DOC) in its still quite viable C-17 Industrial Base Impacts Study of 2005/2006, our team is resolute in its support.”
(Note to editors: A copy of this quasi-public study is available upon request)

According to Stokes, the criticality of retaining an aircraft that effortlessly transitions between strategic and tactical airlift missions as demanded by 21st Century conventional (the military build-up of China; nuclearization of Iran and North Korea; re-emergence of Russia as a power broker, etc) and asymmetric war (Terrorist operations with global reach) threats/realities compells listing the following informational absolutes to clarify, if not neutralize, assertions being made by C-17 detractors:

1.Secretary of Defense Gates, with all due respect, has no truly substantive, credible data to support his intent to kill C-17. Although initially publicly supportive of ending C-17 production at 180 (now 205) as suggested by the never released to public Mobility Capabilities Study (MCS, 2005/2006) and 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR)gao which echoed MCS findings, former SECAF Michael Wynne and Chief of Staff Gen. Michael Mosely strongly recommended against line closure, and were fired last year as a result. It was this, not the “inadvertent” flight of a nuclear-armed B-52 across country, that played a significant role in their dismissal. The data the SECDEF refers to as “internal Pentagon analyses” is that developed by the Pentagon Office of Program Analysis and Evaluation (PA&E) in collaboration with RAND Corporation, and exists in the form of the Mobility Capabilities Study mentioned above, which was completed in late 2005 after several delays. This study was promptly debunked by the GAO (and to former SECDEF Rumsfeld in a strongly worded letter prior to its “release”) subsequently by Congress as being based on flawed analytics and inapplicable, outdated, conflict assumptions.

Comments to the effect that a new study ordered by Congress “Will reach the same conclusions as the first” should be suspect.

By all rational indications, the directives given to PA&E were designed to ensure an end of C-17 production in favor of C-5A and B retrofit, and inclusion of a much-delayed EADS/Airbus A400M (despite its inability to carry an Abrams Tank) in USAF inventory.

2.Before the MCS was completed, capable academics and researchers in industry and government were advised in advance of the “release” of its findings and promptly developed a countering study -co-sponsored by the USAF- as it pertained to industrial base impact. This was particularly important owing to an element of MCS concluding that industrial base impact would be negligible. As those lawmakers who were able to receive a copy of the DOC study before it was rendered inacessible ascertained, it reached a diametrically opposite conclusion.

3.The intent of the DoD to kill two critically important elements of national security, C-17 and F-22, comes on the heels of the confirmed (by Lockheed-Martin) theft by China of the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMD) through a front company posing as an LMCO supplier. The Aegis is core to US Naval offensive/defensive capabilities, while being systemically interlinked to the whole of network-centric US military operations. Moreover, there is every reason to believe that F-22 Raptor and C-17 technologies have been compromised as well, owing to the relative ease with which Aegis was acquired. The Chinese clone was initially introduced on Luyang II-class Destroyers in 2005/2006 (derived from Sovremenny-class Russian vessels) and in all likelihood incorporated, among other capitol ships, within the now operational 67,500 ton Adm. Kuznetsov-class aircraft carrier Shilang purchased from Ukraine.

4.Transformational Recapitalization, an acquisition process well articulated by national security strategist Dr. Sheila Ronis in a Defense AT&L (November 2004) analysis “Transformational Recapitalization: Rethinking USAF Aircraft Procurement Philosophies”, holds the key to virtual elimination of Congressional/Presidential budget wrangling, while simultaneously taking large steps towards achieving oft-stated goals of governmental expenditure equilibrium. GHH will initialize this process through acquisition -following Congressional resale approval to the USAF- of first generation “A” model C-17s, currently constituting approximately 54 aircraft at a price ranging between USD90M-140M. The money paid to the USAF, subsequent to a necessary change in scoring law, flows back into their coffers, thus recapitalizing it. Another modification of existing budgetary law would require that these funds are used to acquire new C-17s only, therefore keeping Long Beach and St. Louis assembly lines open, as well as maintaining the irreplaceable design, engineering and supplier base.

Utilization of A-model C-17s from AF inventory allows GHH H&O commercial operations to begin sooner, and profitability to be achieved in a shorter timeframe, while maintaining these aircraft at mandated AF operational standards and immediately available in times of national emergency. The aircraft will be available for peacetime organic airlift augmentation at all times. Notably, the used aircraft scenario does not require Boeing’s participation, other than contracted and mandated major maintenance, or approval.

5.Concurrent with required Congressional approval for USAF resale of first generation C-17s, FAA exemption to FAR Part 14 CFR 21.27 -a reg requiring that all aircraft declared “military surplus” are re-certified to operate in US airspace- must be obtained. GHH maintains, as did Boeing in a previous petition, they are not surplus, owing to mandated inclusion in the Civil Reserve Air Fleet and continuous Air Mobility Command mission undertakings. Also, thanks to an impeccable C-17 safety record since becoming operational in 1993 (Iraq War sustained missile strikes and unintentional wheels-up landings at Bagram Air Base, Afghanistan, notwithstanding) there should be no viable concerns in this arena.

“We will not only continue to pursue the necessary resale language from Congress, to be contained within the 2010 or 2011 budget, but FAA exemption from 14 CFR 21.27, perhaps with a little prodding from the DoD. Furthermore, this continued exemption quest will be undertaken separate from Boeing”, says Stokes.

“The 18.4B funding strategy that will permit acquisition of up to 60 C-17As and 40 new aircraft, and hopefully include the even more capable B variant proposed, remains as a quadruple and simultaneous raise in the US, Europe, Middle-East and Asia. This approach continues viable as it was designed with the understanding of a possible financial sector melt-down over a year before it occurred.

“As of now, and towards the above objective, we have identified accessible resources up to USD5B. Conversely, in the middle of an economic war and a much more dangerous world, it is our intent, through the heavylift initiative, to be part of the profound economic revitalization efforts ongoing; at least to the extent humans can shape the outcome they want.”

Recognizing the absolute necessity of international C-17 sales to its continued production, GHH, while working with foreign governments to establish the four global aircraft operations epicenters outlined within plan data, encouraged them to acquire -and if already in inventory, acquire more- C-17s for both military and commercial use as a condition of purchase. Such overtures were made to the UK, Belgium, Japan and The Sultanate of Oman governments, among others.

“Many dedicated people in industry and government have worked very hard, and made many sacrifices, over the past near decade to preserve C-17 and to create a US/NATO-controlled heavlift industry with the BC-17 variant,” says Stokes.

“For all of us intensely involved in this project; from New York to Washington; from Detroit to Chicago; from St. Louis to Los Angeles and Long Beach, failure… is not an option.”

About Global HeavyLift Holdings, LLC

Founded in 2002, GHH is a strategic air transport solutions that was born of a multi-year public/private effort among forward thinkers in both the private sector and government to mitigate emerging and observable vulnerabilities in the U.S. industrial base global supply chain. Such vulnerabilities are represented by the fact that no ocean-borne shipping is in U.S. hands at present, thus potentially subjecting American corporations, especially automotive, and their global operations to the whims and perhaps economically hostile activities of and by foreign governments. Add to this the risk of terrorist activities, which have, according to the Department of Homeland Security, targeted maritime operations; i.e., ships, ports and ocean containers.

Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) listed, it is the goal of GHH and its strategic partners around the planet to work with key logistics personnel within these corporations and government agencies to conceptualize, craft and structure long-term global supply chain alternative transportation methodologies through continuous — not stop gap or emergency — air augmentation solutions. Its most important mission, however, has been in the co-development of global architecture for infrastructure of a new American controlled industry, Heavylift, utilizing the excellent airlift performance characteristics of the Boeing BC-17.

—
This article was first published at JKHanok.com
The article can be re-published on your site as long as this message remains intact.

This work by JK Hanok Press Release Center is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 2.0 UK: England & Wales License.
—

Bloomfield HIlls, MI, September 18, 2009 — Somewhere In Michigan — Continuing a series of media advisories beginning May 28, 2009, stressing the need to maintain production of the Boeing C-17 Globemaster III strategic/tactical airlifter and address erosion of US industrial base concerns, Global HeavyLift Holdings, LLC, a Florida-based, Defense Logistics Agency listed (www.CCR.gov) air transport solutions entity with principal offices in Bloomfield Hills, MI and Chicago, IL, is now revealing submission of an RFP (Request For Proposal) to Boeing Commercial Airplanes, a unit of The Boeing Company (BA) outlining a requirement of five firm order and five optioned high-efficiency 747-8F freighters.

The requested delivery timeframe is 4Q 2011 to 4Q 2013.

The aircraft will be based in Michigan, and will serve to expand the existing freighter air fleet of one of its two strategic air partners, who will operate the planes. This represents execution of a modular business model construct recommended by one of the world’s top airline business consulting firms. Aircraft acquisition funding will be accomplished through use of up to USD5billion in accessible resources.

“Submission of this RFP, we believe, demonstrates confidence in the world’s premier aircraft builder, the potential of restored financial sector equilibrium within 12-18 months, and the capability of this advanced airplane to take a lead role in the permanent air augmentation of US industrial base global supply chain as outlined in our business plan,” said Myron D. Stokes, Managing Member.

“As we continue our pursuit of a US/NATO controlled heavy and outsized industry, currently controlled by Russia and Ukraine with their AN-124s, using very modestly modified commercial variants of Boeing’s C-17 Globemaster III (BC-17) the 747-based supply chain air augmentation initiative is a near -term implementation element of our transportation and logistics sector realignment grand strategy. And, we are appreciative of global logistics personnel at GM and Ford, respectively acting on the instructions of Rick Wagoner, Bob Lutz, Brad Ross, Jac Nasser, Sir Nick Scheele, Vaughn Koshkarian and Joe Greenwell, who lent their time and expertise during the 2001-2004 case study development phase, co- developing a comprehensive permanent air augmentation of supply chain methodology designed to minimize vulnerabilities and systemic inefficiencies once engaged.”

Stokes further noted air augmentation of supply chain has been a recurring theme since the HeavyLift project, based on a restructured version of the USAF/Boeing collaborative undertaking, Commercial Application of Military Airlift Aircraft, was pursued by GHH and designed to mitigate weaknesses as outlined in a recently released RAND study.

http://commercial_application_of_military_airlift_aircraft.totallyexplained.com/

Michigan Mid-West MRO and Role in Base Revitalization

Although Global HeavyLift Holdings’ core focus has been creating architecture for infrastructure of a US/NATO controlled Heavy and Outsized industry using commercial C-17s, its primary mission, along with colleagues in the academic, industrial and governmental sectors, is preservation of the industrial base. It also understands the critical role that the State of Michigan, with its virtually inarguable historic role as birthplace of the world’s auto industry, and the engine that drove the US to pre and post World War II prosperity, must play in the nation’s economic recovery.

“The revitalization of the nation’s industrial base will have enormous implications in the long term for the country’s strength and capabilities, not only for industry, but national defense. As you know, economic security is national security. Many people have forgotten that fact, but I have not,” says Dr. Sheila R. Ronis, a national security strategist and Director, MBA/MSSL Programs and Associate Professor, Management Walsh College in Troy, Michigan.

“This initiative by Global HeavyLift and its air partners will start the process of bringing jobs strategically important to the nation, jobs of the future that are much more difficult for other nations to take away.”

MRO Is Complete and Ready For Operation

The already complete Maintenance Repair and Overhaul (MRO) facility at an as yet undisclosed location in Michigan, will create 8,000 direct and supply side high-skill positions within a 24 month timeframe with an average salary of USD70,000. Hiring begins first quarter 2010 in order to take advantage of tax breaks associated with jobs creation. According to a senior MRO executive, the facility’s location has all the right advantages, in terms of housing, schools, shopping and entertainment. “It has enabled us to attract, and continue to attract, the best in aircraft servicing talent.

“Obviously, all jobs are not created equal, and replacing a core manufacturing position with Burger flipping at Micky D’s or as greeter at Wal-Mart just won’t accomplish much of what’s needed. Moving Michigan in to a position wherein it can adjust for auto sector losses through an expansion of aerospace industry support as represented by this MRO, and the near immediate impact on the base, is exactly what’s required.

“We are encouraging aerospace industry suppliers around the world to start considering Michigan for relocation in accordance with this initiative along with significant attraction incentives currently available,” he said.

A Heavy Maintenance Facility with USD300,000,000 in Projected Annual Revenue

The work place itself is state-of-the-art heavy maintenance operation capable of performing “C” (airworthiness) and “D” ( structural and aircraft systems comprehensive) checks, and features 3 work bays capable of handling 24 Boeing aircraft each of single and twin-aisle types including DC-9, MD-80, 717, 737, 767, 777 and 747, for a total of 72 AC per year, It will generate, according to projections, USD300,000,000 annually.

Within 2 flight hours of multiple international airports, and its location along the Polar Route, this Mid-West MRO will be most convenient for major airlines.

“Most don’t realize that Michigan was home to a short lived aircraft design, engineering and production effort known as the Lockheed-Detroit Aircraft Company in 1931,” said Stokes. “Their first intended product was a prototype all metal, low wing monoplane Fighter with retractable landing gear, the YP-24. The effort ended after a crash destroyed the aircraft.

“Most also forget that Bill Boeing was born in Detroit.”

Michigan As Anchor to Five Global Air Operations Epicenters

Global HeavyLift also expanded on comments in its 5/28/09 release relative to a Commercial C-17 (BC-17) base in Michigan serving as the anchor facility for five global air operations epicenters in the US, Middle-East, Europe and Asia. Atlantic and Gulf Coast States being considered for the second US BC-17 epicenter include Florida, Virginia, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana. Middle-Eastern countries under consideration include Qatar, Oman, Jordan and Saudi Arabia, while Belgium, The UK (Britain, Scotland and Northern Ireland) Hungary and Spain constitute the European contingent of possible locations. Japan, Malaysia, Vietnam and India are among the Asia potential locales.

Global HeavyLift associates have already visited potential locations in the US, Europe and Middle-East over the past four years, inclusive of Oklahoma, Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, Britain, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Oman, Dubai and Saudi Arabia, while briefing Japanese and Vietnamese Consular officials. These visits were in line with GHH’s stated goals when founded in 2002 as a hybrid “Think-Tank” to “Bring together the intellectual resources within industry, government and academia, to craft architecture for infrastructure of a new, globe spanning industry, HeavyLift, using commercial variants of Boeing C-17.”

Each epicenter both here and abroad will be in close proximity to, or sharing, a combined commercial/military operations air base in recognition of the proposed dual role of Commercial C-17, which is to be instantly available in times of national emergency in all countries in which it is based. The Michigan epicenter, an extension of the MRO, is proposed to include a C-17 overflow training facility in addition to light/heavy maintenance capability, and will support existing C-17 training and maintenance operations such as those in Flowood, MS (172nd Airlift Wing) Scott AFB and Boeing’s Long Beach location.

Diavik Diamond Mines, Northwest Territories of Canada

BC-17′s operating out of Michigan will be available for heavy and outsized cargo missions in and out of the Diavik diamond mines, Yellowknife, in the Northwest Territories of Canada. This project is one of 17 cases studies conducted to determine if BC-17 use would have reduced facility build to output time. Their availability will become increasingly important as global warming affects the structural integrity of the ice roads still used 8 weeks of the year as a critical supply chain support route. An existing airstrip of 5,249′ length, currently receiving 737 and C-130 Hercules (L-100) aircraft, can easily accommodate BC-17 with its 87 ton payload as opposed to the 25 tons for the C-130. Fewer trips and the ability to carry D-8 Class Bulldozers and similar vehicles categorized as outsized should reduce supply chain costs and complexity over the projected 20+ year life of this project.

“Had we been flying BC-17s in 2006, we would be there even today,” Stokes said. “We had several contacts with the Diavik logistics people at the time who were in the middle of a supply chain crisis with an urgent completion deadline to meet. In any event, the climate for obtaining “A” model first generation C-17s on a Congressionally approved USAF resale basis has improved notably, we believe, as a result of the recent ending (June) of the mandate against retiring any Lockheed-Martin C-5s beyond the 14 mothballed or dismantled in 2004.”

http://www.diavik.ca/ENG/ouroperations/565_infrastructure

Quick Facts:
* 747-8F aircraft are being funded via a financial instrument possessed of sufficient equity for this purpose. Total value of proposed aircraft acquisition is USD 3,000,000,000.

* Firm is in process of acquiring additional administrative office facilities in Southfield, MI.

* Several highly placed government officials in various counties, and corporate executives have been instrumental in crafting this aerospace industry based revitalization effort.

* Discussions on-going at moment to identify lead bank for USD18.4billion capital raise for acquisition of 40 new and 60 “A” model C-17s by a consortium of financial institutions.

* Firm reveals its participation in 1Q 2008 quest to gain control of Jaguar and Land Rover with intent of maintaining UK ownership and production.

* Firm has registered with USAF (WPAFB) to take over production of C-17 should Boeing elect to discontinue this position as sole source supplier.

Overall Economic Impact

Global HeavyLift’s September 6, 2009 release discussed in detail how the negative impact resulting from Economic War accelerated industrial base erosion has been up to this point grossly underestimated.

http://www.pressreleasepoint.com/global-heavylift-holdings-llc-provides-copy-publicly-unavailable-dept-commerce-boeing-c17-industrial

“Our current and proposed activities, in conjunction with our partners, should help to achieve the diametric opposite in Michigan’s, and by appropriate extension, the nation’s, economic stabilization outcome expectations,” Stokes says, especially when one considers the 4 elements involved: One; expansion of the current freighter fleet of our strategic air partner with new, high-efficiency 747-8Fs, two; Completed Mid-West Region MRO to service up to 72 Boeing aircraft per year, three; BC-17 Anchor air operations epicenter for four sister bases globally and four; expansion of the MRO to include a C-17 overflow training and maintenance operation. Taken collectively, it doesn’t require rocket science to understand the positive effect. It goes without saying that air operations often serve as the crucible of economic development.

“We’ll leave it to our colleagues in the economics departments of the University of Michigan, Wayne State University and Michigan State University to calculate the economic impact in accordance with the Keynesian Economic Multiplier Principle as it was meant to be used, its falling a bit out of favor among some economists following the early 1970′s recession notwithstanding”, he said.

Previous Releases:

http://www.pressrelease365.com/pr/industry/aerospa…

http://www.pressrelease365.com/pr/industry/aerospa…

http://www.pressrelease365.com/pr/industry/military-and-defense/boeing-c17-2010-congressional-budget-dod-usaf-airlift-3650.htm

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=…

About Global HeavyLift Holdings, LLC:
Founded in 2002, GHH is a strategic air transport solutions entity born of a multi-year public/private effort among forward thinkers in both the private sector and government to mitigate emerging and observable vulnerabilities in the U.S. industrial base global supply chain. Such vulnerabilities are represented by the fact that no ocean-borne shipping is in U.S. hands at present, thus potentially subjecting American corporations, especially automotive, and their global operations to the whims and perhaps economically hostile activities of and by foreign governments. Add to this the risk of terrorist activities, which have, according to the Department of Homeland Security, targeted maritime operations; i.e., ships, ports and ocean containers.

Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) listed, it is the goal of GHH and its strategic partners around the planet to work with key logistics personnel within these corporations and government agencies to conceptualize, craft and structure long-term global supply chain alternative transportation methodologies through continuous — not stop gap or emergency — air augmentation solutions. Its most important mission, however, has been in the co-development of global architecture for infrastructure of a new American controlled industry, Heavylift, utilizing the excellent airlift performance characteristics of the Boeing BC-17.

Contact:
John Chuhran
Global Heavylift Holdings LLC
74 W. Long Lake Rd, Suite 103
Bloomfield HIlls, MI, 48304
248-310-2650
globalheavyliftholdings@ymail.com

http://www.emotionreports.com

—

This article was first published at JKHanok.com
The article can be re-published on your site as long as this message remains intact.

This work by JK Hanok Press Release Center is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 2.0 UK: England & Wales License.
—

“The best approach is to ensure our units are interoperable and to work with Australia where we have shared aims such as in the peacekeeping mission in Timor Leste. This is the current situation; there is no good reason to change it,” said Mr Locke.

Yesterday, Prime Ministers Key and Rudd announced that the two countries will consider developing a joint military contingent.

“The Greens are worried that a joint force would hitch New Zealand to Australia’s more interventionist approach to world politics,” said Mr Locke.

“Australia has been much more willing to commit to unjust wars, like that in Iraq, at the bidding of the Untied States.

“Through its membership in ANZUS, Australia has also been accommodating of America’s nuclear policies.

“New Zealand’s bold anti-nuclear stance could be compromised if our armed forces become too closely intertwined with Australia’s.

“Currently, New Zealand has a better image in the Pacific than Australia. Our forces are seen as less brash and more understanding of Pacific ways. It would be a pity to lose this.

“We already work successfully with Australia. We don’t need to set up a joint task force, in which Australia would inevitably have the dominant role,” said Mr Locke.

—
This article was first published at JKHanok.com
The article can be re-published on your site as long as this message remains intact.

This work by JK Hanok Press Release Center is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 2.0 UK: England & Wales License.
—

Chicago, IL, September 09, 2009 — Continuing a series of releases that focus on a very real and abiding threat to the US industrial base and aerospace knowledge sector as debate continues on the future of Boeing’s C-17 Globemaster III, Global HeavyLift Holdings, LLC, A Florida-based, Defense Logistics Agency (/DLA) listed (www. ccr.gov) entity with principal offices in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, has made accessible again an extremely relevant-to-discussion U.S. Department of Commerce (DoC) study.

http://www.emotionreports.com/downloads/pdfs/GHHDO…

Originally completed in November of 2005 as a specific counter to the conclusions reached within the largely discredited Mobility Capabilities Study (MCS) and the 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) echoing its “180 C-17s is enough”, and “minimal negative economic impact” contentions, the DoC study paints a grim picture backed by voluminous data that is “evergreen”.

“For all of the supportive –albeit very commendable– talk by lawmakers and involved industrial entities, there is, with few exceptions, an observable recalcitrance in voicing the extremely serious state of affairs represented by C-17 line termination”, says Myron D. Stokes, Managing Member.

“For example, despite that fact of the DoC study’s existence and its data-based articulation of an immediate USD8.4 billion in negative industrio-economic base effect resulting from idling 30,000 highly skilled direct employees of (as of 2006) 702 suppliers in 42 states, there is focus on the more recent GAO analysis observing a USD1 billion cost if the line were closed and restarted. It is not only important to conjoin the expansive data contained within these vitally important studies, but to use them in driving home the point of a country’s economic stability DNA as existing within its manufacturing base,” he said.

The Keynesian Economic Model Multiplier Principle: John Maynard Keynes Knew What He Knew

In the automotive/aerospace industries research and analysis site eMOTION! REPORTS.com (www.emotionreports.com) critique “Boeing Going?” (2001) that discussed the company’s Chairman pondering an HQ move from ancestral home Seattle, Wayne State University Professor and Former Ford Motor Company statistician Victor Lowe painted a disturbing picture in reference to what is now understood as the capturing of Chrysler Corporation by Daimler-Benz, AG.

“The loss of so many jobs at Chrysler and other large companies,” he said, “may be setting up the U.S. economy for potential catastrophe. According to the Keynesian Economic Model multiplier principle, you have to multiply each job lost by a fairly large number to calculate the total loss to the economy.”

Study: 16,000,000 Positions Affected

The analysis also referenced a 2001 University of Michigan study demonstrating that then recent Chrysler job loss would impact over 16 million positions and accelerate a recession. “When one considers all of the aforementioned factors,” it read, “the threat of AIRBUS, the predatory economic activity of the E.U., an irresponsible Wall Street, a rapidly emerging recession with crash potential, the destruction of Chrysler, an appalling apathy on the part of Capitol Hill and a globally clueless American society as to the fragility of this country’s industrial base, should we really be surprised at [former Boeing Chairman Dr. Philip] Condit’s actions?”

In line with Professor Lowe’s comments, Stokes observes further that “Failure to apply the Keynesian model appropriately will and has resulted in inaccurate and unsustainable economic recovery estimates/projections, for the simple reason that the loss of manufacturing SYSTEMS like C-17 is so massive in its overall economic impact. This is owing to multiple and inextricably linked layers of production process interactions between the OEMS and their supplier base”, says Stokes. “And then you add the butcher, the baker, the candlestick maker.”

Unabated Job Loss

A former associate of manufacturing quality visionary Dr. W. Edwards Deming, Prof. Lowe further noted, and in what can now be viewed as quite prescient, that “The accumulated effect of all the lost jobs will ripple through the economy for a long time, and companies, such as GM and possibly even Ford, may become so weakened economically that they might be vulnerable to take over, even from a non-U.S. owned firm. People should be concerned, especially after seeing what happened to Chrysler so soon after it was purchased.”

According to Stokes, a former Newsweek, Newsweek Japan and Newsweek International business correspondent, “Prof. Lowe’s Chrysler conclusions are perfectly analogous to the Boeing C-17 circumstance, in terms of job count and skillsets with the exact same impact: Over 16,000,000 positions affected with the uncomfortable, if not disastrous, effect of reverse job growth. This in term, mitigates, if not neutralizes, any positive movement associated with Federal stimulus initiatives that seem disconnected from erosion of base concerns.”

The Other Elephant in The Room: China Stands Ready to Replace The US and EU in Automotive and Aerospace Dominance

Stokes further states that colleagues in government and academia are convinced termination of the C-17 production line and other pivotal elements of the country’s industrial foundation, represents the final phase of a well orchestrated strategy playing out over at least two decades initiated by multiple governments inclusive of China and Japan, to end US manufacturing dominance in the automotive and aerospace sectors. Strategies, it can be said, facilitated by only too willing participants in the US industrial, financial and policy-making sectors.

It is through such exertion of policy influence and market manipulations, Stokes observes, that China now essentially controls General Motors and thanks to its industrial espionage activities as partly noted in the 31 May, 2009 release, has obtained entire vehicle platforms, Aegis BMD, F-22, F-35 and C-17 techologies. Thus, it stands poised to supplant the US and the EU, as a global center of automotive and aerospace manufacturing.

More ominously, say sources, the Canadian government is expressing cautious concern regarding China’s burgeoning control and attempts to control, essential resources inclusive of rare earth metal production. According to The Australian recently, “global supply of the rare-earth metals, which are vital to the mechanisms of hybrid cars, wind turbines, iPods, lasers, super-efficient light bulbs and radar systems, is 95% controlled by China.”

The Reality of Economic War

“In some circles, and most certainly in the view of Sun Tzu”, says Stokes, “the above is known as economic war: The assignment by a given government of resources, along with the development of trade policies designed to gain an advantage for its own industry over, or even remove from existence, business entities in the target country. Conversely, it is not sufficient to simply assert a perceived threat to the US industrial base and the defense industrial base, which are one and the same, rather, the proving data must be collected, analyzed, tracked and submitted through appropriate channels within the policy making arena.

“This is precisely what studies such as that developed by the Department of Commerce regarding the quite negative economic impact of a discontinued C-17, the GAO and the on-going work of the United States-China Economic and Security Review Commission (USCC.gov) are designed to do. And this is why we are making the DoC study, originally obtained by a respected defense industry website, available for a broader base of scrutiny, despite efforts to render it inaccessible,” Stokes said.
# # #

Additional reference data:

http://www.bis.doc.gov/defenseindustrialbaseprogra…

http://www.slideshare.net/GHHLLC/emotion-reportsco…

http://www. slideshare.net/GHHLLC/superglobalism-strategies-for-maintaining-a-robust-industrial-base-through-technological-policy-and-process-improvement-presentation

http://www.slideshare.net/GHHLLC/hyperintelligence…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_economics

About Global HeavyLift Holdings, LLC:

Founded in 2002, GHH is a strategic air transport solutions entity born of a multi-year public/private effort among forward thinkers in both the private sector and government to mitigate emerging and observable vulnerabilities in the U.S. industrial base global supply chain. Such vulnerabilities are represented by the fact that no ocean-borne shipping is in U.S. hands at present, thus potentially subjecting American corporations, especially automotive, and their global operations to the whims and perhaps economically hostile activities of and by foreign governments. Add to this the risk of terrorist activities, which have, according to the Department of Homeland Security, targeted maritime operations; i.e., ships, ports and ocean containers.

Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) listed, it is the goal of GHH and its strategic partners around the planet to work with key logistics personnel within these corporations and government agencies to conceptualize, craft and structure long-term global supply chain alternative transportation methodologies through continuous — not stop gap or emergency — air augmentation solutions. Its most important mission, however, has been in the co-development of global architecture for infrastructure of a new American controlled industry, Heavylift, utilizing the excellent airlift performance characteristics of the Boeing BC-17.

Contact :
John T. Chuhran
Global HeavyLift Holdings
74 W. Long Lake Rd.
Suite 103
Bloomfield Hills, MI
48304
248-310-2650
mstokes@emotionreports.com

http://www.emotionreports.com

—

This article was first published at JKHanok.com
The article can be re-published on your site as long as this message remains intact.

This work by JK Hanok Press Release Center is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 2.0 UK: England & Wales License.
—

The award was gained after MTL adhered to strict criteria through the manufacture and supply of specific armour plate components, created with fixing kits, ready for deployment on armoured vehicles in International war zones.

Managing Director Dr Henry Shirman said: “MTL has been a major supplier to BAE Systems for a number of years now and we are delighted to receive this prestigious award”

“We are proud on this programme to have met the strict criteria demanded by BAE Systems Global Combat Systems in supplying critical armour plate components and complete assemblies to meet exacting schedules. ”

“MTL Group is a major international supplier of steel and aluminium armour plate and this award further enhances our position within the Defence sector. Receiving this award from a company of the stature of BAE Systems means MTL has been recognized as a quality supplier of armour plate with the capability to react to customer’s requirements quickly and efficiently.”

The ‘Chairman’s Bronze Award’ was officially presented to MTL Group at their headquarters in Sheffield, UK by Jonathan Pape, BAE Systems Programme Manager on June 5th, 2009.

—
This article was first published at JKHanok.com
The article can be re-published on your site as long as this message remains intact.

This work by JK Hanok Press Release Center is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 2.0 UK: England & Wales License.
—

Yukio Takusu (Japan) recalled that, in the previous report, he had informed the Council that the Committee had sent letters to concerned Member States inviting them to provide any additional relevant information regarding a transfer of materiel that constituted a violation of paragraph 5 of resolution 1747 (2007).  That paragraph sets out the export ban on arms and related materiel from Iran.

Updating the Council, the Japanese Ambassador reported that the Committee had subsequently received a response from one of the two States, which, however, did not provide any information relevant to the transfer.  The Committee had reiterated its request in a second letter to both States on 1 May.  The Committee had also received, on 27 March and 26 May, respectively, additional details on the materiel from the State that had first brought the matter to the Committee’s attention.  That information was currently under review by the Committee.

In his earlier briefing on 10 March, Mr. Takasu had informed the Council that the Committee had received a letter on 3 February from a Member State “seeking guidance with respect to its inspection of a vessel carrying its flag that had been carrying arms-related materials”.  The Committee had responded on 6 February, saying that the transfer of the material in question was a violation of paragraph 5 of resolution 1747 (2007).  After a further exchange of letters, on 9 March, the Committee had sent a letter to the concerned Member States inviting them to provide, within 10 working days, any additional information regarding that transaction that might help the Committee carry out its mandate.  Council members have described the incident as involving a ship travelling from Iran to Syria that was detained in late January off the coast of Cyprus, its flag State carrying arms prohibited under Security Council resolutions.

Also during the reporting period, the Committee had received a notification from a Member State with reference to paragraph 5 of resolution 1737 (2006), concerning the delivery of items for use in the nuclear power plant in Bushehr, Iran, he continued.  The Committee had also received a notification pursuant to paragraph 15 of that resolution, in connection with the unfreezing of funds to make payments for contracts entered into prior to the listing of an entity.

He informed the Council that the Committee had responded to two written queries from Member States concerning certain aspects of the sanctions regime.  Finally, with regard to reporting by States on their implementation of all relevant measures set out in resolution 1737 (2006), 1747 (2007) and 1803 (2008), the updated figures are as follows:  91 reports under resolution 1737, 78 reports under resolution 1747, and 66 reports under resolution 1803.

Following the briefing, the representative of the United States said that the “E-3 + 3” (China, France, Germany, Russian Federation, United Kingdom and United States) had been seeking a meeting with Iran to discuss a way forward on its nuclear programme, but it had not yet received a reply.  The United States continued to urge Iran to accept that invitation.

Noting that today’s meeting was the first one since Iran’s elections on 12 June, she said the United States shared the international community’s concern in their aftermath.  It was important to respect the rights of the Iranian citizens to express themselves peacefully.

It was also the first meeting since the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) had released its latest report on the status of Iran’s compliance with its Safeguards Agreements and Security Council resolutions, she said, noting that the Agency’s board of Governors was starting meetings today.  The focus should be on IAEA’s detailed findings, which were troubling and included Iran’s refusal to comply with the Council’s demand to suspend its proliferation-sensitive nuclear activities.  That deserved the Council’s attention.  The Agency’s report had also found that Iran continued to advance significantly towards a nuclear weapon capability, producing low-enriched uranium hexafluoride (UF6), enough for one nuclear weapon, should it continue to enrich.

Continuing, she said that Iran had not accepted full IAEA safeguards, and, among other things, continued to refuse to address the Agency’s remaining questions about past efforts to produce a nuclear warhead, or even to meet.  It declined to clarify procurement procedures, or the research and development activities of military institutions and companies that could be nuclear-related, and it rejected requests for access to information and documentation, and to individuals necessary to support Iran’s peaceful claims.  The Director General had again asked for cooperation, without further delay.

In light of Iran’s continued non-compliance with its IAEA and Security Council obligations, the Council Committee must continue to receive full support, she said.  The Committee sought additional information from Iran and Syria about the recent violation of 1747.  She remained concerned that that request remained unanswered.  The United States appreciated Cyprus’ inspection of the ship’s cargo and for placing it in safe storage, as well as that country’s provision to the Committee of additional details about the cargo.  Her country would take particular note of additional information that some of the ship’s cargo belonged to Iran’s Defence Industries Organization, a designated entity under 1737.  At the same time, it supported the Committee’s critically important efforts to examine the additional details and take appropriate action.

Her country remained committed to direct diplomacy with Iran and would engage on the basis of mutual respect.  It also recognized that membership in the international family of nations was a right, but also a responsibility.  The Committee had an essential role to play, and she urged it to redouble its efforts to implement the robust measures contained in the relevant Council resolutions.

The representative of the United Kingdom said he also appreciated the cooperation of a Member State in providing further information about the seized cargo, but the response received from the States concerned about the violation of the resolution was not adequate.  The matter remained under the Committee’s consideration, and he hoped it would receive the necessary information.  The IAEA report had made clear, once again, the seriousness of Iran’s proliferation activities, which were in clear defiance of several Council resolutions.  It had also made clear Iran’s continued non-cooperation with the Agency.  Iran now had more than 7,000 centrifuges installed, of which about 5,000 were enriching UF6.  Iran had now produced 1,339 kilograms of low-enriched uranium.  It continued to deny IAEA access to a heavy-water reactor, whose design could be used to produce nuclear weapons.  The IAEA had said that that had made it difficult to report further on the construction of the reactor, as the Security Council had requested.

Continuing, he noted the IAEA point that Iran was the only State with significant nuclear activities with comprehensive safeguards in force, but which was not implementing the provisions of revised safeguards concerning design information.  The IAEA had still not received preliminary design information for another nuclear power plant, as requested in December 2007.  Nor had it cooperated on questions about the possible military dimensions of its nuclear programme overall, making it impossible to be confident about Iran’s peaceful intentions.  The United Kingdom did not want to deny Iran the use of nuclear energy for civilian purposes, but it was difficult to see how Iran’s present actions were in pursuit of that goal.

Simply stated, Iran’s continued stalling undermined confidence in its intentions, he said.  Moreover, it continued to expand its enrichment programme, with no apparent civilian purpose.  Iran must suspend enrichment activities and act now to assure the international community that its intentions were exclusively peaceful.  The message was clear and simple:  now was the time to get down to serious business.  The international community had made clear its desire for a sincere partnership with Iran, but that opportunity was not a blank check.  Iran needed to make real and urgent progress.  The offer would not be there forever.

According to the IAEA report, noted France’s representative, Iran was continuing with enrichment and installing new centrifuges.  It had refused repeated requests by the Agency for access to a new plant being built and to implement certain transparency measures.  As the Director General had said, Iran was the only country with significant nuclear activities that did not apply those measures or the Agency’s Additional Protocol.  Iran had not cooperated on key points; it had not provided the requested information or documentation or access to the key sites.  The Agency had concluded, therefore, that it was not in a position to verify the absence of undeclared nuclear activity and that there was a need to fully apply the sanctions adopted after repeated violations by Iran.

He said that Cyprus had taken the right decision to inspect the vessel and withdraw its cargo, but it remained to be determined whether, in addition to the banned arms, the cargo had any link with persons or entities listed in the resolutions related to Iran’s nuclear programme.  France favoured the political direction of the “E-3 + 3”, which had long proposed that Iran meet, but that country had still not replied.  He hoped it would re-evaluate its behaviour and stop obstructing the work of the Agency.  In short, he hoped it would extend its hand to the hand extended to it.  Iran had a singular opportunity to do that, and France hoped that it would.

The representative of the Russian Federation said the Committee, in its continued work, should remain guided by the Council’s resolutions and by the primary goal of effective monitoring of Iran’s programme, via diplomatic means and negotiations based on proposals put forward by the “six”.  Russia was working towards ensuring dialogue with Iran, as soon as possible.  All six concerned States should stay with the primary goal of ensuring that there were no military aspects to Iran’s nuclear programme.

Mexico’s speaker thanked the Japanese Ambassador for the detailed report, while expressing concern about points raised in the most recent IAEA report of 5 June that Iran was still not complying with the Council’s resolutions and that it continued to enrich uranium and build plants linked to heavy-water reactors.  Mexico favoured nuclear disarmament through effective and progressive measures, ensuring the credibility and efficiency of the international non-proliferation system.  The recent positive disarmament initiatives shown by some nuclear-weapon States contrasted with the attitudes of other States continuing in their nuclear energy-related activities for non-peaceful purposes.  Mexico was concerned about possible delays towards a world free of nuclear weapons; only their total elimination would prevent their proliferation.  It was crucial to remain seized of Iran’s nuclear issue.  Iran should continue to work with the IAEA in order to clarify pertinent issues in conformity with Council resolutions.

China’s representative said Iran’s nuclear issue involved the effectiveness of the nuclear non-proliferation regime and had a direct bearing on the Middle East situation.  China had always stood for the maintenance of the global non-proliferation regime; it was opposed to nuclear weapons proliferation and did not wish to see a new wave of turbulence in the Middle East.  But, the matter should be resolved diplomatically, in the interest of peace and security in that region and beyond.  At present, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, China, United States and the Russian Federation remained in close contact with Iran regarding problems on different aspects of its nuclear programme.  China hoped the outstanding issues with the IAEA would soon be resolved, so as to allay the international community’s misgivings.  The international community should intensify its diplomatic efforts and maintain dialogue with Iran, aimed at the early start of negotiations and a comprehensive, long-term settlement of the nuclear issue.

—
This article was first published at JKHanok.com
The article can be re-published on your site as long as this message remains intact.

This work by JK Hanok Press Release Center is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 2.0 UK: England & Wales License.
—

Chicago, IL, June 01, 2009 — Following previous releases in February 2006 and March 2007, Global Heavylift Holdings, LLC, a Florida incorporated and Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) listed (www.ccr.gov) entity with principal offices in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, will continue its pursuit of an USD18.4B capital raise to implement a US/NATO-controlled Heavy and Outsized (H&O) air cargo industry utilizing new and used modestly modified variants of C-17 for commercial missions, while still meeting USAF operational standards as part of Civil Reserve Air Fleet (CRAF) organic airlift augmentation. (GOOGLE SEARCH: Global HeavyLift Holdings, LLC; also Commercial Application of Military Airlift Aircraft (CAMAA) ) WIKIPEDIA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_Application_of_Military_Airlift_Aircraft

” The current and real threat to C-17 line continuance concomitant with the core role this aircraft plays in our existent and long-term plans for wresting control of the H&O air cargo industry from our Russian and Ukrainian friends, whilst allowing them to maintain a symbiotic role with the heavylift market-proving Antonov AN-124 Ruslan, serves as a strong impetus to assist in the preservation of C-17, not for just the next 2 years, but for the next two decades”, says Myron D. Stokes, Managing Member. “A status, mind you, that C-17 richly deserves as an aircraft unparalleled in its tactical/strategic airlift capacity. And, given the fact there is no replacement on any horizon for an airlifter with capabilities anywhere near C-17, proposing its termination approaches the realm of the irresponsible.”

As for Secretary of the Air Force Donley’s comment to the extent if the AF needed more airlift, “They could always retrofit more [35-42 year old] C-5s”, Stokes observes that without complete control of the air in a battlespace -the intended role of F-22- very large, minimally maneuverable C5s (not to mention requiring significant air operations infrastructure) would be nothing more than fodder for the cannons and missiles of enemy fighter craft.

Stokes also stated his team will support Antonov’s late 2009 efforts to restart AN-124 production at Ulyanovsk, Ukraine, through as yet undisclosed means. The DoD continues to contract Russian/Ukrainian government controlled entities operating AN-124 to make up for in-theater airlift capacity shortfalls in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The company is right now in process of establishing aircraft operations offices (to anchor four global epicenters in the US, Europe. Middle East and Asia) with one of its strategic air partners in Oakland and Washtenaw counties, Michigan.

“Our strategy, as announced in February 2006, outlined a non-traditional business model involving a primary focus on acquisition of the necessary intellectual resources from within industry and government to craft a blueprint for a new global industry. It continues to evolve in content and depth, but has remained largely intact owing to built-in project execution flexibility architecture”, says Stokes.

“In light of the on-going fight, and it is a fight, if not out and out political war, for preservation of C-17, whose production constitutes so large an economic foot print as confirmed by the Department of Commerce (DOC) in its still quite viable C-17 Industrial Base Impacts Study of 2005/2006, our team is resolute in its support.”
(Note to editors: A copy of this quasi-public study is available upon request)

According to Stokes, the criticality of retaining an aircraft that effortlessly transitions between strategic and tactical airlift missions as demanded by 21st Century conventional (the military build-up of China; nuclearization of Iran and North Korea; re-emergence of Russia as a power broker, etc) and asymmetric war (Terrorist operations with global reach) threats/realities compells listing the following informational absolutes to clarify, if not neutralize, assertions being made by C-17 detractors:

1.Secretary of Defense Gates, with all due respect, has no truly substantive, credible data to support his intent to kill C-17. Although initially publicly supportive of ending C-17 production at 180 (now 205) as suggested by the never released to public Mobility Capabilities Study (MCS, 2005/2006) and 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR)http://www.defenselink.mil/qdr/ which echoed MCS findings, former SECAF Michael Wynne and Chief of Staff Gen. Michael Mosely strongly recommended against line closure, and were fired last year as a result. It was this, not the “inadvertent” flight of a nuclear-armed B-52 across country, that played a significant role in their dismissal. The data the SECDEF refers to as “internal Pentagon analyses” is that developed by the Pentagon Office of Program Analysis and Evaluation (PA&E) in collaboration with RAND Corporation, and exists in the form of the Mobility Capabilities Study mentioned above, which was completed in late 2005 after several delays. This study was promptly debunked by the GAO (and to former SECDEF Rumsfeld in a strongly worded letter prior to its “release”) http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-938 and subsequently by Congress as being based on flawed analytics and inapplicable, outdated, conflict assumptions.

Comments to the effect that a new study ordered by Congress “Will reach the same conclusions as the first” should be suspect.

By all rational indications, the directives given to PA&E were designed to ensure an end of C-17 production in favor of C-5A and B retrofit, and inclusion of a much-delayed EADS/Airbus A400M (despite its inability to carry an Abrams Tank) in USAF inventory.

2.Before the MCS was completed, capable academics and researchers in industry and government were advised in advance of the “release” of its findings and promptly developed a countering study -co-sponsored by the USAF- as it pertained to industrial base impact. This was particularly important owing to an element of MCS concluding that industrial base impact would be negligible. As those lawmakers who were able to receive a copy of the DOC study before it was rendered inacessible ascertained, it reached a diametrically opposite conclusion.

3.The intent of the DoD to kill two critically important elements of national security, C-17 and F-22, comes on the heels of the confirmed (by Lockheed-Martin) theft by China of the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMD) through a front company posing as an LMCO supplier. The Aegis is core to US Naval offensive/defensive capabilities, while being systemically interlinked to the whole of network-centric US military operations. Moreover, there is every reason to believe that F-22 Raptor and C-17 technologies have been compromised as well, owing to the relative ease with which Aegis was acquired. The Chinese clone was initially introduced on Luyang II-class Destroyers in 2005/2006 (derived from Sovremenny-class Russian vessels) and in all likelihood incorporated, among other capitol ships, within the now operational 67,500 ton Adm. Kuznetsov-class aircraft carrier Shilang purchased from Ukraine.

4.Transformational Recapitalization, an acquisition process well articulated by national security strategist Dr. Sheila Ronis in a Defense AT&L (November 2004) analysis “Transformational Recapitalization: Rethinking USAF Aircraft Procurement Philosophies”, holds the key to virtual elimination of Congressional/Presidential budget wrangling, while simultaneously taking large steps towards achieving oft-stated goals of governmental expenditure equilibrium. GHH will initialize this process through acquisition -following Congressional resale approval to the USAF- of first generation “A” model C-17s, currently constituting approximately 54 aircraft at a price ranging between USD90M-140M. The money paid to the USAF, subsequent to a necessary change in scoring law, flows back into their coffers, thus recapitalizing it. Another modification of existing budgetary law would require that these funds are used to acquire new C-17s only, therefore keeping Long Beach and St. Louis assembly lines open, as well as maintaining the irreplaceable design, engineering and supplier base.

Utilization of A-model C-17s from AF inventory allows GHH H&O commercial operations to begin sooner, and profitability to be achieved in a shorter timeframe, while maintaining these aircraft at mandated AF operational standards and immediately available in times of national emergency. The aircraft will be available for peacetime organic airlift augmentation at all times. Notably, the used aircraft scenario does not require Boeing’s participation, other than contracted and mandated major maintenance, or approval.

5.Concurrent with required Congressional approval for USAF resale of first generation C-17s, FAA exemption to FAR Part 14 CFR 21.27 -a reg requiring that all aircraft declared “military surplus” are re-certified to operate in US airspace- must be obtained. GHH maintains, as did Boeing in a previous petition, they are not surplus, owing to mandated inclusion in the Civil Reserve Air Fleet and continuous Air Mobility Command mission undertakings. Also, thanks to an impeccable C-17 safety record since becoming operational in 1993 (Iraq War sustained missile strikes and unintentional wheels-up landings at Bagram Air Base, Afghanistan, notwithstanding) there should be no viable concerns in this arena.

“We will not only continue to pursue the necessary resale language from Congress, to be contained within the 2010 or 2011 budget, but FAA exemption from 14 CFR 21.27, perhaps with a little prodding from the DoD. Furthermore, this continued exemption quest will be undertaken separate from Boeing”, says Stokes.

“The 18.4B funding strategy that will permit acquisition of up to 60 C-17As and 40 new aircraft, and hopefully include the even more capable B variant proposed, remains as a quadruple and simultaneous raise in the US, Europe, Middle-East and Asia. This approach continues viable as it was designed with the understanding of a possible financial sector melt-down over a year before it occurred.

“As of now, and towards the above objective, we have identified accessible resources up to USD5B. Conversely, in the middle of an economic war and a much more dangerous world, it is our intent, through the heavylift initiative, to be part of the profound economic revitalization efforts ongoing; at least to the extent humans can shape the outcome they want.”

Recognizing the absolute necessity of international C-17 sales to its continued production, GHH, while working with foreign governments to establish the four global aircraft operations epicenters outlined within plan data, encouraged them to acquire -and if already in inventory, acquire more- C-17s for both military and commercial use as a condition of purchase. Such overtures were made to the UK, Belgium, Japan and The Sultanate of Oman governments, among others.

“Many dedicated people in industry and government have worked very hard, and made many sacrifices, over the past near decade to preserve C-17 and to create a US/NATO-controlled heavlift industry with the BC-17 variant,” says Stokes.

“For all of us intensely involved in this project; from New York to Washington; from Detroit to Chicago; from St. Louis to Los Angeles and Long Beach, failure… is not an option.”

About Global HeavyLift Holdings, LLC
Founded in 2002, GHH is a strategic air transport solutions that was born of a multi-year public/private effort among forward thinkers in both the private sector and government to mitigate emerging and observable vulnerabilities in the U.S. industrial base global supply chain. Such vulnerabilities are represented by the fact that no ocean-borne shipping is in U.S. hands at present, thus potentially subjecting American corporations, especially automotive, and their global operations to the whims and perhaps economically hostile activities of and by foreign governments. Add to this the risk of terrorist activities, which have, according to the Department of Homeland Security, targeted maritime operations; i.e., ships, ports and ocean containers.

Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) listed, (http://www.ccr.gov/) it is the goal of GHH and its strategic partners around the planet to work with key logistics personnel within these corporations and government agencies to conceptualize, craft and structure long-term global supply chain alternative transportation methodologies through continuous — not stop gap or emergency — air augmentation solutions. Its most important mission, however, has been in the co-development of global architecture for infrastructure of a new American controlled industry, Heavylift, utilizing the excellent airlift performance characteristics of the Boeing BC-17.

For Further Information: Global HeavyLift Holdings, LLC, 74 W Long Lake Rd. Suite 103, Bloomfield Hills, MI, 2483102650
Defense Logistics Agency listed (www.ccr.gov), www.emotionreports.com, mstokes@emotionreports.com

Contact:
Gabriella Barthlow
Global HeavyLift Holdings, LLC
74 W Long Lake Road
Suite 103
Bloomfield Hills, MI
248 310 2650
mstokes@emotionreports.com

http://www.emotionreports.com

—

This article was first published at JKHanok.com
The article can be re-published on your site as long as this message remains intact.

This work by JK Hanok Press Release Center is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 2.0 UK: England & Wales License.
—

In full, the statement from the Korea Central News Agency, as translated by The Wall Street Journal, read:

“As requested by our scientists and technicians, [we] successfully conducted one more underground nuclear test on May 25, Juche 98 (2009), as part of the measures to strengthen the Republic’s self-defense nuclear deterrent in every way.

“This nuclear test was safely conducted on a new, higher level in terms of the explosive power and controlling technology and, as a result, scientific and technological problems were resolved that can further increase the power of nuclear weapons and constantly develop nuclear technology.

“The success of this nuclear test greatly fires the flames of a new revolutionary surge to open up the door of strong and prosperous country, and highly encourages our military and people who participated in the 150 Day Battle, like one person.

“The nuclear test will contribute to protecting the sovereignty of the country and the nation and socialism, and ensuring peace and security on the Korean peninsula and neighboring region, with the power of Songun.”

The Reaction

South Korea called the test a threat to world peace.

In Japan

Japan’s chief cabinet secretary Takeo Kawamura said Tokyo might seek an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council to deal with the test, North Korea’s second since 2006.

Japan is particularly sensitive to North Korean actions because all of Japan is within North Korean missile range.

In the USA

In the UK

—
This article was first published at JKHanok.com
The article can be re-published on your site as long as this message remains intact.

This work by JK Hanok Press Release Center is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 2.0 UK: England & Wales License.
—

The event gave Boeing and its F/A-18E/F Super Hornet industry partners the opportunity to learn more about the capabilities of the Greek aerospace and defense industry, and identify projects in support of the industrial participation program tied to Greece’s next-generation fighter aircraft competition, for which the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet is a contender.

“Greece and Boeing have a history of partnership and collaboration that extends over more than three decades,” said Gwen Kopsie, director of International Industrial Participation and Alliances for Boeing Integrated Defense Systems. “Boeing commercial and military products have been well represented in Greece for many years, finding a home in a wide range of civil and defense applications. As an enduring partner, we are committed to ensuring that Greek industry, too, is well represented among our global supplier base.”

In April, Boeing and Hellenic Aerospace Industry (HAI), Greece’s largest aerospace and defense company, signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that outlines areas of potential cooperation between Boeing Integrated Defense Systems and HAI. The MOU included opportunities such as depot-level maintenance of rotary and fixed-wing aircraft; avionics and accessories; aircraft upgrades; metal and composite aerostructures; wiring and wire harness manufacturing; maintenance training for rotary and fixed-wing aircraft; and performance-based logistics.

“Together with our Super Hornet industry partners — an industrial powerhouse with sales exceeding $454 billion a year — we are focused on bringing together the best of industry from around the world to make our products and services more affordable and more capable,” Kopsie added. “We are committed to strengthening existing relationships and creating new opportunities that will bring long-term, high-value work to a broad cross section of Greek companies of all sizes and capabilities.”

—
This article was first published at JKHanok.com
The article can be re-published on your site as long as this message remains intact.

This work by JK Hanok Press Release Center is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 2.0 UK: England & Wales License.
—