Engineers from the University of Missouri (MU) College of Engineering, with funding from the U.S. Army/Leonard Wood Institute (LWI), are developing applications that could allow soldiers to reach into a pocket, pull out an Android-based smartphone or iPhone® and determine the exact location of a remote target via sight or sound.

Dr. Yi Shang, professor of computer science in the MU College of Engineering, is leading the research with a team of fellow MU colleagues and students. The effort, which culminates early next year, began when Shang, an expert in wireless sensor networks, realized that smartphones could be used to detect and image targets, and be treated as powerful wireless sensor nodes.

“Two years ago I came up with the idea of using a set of smartphones to find the location of remote targets based on either sight or sound,” Shang says. “Using traditional wireless sensor networks doesn’t work because they don’t have the proper capabilities. But smartphones have cameras and microphones as integral, widely available sensors. Last year there was an RFP [request for proposal] from the LWI [LWI funds research projects on behalf of the Army Research Laboratory/Human Research and Engineering Directorate]. I got together with colleagues, wrote a proposal, and it was funded.”

Shang describes a sight-based scenario in which a small team of soldiers in Afghanistan is monitoring a remote target, a vehicle for example. Using a laser to determine the exact location of the target is one common technique. But lasers have a limited range and are intrusive. The targeted entity may detect the signal the laser is shooting at them.

Smartphones equipped with the applications the researchers are working on could passively determine the location of the target, allowing the soldiers to go undetected. Their integral cameras would be used to take pictures of the target and together with other sensors already resident in the phones (compass, GPS, accelerometer, etc.), determine the target’s exact position.

Targeting can also be accomplished in sound-based scenarios, utilizing applications written to exploit the microphones in smartphones.

“If a vehicle is in a dark environment or if it’s in an urban setting where you don’t have line of sight but you can still hear the sound of a vehicle over the sound of gunshots for example, then you use the microphone-based application,” Shang says.

So far the applications are being written primarily for Android-based smartphones because they are easier to program, Shang says. The MU team is developing single image-based, multiple image-based, and video image-based technologies for different scenarios and single or multiple phone-based methods of determining target location information.

“For a single image-based application you need some idea of the size of the object you are trying to locate,” Shang explains. “For a two-phone image-based application, we are essentially using triangulation. In addition to the image recognition and the signal processing [sound] applications, we’re also developing ad hoc networking support so that the phones will be able to talk to each other directly via Bluetooth or Wi-Fi to send the data to one location to compute.”

Cellular communication networks upon which phones typically depend in a civilian setting aren’t present in a conflict area like Afghanistan. So to calculate and relay target location information, Shang and his colleagues are working on applications that will allow soldiers’ smartphones to talk directly to one another in a local area.

“That’s the third part of the program,” Shang says. “Improvised ad hoc networking allows peer-to-peer communication between the phones directly without going through any cellular network. You can do Bluetooth or Wi-Fi communications directly in ad hoc mode.”

Doing so requires some adaptation of current smartphone capabilities Shang says. For instance, Bluetooth currently supports only single hop, phone-to-phone communication but does not support multi-hop networks. Multi-hop networks could extend the distances at which target location information could be determined or relayed.

“If you have two phones a great distance apart, you cannot currently provide a third phone in the middle as a forwarding node,” he explains. “We’re implementing that part for Bluetooth.”

Shang’s team is also developing a Wi-Fi-based ad hoc network that will allow multiple app-equipped smartphones to talk to each other at extended range.

“Usually for Wi-Fi you need to have an access point. Interestingly Wi-Fi also has direct node-to-node communication called ad hoc mode. On a regular Android phone, you cannot do node-to-node communications. You have to route the phone and change the system a little bit. We’re experimenting with it. Wi-Fi actually has a longer range than Bluetooth and is more efficient so we’re also employing the Wi-Fi ad hoc network in our project too.”

Shang’s team is employing encryption mechanisms so that the signals sent between the app-equipped smartphones can’t be deciphered.

“Since they essentially act as a radio, you cannot avoid detection of the signals they send. But the content of the signals can be protected,” he says.

The killer app technology is still in early stages of development, but, as Shang notes, “it holds a lot of promise. If we can achieve our goals, the application will be a very useful tool for our soldiers.”

A graduate of the Test Pilot School at NAS Patuxent River, Md., with Class 107, he was picked to be one of three original Navy Test Pilots for the beginning of the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet Engineering and Manufacturing Development flight test program.

Morley was assigned as the Navy’s performance, propulsion and carrier suitability test pilot for the first two years of the Super Hornet program. In this capacity, he conducted the first ever Super Hornet shipboard landing in January 1997 as part of Initial Sea Trials. He has more than 3,600 flight hours in 35 different aircraft and more than 750 carrier arrested landings. Morley flew the first missions of Operation Southern Watch in August 1992, participated in Operation Desert Fox, led strikes on Iraq in Operation Southern Watch, flew missions over New York City immediately following Sept. 11, 2001 in Operation Noble Eagle, and supported troops on the ground in Afghanistan and Iraq in Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom.

An F/A-18F Super Hornet flies with an infrared search and track (IRST) system integrated in the front section of the aircraft's centerline fuel tank during system flight testing. Boeing Company photo

Now in the EMD (engineering and manufacturing development) phase, the IRST system being developed by Lockheed Martin and the USN is exemplary of a renewed interest worldwide in “out-of-band” air to air sensors for modern fighter aircraft. It’s a road the Navy first went down with the F-14D, for which the AN/AAS-42 IRST was developed in the 1980s.

Today, sophisticated EW equipment for threat aircraft has proliferated, and its potential to compromise the effectiveness of RF (radar-based) sensors is significant. Consequently, an increasing number of western fighters, including the Boeing F-15K, Eurofighter Typhoon and Saab JAS 39E/F Gripen have recently adopted IRST systems. Russian MiG and Sukhoi fighters have employed them for nearly two decades.

Because radars are active sensors they are vulnerable to jamming. IRST systems are passive, searching for and detecting heat sources within a field of regard. They emit no RF radiation and are therefore more difficult to detect as out-of-band sensors.

A buy of 150 IRST sensors is planned for the Super Hornet. For an update on the program and insight into its genesis Jan Tegler chatted with Morley.

Jan Tegler: I understand that the new IRST system the program is pursuing is based on technology from the AAS-42 IRST on that was carried on F-14Ds. When did this new program get under way and what spurred further development of IRST for the Super Hornet?

Capt. Francis Morley: The program officially got under way in 2008. There had been discussions and analysis of alternatives prior to that. The reason for it is the prevalence of advanced electronic attack and jamming systems today. Everyone is looking for an out-of-band solution. We’ve still got to work in the RF bands and certainly radar is still a very powerful tool, but let’s increase our options. Knowing that the Super Hornet is here for a long time, the Navy decided to invest in getting an out-of-band air to air targeting solution for the airplane. So that’s where the IRST went.

This new IRST sensor is an evolution of the sensor we started using on the F-14D. Lockheed Martin was the manufacturer and invested in improving and updating it over time. An updated version of that original IRST was put into the F-15, the South Korean version. That is the baseline and we’re taking the next step with the system for the Super Hornet. It’s a new sensor but it has evolved through a couple generations of technology.

New and developing IRST systems seem to be growing in popularity internationally. What are the advantages of this type of system for the Super Hornet and why has IRST found favor of late with our air forces?

The IRST pod being developed for the Super Hornet will take up the first third of a centerline tank, with fuel carried in the remaining portion. Lockheed Martin imagery

There are two drivers of that. The electromagnetic spectrum that we spoke about with advanced threat aircraft equipped with electronic jamming technology is one. That’s driving everybody to take a more serious look at alternatives, and IRST is one of them. Couple that with technological progression and our ability to provide not only a sensor but also a passive targeting solution and you can see the why the U.S. would pursue IRST for the Super Hornet.

How will the IRST be fielded on the F/A-18E/F?

The IRST is incorporated in the front one-third of a centerline fuel tank with the remaining two-thirds dedicated to fuel [approximately 2000 pounds] so the lost fuel capacity is fairly small. The podded solution is a low-cost option because it means you don’t have to change the mold line of the airplane and it allows you to switch IRSTs from aircraft to aircraft. I suspect that they will get a lot of use. Putting the pod on the tank locates the sensor on the centerline which is important from a field of view standpoint. You get a symmetrical field of view on both sides of the airplane. It’s also far enough forward to have an adequate field of view without blanking from the nose.

A new IRST would seem to be a cost-effective way of keeping the Super Hornet viable into future. If the system is operational by 2016, that would seem to be a great benefit as the fleet awaits the delayed F-35C.

The Navy’s air wing of the future, through 2030 and beyond is a Super Hornet, F-35C and EA-18G combination. I think the vision here is to give this additional out-of-band air to air solution to the Super Hornet because of the airplane’s longevity. If you want an effective fighter into the future you’re probably going to need this capability.

As mentioned previously, the MRE is probably the most frequently updated combat ration in the world, both in terms of menu variety and technology. There are even “Special Purpose” MREs. The “Meal, Religious” features Kosher and Halal MREs while the “Meal, Tailored Operational Training” provides “an alternative operational training meal in lieu of ‘sack lunches’ and catered commercial meals to military organizations that engage in inactive duty training.”

The team of nutritionists, food scientists and technologists at the Combat Feeding Directorate work hard to ensure that the warfighter receives the best rations possible. U.S. Army photo by David Kamm

Keeping the MRE current requires the relatively small cadre of nutritionists, food scientists and technologists at the Combat Feeding Directorate to stay up to date with evolving technologies and developments in health and nutrition.

Fortunately, the CFD recognized early on that partnering with the nation’s industry and research institutions could pay significant dividends. Today, the Directorate continually leverages that relationship, says Logistics Management Specialist Joe Zanchi, with the CFD’s Combat Rations Team.

“The U.S. is unique in its ability to make that investment in combat feeding,” he points out. “It’s not the same for a lot of our foreign partners. Part of the strength of our program is that decades ago we realized that there had to be a positive relationship with our industrial sector. We’re really partnered with leading-edge companies in the food industry and with academic institutions that are moving technologies forward. We’re able to take advantage of that.”

Two technologies under development for commercial applications which could be beneficial to the MRE – high pressure food processing and microwave sterilization – are being closely followed by the CFD for their potential in a military setting.

The majority of today’s processed foods are heat treated to kill bacteria. This often diminishes product quality, particularly in terms of freshness. High pressure processing (HPP) provides an alternative means of killing bacteria that can cause spoilage or food-borne disease without a loss of sensory quality or nutrients.

Spiced apples are the first to be high-pressure packaged in Meals, Ready-to-Eat (MREs). The apples on the left are high-pressure processed, and on the right are the apples currently in MREs. This pressurization technology has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and will be used in future MREs. U.S. Army photo by Eriika Wonn

Under HPP, food is subjected to elevated pressures (up to 87,000 pounds per square inch or approximately 6,000 atmospheres), with or without the addition of heat, to achieve microbial inactivation. Pressure inactivates most vegetative bacteria at pressures above 60,000 pounds per square inch. The primary benefits are higher quality processed foods with improved freshness and extended shelf life.

“There’s been a lot of enthusiasm about high pressure processing and its benefits where it may fit in here as it nears commercialization,” Zanchi reports. “High pressure processing has the potential to keep processed food like that found in the MRE fresher and perhaps lend it better nutrient retention. It’s less stressful on the food when it’s processed so it improves its quality. We look at all of the areas where there is innovation which we think might have relevance for a military feeding application.”

Microwave sterilization is another technology which could benefit the MRE, says CFD Senior Food Technologist Jeannette Kennedy. The technology is basically what the term describes. Microwaves are used to deliver energy to packaged food under pressure and controlled temperature to achieve inactivation of bacteria harmful for humans, thereby sterilizing the food.

The crew from NBC's "Rock Center with Brian Williams" turned the Pilot Plant Kitchen at the Combat Feeding Directorate at Natick Soldier Research, Development and Engineering Center into a temporary TV studio during a Nov. 4, 2011 visit. This kind of attention is unusual for the directorate, whose work mostly goes unsung. U.S. Army photo by NSRDEC Photographer David Kamm

The main benefits are similar to those of HPP, due primarily to the speed of microwave sterilization. With traditional food processing and sterilization techniques, prolonged exposure to high heat often diminishes product quality. Microwaves interact with polar water molecules and charged ions. The friction resulting from molecules aligning in rapidly alternating electromagnetic fields generates the heat within food. Since the heat is produced directly in the food, the thermal processing time is sharply reduced.

This yields fresher processed food with better nutrient retention, improved visual appeal and the advantage of post packaging processing which can reduce spoilage and eliminate refrigeration costs for manufacturers.

“Microwave sterilization is something we’re definitely working on,” Kennedy says. “The hurdle currently is that the packaging of the MRE entrees has a foil layer in it. Foil is a great barrier for moisture, so it helps maintain the shelf-life of the products. But you can’t microwave foil. So we’re looking at developments in packaging that has the same barrier properties as foil but which is not foil.”

“Microwave sterilization is much quicker,” she continues. “Just as you have a microwave at home, it’s a much faster process of making food suitable for consumption. It’s a different alternative to the canning process wherein temperature and pressure are used in order to commercially sterilize food inside the vessel. Instead of using cans, we use a flexible pouch, kind of like what you get tuna fish in at the store. With microwave sterilization our MRE manufacturers would fill the pouch and then microwave sterilize it. That’s the goal.”

Pvt. Heather Buchanan learns the characteristics of a Meal, Ready-to-Eat (MRE) entree to determine if the ration is serviceable. Balancing MRE quality and longevity has long been an area of focus for the Combat Feeding Directorate. U.S. Army photo

The adoption of new technology has, as we’ve detailed, already benefitted the MRE. The once thorny and intractable problem of how to encase Tabasco sauce in a flexible pouch like the rest of the items in an MRE rather than the bottles that had been in use was solved with the application of new packaging technology developed commercially.

Always alert to possible spin offs enabled by new technological solutions, the CFD recently used the same technology to include two new condiments in the MRE that had rather surprisingly been absent until now.

“That breakthrough has allowed the inclusion of a couple more food items that were similarly difficult to package in flexible packaging,” Jeannette Kennedy reveals. “Ketchup and mustard will be going into the 2013 or MRE-33 production. The pH (the relative acidity; the higher the pH, the lower the acidity) in ketchup and mustard  is very low so we weren’t able to include them in the menus, but now we can. We think this should provoke a very positive response!”

Clearly, as the MRE enters its 31st year of existence, progress continues. And though combat rations and the MRE in particular will always be a source of celebration and not a little griping among warfighters, the CFD is doing its best in the complex and ever-changing field of combat feeding to live up to its motto – “warfighter tested, warfighter approved!”

Food speaks volumes about societies. Inextricably linked to national identity, it’s a fundamental cultural marker. So when American warfighters or Australian, Italian or French troopers thousands of miles away from home open up an MRE, Combat Ration Pack, Razione Viveri Speciale da Combattimento or Ration de Combat Individuelle Rechauffable, they are connecting, however briefly, directly with their homeland.

Name-brand products that are included in Meals, Ready-to-Eat (MREs) provide a taste of home that's highly valued by deployed warfighters. U.S. Army photo by Todd Lopez

That’s just one of the morale-boosting effects of food during periods of conflict, but it’s an important psychological ingredient in the MRE, says Joe Zanchi, a Logistics Management Specialist with the Combat Rations Team at the Combat Feeding Directorate (CFD).

“It’s an extremely important aspect of combat feeding that is sometimes overlooked,” he says. “Certain foods can be a taste of home. For instance, we have a lot of commercial items that are over-wrapped that find their way into the MRE. There’s value in that, in the branding and recognition of a suitable item in a combat ration. Oftentimes these items have to be further protected in special packaging, but they can be very meaningful.”

That “taste of home” is also a tempting part of foreign militaries’ individual combat rations. It’s well acknowledged that American and coalition warfighters serving in Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom have indulged their interest in trying something different.

“When you put troops together there’s going to be trading of various rations,” Zanchi observes. “There is that natural curiosity about what’s contained in other nation’s rations. If you’ve been eating the same thing over and over, even if you think of it favorably, something new or different is generally attractive. You hear things anecdotally about positive reactions to some of the things that are in other rations.”

Various sources have also reported that there is an exchange rate for MREs and other rations based on their desirability. Among those sources is Ashley Gilbertson, a photojournalist renowned for his work in Iraq from 2002 to 2008.

A German Army recruit warming up his Einmannpackung (EPa) during a training mission. German Army photo

In a recent photo-series, “Military Rations of Troops in Afghanistan” wherein Gilbertson visually documents the MRE and many other contemporary military rations, the war photographer claims: “Early in the war in Afghanistan, among the international troops who mingle at Bagram Air Base, a single French combat ration (cassoulet, perhaps, with deer pâté and nougat) could be traded for at least five American Meals Ready to Eat, better known as M.R.E.’s.

“Recently though, the barter values have changed.

“A fellow journalist who just got back from an embed with the French told me that today they look forward to visiting the Americans for a meal. American rations — hamburgers, chili, peanut butter, candy — they say, are ‘fun.’”

Joe Zanchi and the CFD are aware of the “horse-trading” that goes on, but he doesn’t think there is any formalized exchange rate.

“I think it depends on what people have been eating, how long they’ve been eating it, what their deployment is and what’s available,” he says. “I think people kind of come to an exchange rate depending on all of that. There is definitely interest in trying something different.”

Items included in the ration packs of foreign militaries have frequently been the source of speculation. It’s hard to confirm just what is included in the latest combat rations for some nations because of their security policies, but rumors of French wine and German beer being integral to the MRE-equivalents for those nations appear outdated.

However, Zanchi believes the Italians still cling to one spirit. “I think one of the Italian rations actually has a liqueur in it.”

An Italian Army corporal distributes rations to the members of Task Force Elephant, Italian Heavy Engineers who were part of the NATO Disaster Relief Team in Pakistan, after the convoy passed the halfway mark to Arja in the Himalayan Mountains on Dec. 12, 2005. Task Force Elephant was part of NATO Disaster Relief Team in Pakistan. Italian military rations have long been rumored to contain a liqueur that is highly valued. NATO photo

Based on research, we can confirm that at least as recently as 2007 the Razione Viveri Speciale da Combattimento incorporated a “Cordiale/bevanda alcolica” described as a “brandy-like” liqueur. Australian combat ration packs continue to feature “Vegemite,” the vegetable/spice sandwich spread so popular with Aussie’s and so inexplicable to the rest of us. Meanwhile the German Einmannpackung or EPa offers (as recently as we can tell) “Cevapcicci,” basically Yugoslavian sausages.

“All of the rations internationally are designed around specific mission profiles and operational requirements for the type of operations and or environmental conditions under which they’re working,” Zanchi notes. “And they’re designed for the national composition of those troops and their tastes.”

This brings up two important points regarding the MRE and its foreign counterparts. First, given the comparative resources of the U.S. military, the MRE is perhaps the most advanced individual combat ration but, as Zanchi observes, that is partially due to the wide range of challenges our armed forces take on.

“I would say that the U.S. is probably at the forefront of combat feeding,” he agrees. “In my experiences with some of the NATO countries we are certainly advanced. But in fairness to those countries, they all don’t necessarily have the same commitments or share the same missions that the U.S. does. Nor the do they have the same requirements for shelf stability, for example. The countries that share similar operational capabilities as the U.S. – the Canadians, the U.K., the Australians – they’ve done a good job in advancing their programs.”

Zanchi says that these countries are now, like the U.S., much more responsive to the tastes and preferences of their warfighters and that they vary their menus and incorporate the latest food processing and packaging technologies. He also adds that one of the strengths of the MRE is its suitability for our diverse population.

“You can imagine the challenges. That illustrates how interesting the American MRE is. We’ve got a diverse ethnic population and that’s apparent in our armed forces. The CFD has taken a challenge and made it into a very successful strength. It’s a considerable feat.”

The challenge of standardizing an international ration was the focus of a series of meetings conducted by NATO from 2007 through 2010. Combat feeding experts came together from the NATO nations to discuss the feasibility of developing a standardized individual combat ration to support the quick-reaction coalition known as the NATO Response Force. Conclusions resulting from the meetings and some small scale studies were mixed.

“I wouldn’t say it’s beyond the realm of possibility,” Joe Zanchi opines. “It just crosses so many different areas, from national identity and preferences to technological and production capabilities and more. We can always learn from other nations though, and include the best of what’s out there in the MRE.”

Like any military ration, the MRE must cater to a wide range of palates. The task is a daunting one. As we’ve already detailed, the original eight MRE menus were not terribly well received, but one of the main entrées stood out as a favorite – spaghetti and meatballs. Widely acknowledged as perhaps the best entrée ever to grace the MRE menu roster, this classic is still a part of the ration today.

Other entrees have made the grade over time too, says Jeanneatte Kennedy, the Combat Feeding Directorate’s (CFD) senior food technologist.

“The spaghetti and meatballs is a well-known hit, but the chili, macaroni and ravioli have been popular too,” she says.

A Soldier adds water to his Meal, Ready-to-Eat (MRE). More than 6,000 warfighters have contributed to the MRE improvement program since 1992. U.S. Army photo

These entrees didn’t appear until after the CFD’s continuous product improvement program got under way in the mid-1990s. The chili and macaroni (said by some service members to be “better than mom’s mac and cheese”) debuted in 1996 in MRE XVI, followed the next year by the inclusion of beef ravioli in MRE XVII.

Not surprisingly, there have been some notoriously unpopular dishes in the menu selections as well. Among the early options, Chicken a la King, seems to have drawn considerable negative comment. In the 21^st century, however, no item seems to have been more uniformly reviled than the “Cheese and Vegetable Omelet.”

“One of the more recent misses would be the veggie omelet,” Kennedy admits. “We field tested it and it did well, but afterwards it just wasn’t popular.”

Asked how long this dish was on the menu, she laughs, “not long!” In fact, the veggie omelet seems to have worn out its welcome in less than four years, between 2005 and 2008. But how could it be that a dish that fared well in testing was a bust in the real world? It comes down to produceability, Kennedy explains.

“Say you’re producing 200 veggie omelet MRE meal samples for a field test,” she offers.  What you get with 200 samples may differ from what you get when you go to full-scale production. You may not always get the same quality. Some of that has to do with the fact that we don’t have military specifications. We have performance requirements. The CFD doesn’t tell producers exactly how to make spaghetti and meatballs for instance.”

“Basically we require that the spaghetti is a certain length, that it’s fortified, that the protein level is a certain amount and that the salt and fat levels are a certain amount,” Kennedy continues. “The sauce would be required to be red, of course, but other than that, producers create their own recipes. So perhaps one of the vendors might have a higher oregano flavor in their sauce. Another producer might have a slightly higher garlic flavor. That could account for it.”

As mentioned previously, feedback on current MREs gets to the CFD in a variety of ways, from field tests to installation visits by CFD personnel. Warfighters just returned from deployment also have a chance to interact directly with the CFD.

Kathy-Lynn Evangelos, with the Combat Food Directorate, prepares her booth for soldiers. Here, soldiers could taste-test new Meal, Ready-to-Eat (MRE) menu items and take an interactive test. U.S. Army photo by Erika Wonn

“We’ll have units come to visit Natick (Soldier Research, Development & Engineering Center),” Kennedy affirms. “They will visit all of the different functional areas we look at here – food, ballistics, helmets, uniforms, etc.  When they’re here, they’re fresh from deployment.  They haven’t even made it home yet.  So we get immediate feedback on what’s working and what’s not working.”

But the CFD isn’t always the first stop for warfighters wishing to comment on the MRE. Today’s troops aren’t just specialists in the military arts, they’re savvy consumers. And when they have a complaint they occasionally go right to the source, according to Kennedy.

“We do have a website, but they also tend to get in touch with the vendors because the vendor’s name and address is on each item,” says Kennedy.  “They’ll send an email or a letter back to the manufacturer and then the manufacturer shares that information with us.”

In this age of social media, there are even more ways for those who presently consume MREs or who’ve experienced them in the past to share their thoughts about the ubiquitous ration. Apparently the MRE has been a topic of discussion on the U.S. Army’s own Facebook page. The service recently asked its followers to comment on their favorite and least liked MRE menu options.

“A wide range of people replied,” Kennedy reveals. “You had active duty, family members and retired service people.”

A Soldier takes a moment to fill out a field evaluation form after eating a meal developed at Natick Soldier Systems Center. Soldier evaluation is crucial to the development of any new Meal, Ready-to-Eat item. U.S. Army photo by Dave Kamm, NSRDEC Photographer

She says two-thirds of the responses featured people’s favorite MREs, while only a third included their dislikes. We took a look at the U.S. Army Facebook page and found over 600 replies to the question put this way – “What’s the worst thing you ever ate in an MRE?”

Some of the responses, taken from the Facebook page, were indeed positive, including these below.

“When I first joined in ’99 they were all pretty equally ranked as my ‘least favorite.’ However, with the improvements over the years and changes to the menu they are all relatively palatable.”  – Eric Baker

“Today’s MREs, it feels like they’re trying to make them taste good.” – Juan A. Castillo

But many more were less than enthusiastic. And so it goes. . .

“Chicken a la King back in the early ’80s, you talk about runnin’ to the bathroom! And this is when combat engineer units lived in the field for 30 days at a time, so no running water, yuk hahahaha” – Lance E. Pruitt

“The turkey in gravy MRE was one if the worst for me. Found bone fragments and a bit of feather in one. Same with the chicken loaf.” – Tom McGee

“That Country Captain Chix (chicken) was horrible!!! At one point it was all we had left, so I went to open another box, my CO said, ‘So you’re not gonna bite the bullet’ … I said, ‘Sir I’d rather take a bullet, LOL!’” – Bruno Saraiva

“The worst MRE is the cheese and veggie omelet, thing has nasty texture, taste, and smell. I’ve met very few people who actually like it. It’s become more of a dare to try, rather than a meal in my unit.” – Kody Comtois

“Veggie cheese omelet! WTF were they thinking?…” – Tom Elder

From the application of food processing and packaging science to ensure safe, shelf-stable rations that appeal to the varying tastes of warfighters, to engineering durable, flexible, lightweight packaging to lighten their load, the task of fielding a continuously viable MRE is a complicated one.

Though the CFD has tackled most combat feeding obstacles successfully, one hurdle it has yet to fully overcome is a phenomenon known as “field stripping.”

The First Strike ration's shelf-stable pocket sandwich gives soldiers a portable ration that they can eat on the go. The sandwiches always score well in field-testing. DoD photo

“That’s a problem we’ve been working for a long time and we’re still trying to overcome it,” CFD technology integration analyst Jeremy Whittsit acknowledges.  “We understand why they do it. Basically soldiers will open up their MRE and take out items that they like or which are easy to carry and put them in their cargo pockets or wherever they have room on their person.”

“Sometimes they’re carrying 80 pounds on their backs already between ammo, body armor, devices and batteries,” he continues. “Often they just don’t have extra room or wish to carry the extra weight.”

Field stripping creates waste of course, costing the military and ultimately the taxpayer considerable money. But there’s a more critical problem. If warfighters field strip their MREs consistently they may experience nutritional deficiencies that can harm their performance on the battlefield.

Troops going outside the wire at FOBs for extended periods or deploying to areas with no logistical support have only the rations they carry with them for sustenance. In areas with rugged terrain, stiff enemy opposition and unpredictable conditions like Afghanistan, dismounted warfighters burn calories by the thousands on a daily basis. Field stripping can shortchange a warfighter who needs every ounce of energy he can muster.

“Through education, we’re trying to help them understand that everything in the MRE is provided for a reason,” Whitsitt emphasizes. “But how do you overcome that field stripping so that troops are actually getting the proper nutrition but still make a ration that’s lightweight and easily portable with items that support an eat-on-the-move type environment? The only other course we have is to provide an alternative, and that’s the First Strike ration.”

Engineman 1st Class Robert Chapman, assigned to the amphibious assault ship USS Nassau (LHA 4), gives Meals Ready-to-Eat (MREs) to a Galveston resident during a food convoy to various neighborhoods to supply people affected by Hurricane Ike with basic items. In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, there were complaints that refugees gained weight while being fed with MREs. U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Kenneth R. Hendrix

The First Strike ration, first fielded in 2008, was developed to meet warfighters’ needs (particularly those of elite or special operations forces) head-on, providing them with a lightweight, low volume ration easy to carry and eat out of hand to support dismounted patrol type operations. It’s packaged as a one-per-day ration, according to Whitsitt.

“Everything one soldier needs for one day’s rations is in the packet,” he explains. “It provides about 3,000 calories in all the proper percentages of fats, proteins and carbohydrates. Many of the items in it are similar to those in the MRE, but the First Strike ration is separate. It reduces the weight and volume by about 50 percent. It’s been on the battlefield since 2008 and has been a tremendous hit.”

An MRE item that wasn’t a hit is the source of a myth no one seems to be able to get to the bottom of – “the Charms curse.” It stems from the inclusion of Charms candies in the MRE in the 1980s. Speculation is that the “curse” arose in the 1990s, perhaps during Operations Desert Storm/Desert Shield. It’s one of the bizarre, often ridiculous side effects of military life and combat.

“From what we’ve been able to learn it’s simply one of those urban legends,” Jeremy Whitsitt says. “The myth goes that if you eat the Charms you’ll have bad luck with whatever kind of operations you’re taking on. No one seems to know the origin of it. It just seems to have been repeated over the years by leaders to their troops. I can tell you that the Charms were actually removed from the MRE in 2007.”

A Marine assigned to Battalion Landing Team, 3rd Battalion, 2nd Marine regiment hands Humanitarian Daily Rations, designed specifically for disaster relief, at an aid distribution site in Leogane, Haiti. U.S. Marine Corps photo by Cpl. Bobbie A. Curtis

Though the era of the Charms curse may have passed, that doesn’t mean that new myths about the ubiquitous MRE don’t pop up with regularity.

“Just the other day a guy from Stars & Stripes Magazine wrote in asking us if it was true that Tabasco sauce is only included in the MREs to kill germs on the entrees,” Whitsitt laughs. “That was a new one to me. But those are the types of things that propagate out there in the field.”

Criticism of the MRE also propagates, occasionally reaching beyond the battlefield. In the wake of Hurricanes Katrina (2005) and Ike (2008) the National Guard provided MREs to refugees for the storms as an emergency ration. Never meant to be consumed by civilians, the MRE was figuratively roasted.

“There were a lot of reports at the time of the refugees gaining weight from eating the ration and the MRE got some bad press,” Whitsitt recalls. “But everything was taken out of context. The people who had been displaced didn’t have much to do but wait in the aftermath of the hurricane and if they were eating three MREs a day – that’s 3,600 calories. They weren’t expending anywhere near the energy to burn that many calories, so they gained weight. A warfighter in Afghanistan will burn that many calories daily and often more.”

Experience with the MRE in disaster relief operations such as these led directly to the creation of the MRE’s cousin, the Humanitarian Daily Ration (HDR). Designed specifically for disaster relief, the HDR was used following the 2010 Haitian earthquake. However, the entire supply of HDRs was exhausted within the first three or four days after the quake. So the MRE was called upon to take its place to support the victims of the disaster.

Though it may not always have been popular with American warfighters, the MRE continues to be essential to our armed forces’ operations. And as Jeremy Whitsitt reports, it can’t be all bad if folks in other militaries have a hankering for it.

“We operate in coalition and joint environments these days and I know that there’s a lot of sharing of rations between militaries,” he says. “We’ve heard stories of American troops eating German rations and French rations and vice versa. They’re just trying something different. We can certainly learn from other countries and they can learn from us.”

On the way to IOC, the Advanced Hawkeye will prove itself in IOT&E (initial operational test and evaluation). Six examples of what is essentially a new airplane are already in the Navy’s hands and will begin IOT&E in the first quarter of 2012. Seventy-five E-2Ds are to be procured at a cost of more than $17 billion, with full rate production slated to begin in early 2013.

Constructed around Northrop Grumman’s AN/APY-9 Multi-role Electronically Scanned Array (MESA) radar, which the Navy and Northrop Grumman characterize as a “two-generation leap in capability,” the E-2D incorporates a much improved suite of sensors, avionics, communications equipment, processors, software and displays. COTS/open architecture networks and software enable the Advanced Hawkeye to process and disseminate information as never before, and allow for future technology insertion.

It adds up to an aircraft that can provide a broader, longer-range picture of the battlespace than ever, whether in the littoral or over land.

For an update on the Advanced Hawkeye, Capt. Shane Gahagan, Hawkeye and Greyhound Program manager at PMA-231, spoke with us about the new capabilities the aircraft will field, their impact on Hawkeye crews, and how the airplane dovetails with current and future U.S. Navy doctrine.

Jan Tegler: What is very the latest in terms of news or developments for the E-2D?

Capt. Gahagan: The U.S. Navy’s Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) test team successfully launched an E-2D Advanced Hawkeye on Sept. 27 at the full-size shipboard-representative test site, Lakehurst, N.J.

In late October, the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye Integrated Test team deployed from NAS Patuxent River, Md., to Naval Base Ventura County, Calif., for radar and mission systems testing. All data points were met during this deployment. Further, two of the test aircraft have surpassed their 300th and 500th flights.

An E-2D Hawkeye assigned to Air Test and Evaluation Squadron (VX) 20 completes a "touch-and-go" exercise aboard the aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman (CVN 75). The "D" model was aboard Harry S. Truman for carrier suitability testing before delivery to the fleet. U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Donald R. White Jr.

Given that the E-2D has been referred to as “the cornerstone of the U.S. Navy’s theater air and missile defense architecture in the littoral,” how much of a departure is it from the E-2C? Is the blue water/sea control mission to be deemphasized to some extent?

The blue water/sea control mission will not be de-emphasized. To the contrary, The E-2D is a multi-mission aircraft and was designed for modern threats and increased visibility over blue water or in the littorals. Its radar provides advanced 360-degree coverage with enhanced sector scan coverage for continuous detection and tracking of targets, expanding maritime domain awareness operations and sorting the dense maritime picture.

The E-2D has been described as an important component of the Navy’s “Sea Power 21 Sea Shield” concept, which advocates for extending defenses against cruise missiles beyond naval forces to joint forces and allies, providing a defensive umbrella deep inland. How critical is the Advanced Hawkeye to this concept?

The platform provides advanced mission enhancement specifically supporting the Sea Shield concept by assisting in the protection of critical shipping ports and loading facilities; defending off-shore facilities and fisheries; patrolling the Economic Exclusion Zone; controlling other maritime surveillance aircraft; evaluating electronic support measures with detection, location and association; evaluating ships for identification, range, distance and location in sea lanes and fishing areas; vectors surveillance aircraft for the identification of unknown ships, as well as classifies ship tracks and reports to other defense elements in the maritime defense environment.

The E-2D not only provides the critical common picture and presence to maintain homeland defense, but expands the operational view to provide joint forces and allies with necessary coordination, presence, and networked intelligence to ensure international stability, security and rapid engagement when required.

With a buy of approximately 75 E-2Ds, when does the Navy plan to retire the E-2C?

The E-2C is currently planned to be retired from active service in 2025, and all squadron transitions to E-2D aircraft will be completed that same year. The E-2C Reserve squadron is not funded for an E-2D replacement, therefore they will continue to operate the E-2C beyond 2025.

Given the leap in capability of Advanced Hawkeye, how much training will existing Hawkeye crews need to exploit its potential?

The amount of “basic” training for aircrew, referred to as “Level 100,” has not increased, with the exception of pilot training.  Basic pilot training has increased some because of the tactical display in the cockpit that is not in the Hawkeye 2000.

An E-2D Advanced Hawkeye assigned to Air Test and Evaluation Squadron (VX) 20 makes its first takeoff from an aircraft carrier. The “D” model was aboard the aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman (CVN 75) for carrier suitability testing before delivery to the fleet. U.S. Navy photo by Lt. j.g. Dusan Ilic

The training system that is being developed for the E-2D is called the Hawkeye Integrated Training System for aircrew – HITS-A.  An “integrated” training system means we are developing a syllabus that covers the basic (Level 100) through advanced (Level 300) training requirements.  To support this syllabus we will deliver courseware and simulators.  The Level 100 training will be conducted at Carrier Airborne Command and Control Squadron One Two Zero (VAW-120), Norfolk, Va. – the Fleet Replacement Squadron (FRS). The Level 200 and 300, representing the tactical training, will be conducted by the Weapons Training Unit (WTU) and the Naval Strike and Air Warfare Center, Fallon, Nev.

The E-2D training differs from the Hawkeye 2000 training due to the fact that the legacy aircraft’s tactical training is a Personnel Qualification Standards (PQS) program, while the HITS-A tactical training will be an approved syllabus requiring aircrew to complete courses, simulators, and flights to achieve their qualifications.  The simulator fidelity will allow aircrew to complete more training events in the simulator versus having to fly the actual aircraft.

Again, given the new capabilities of the E-2D, how much responsibility will be added to the roles of the Advanced Hawkeye’s Radar Officer (RO), Air Control Officer (ACO) and Combat Information Center Officer (CICO) in terms of battle management command and control? It would seem that their respective responsibilities would grow. Does this alter their importance in the kill chain? Will they be tasked with greater decision-making?

With the advanced upgrades and enhancements in terms of radar, flight navigation, and the tactical picture, the E-2D brings a fourth tactical operator to the mission. The addition of the co-pilot’s tactical data display will improve situational awareness, reduce pilot workload for monitoring flight instrumentation and provide the tactical picture to the pilot and co-pilot in the cockpit – adding great benefit to the roles of the RO, ACO and CICO.

The network-enabled architecture (both modular and open) allows for greater battle management and control and data link messaging, supporting the exchange of critical targets, benefitting the E-2D’s responsibility in the central architectural node on the wideband IP network.

Aircrews find new and innovative ways to employ advanced technology and capability with every mission. With these more advanced tools increasing sight and awareness, as well as reducing clutter, it will make the clarity, exchange, amount and accuracy of the mission information and awareness an ever-challenging but “smarter” and manageable responsibility.

The E-2D’s open architecture and robust airframe are said to provide room for growth as new mission systems/components are developed. Are enhancements to be incorporated in a continuous fashion (given budgetary and program support) or will the Advanced Hawkeye experience periodic updates as the E-2C has over the years?

The aircraft’s mission system will be updated as existing requirements are established by the Department of the Navy.

How will the E-2D complement the abilities of platforms like the F-35 and unmanned vehicles in data sharing and battlespace management?

The E-2D program office works closely with JSF and other DoD programs. The Navy plans to operate the E-2D and the F-35 together from our aircraft carriers in the future and the two aircraft are complimentary.  The E-2D is transforming the way the Navy sees the battlespace mission and likewise, the portfolio of the future, including JSF, is designed for this as well.

The E-2D platform provides advanced mission enhancement by providing the critical common picture and presence to maintain homeland defense, but expands the operational view to provide joint forces and allies with necessary coordination, presence, and networked intelligence to ensure international stability, security and rapid engagement when required.

Broken into eight functional teams, the organization is responsible for research, development, integration, testing and engineering for combat rations, food service equipment technology and combat feeding systems. CFD food scientists, nutritionists, dieticians and nutritional biochemists tackle the varied science and technology aspects of combat feeding, and the ever-changing tastes of contemporary warfighters.

To stay ahead of that moving target, the CFD collects information from a variety of sources, interacting with warfighters via a quick reaction cell with a live feed to the AORs, at military/industrial trade shows, online in a number of forums, and in the annual field tests discussed in part one of this story.

Representatives from the U.S. Army Natick Soldier RD&E Center's Combat Feeding Directorate serve new ration recipes at a demonstration at the Pentagon, March 5, 2008. Pfc. Tyler Stratford, of the 3rd U.S. Infantry Regiment (Old Guard), sampled the new rations. RDECOM Photo by Andricka Thomas

“By doing this we can very accurately reflect the trends in the marketplace and the variations in taste and preferences of contemporary warfighters,” says CFD technology integration analyst Jeremy Whitsitt.

“For example, a few years ago Buffalo chicken was all the rage,” he explains. “Everybody loved Buffalo wings and our warfighters were no stranger to them, so we field tested a Buffalo chicken entrée which scored very highly. That was then included in the MRE menu. But if you look at our menu today you’ll see a lot of ethnic food items, a lot of Asian dishes and Mexican-style cuisine. That’s truly reflective of what you might see if you step into popular chain-type restaurants like Applebee’s or T.G.I. Fridays.”

The effort to keep up to date with warfighters’ palates harkens back to the CFD’s continuous product improvement program instituted in the early 1990s. Ironically, however, despite early criticism of the MRE for its blandness and the limited number of menus available when it debuted (just eight in the 1980s versus 24 today), the most popular entrée currently is the same as it was 30 years ago.

“The most popular MRE entrée over the years has been the spaghetti with meat sauce,” Whitsitt reports. “That was one of the original MREs and it’s still popular!”

What does the modern warfighter hold in his hands when he receives an MRE? According to Jeremy Whitsitt today’s soldiers, sailors, Marines and airmen receive a thick brown plastic package weighing about 1.5 pounds and measuring .08 cubic feet. Inside is everything a warfighter needs for a complete meal. Each MRE provides about 1,300 calories on average. Thirteen percent of the calories are from protein, 34 percent from fat and 52 percent from carbohydrates.

A Marine with Battalion Landing Team 3/6, 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit (Special Operations Capable), adds Tabasco sauce for added flavor to his breakfast Meal, Ready-to-Eat (MRE) in his bivouac site immediately in front of the Kandahar International Airport, Kandahar, Afghanistan, during Operation Enduring Freedom. Tabasco sauce has remained a prized MRE item, but it took some time before packaging issues could be resolved. DoD photo

“There’s an entrée, a beef stew or chicken and dumplings which serves as the main dish,” says Whitsitt. “There is also a side dish, a starch or a vegetable. Then there’s a drink and snack-type items like potato sticks, pretzels, trail mix or crackers. A spread is also typically included such as a cheese spread or peanut butter, jelly, something along those lines.”

Accompanying the food is an accessory pack containing two pieces of gum, toilet paper, matches, salt and pepper and some type of spice. Eight of the menus have a tiny bottle of Tabasco sauce included. The only thing that needs to be reconstituted is the powdered beverage-based drinks. All the warfighter has to do is add water, shake one up and then drink.

A word about the Tabasco sauce… Highly desired by warfighters as a spicy compliment to some of the less flavorful MREs, the well-known hot pepper sauce caused consternation for the CFD for a long period of time. The packaging used for just about every other item in the MRE wasn’t up to the job of containing the spicy liquid. It ate through every flexible package tested, so initially glass bottles were used.

These proved less than optimal as well. The bottles were vulnerable to breakage given the rough handling MREs commonly experience. Moreover, the cost of using glass bottles surpassed the cost of the product inside, a big “no-no” in the logistics business. But years of trial and error finally led to a solution.

Soldiers take a moment to fill out a field evaluation form after eating a meal developed at Natick Soldier Systems Center. Field evaluations are just one of the many ways that Meals, Ready-to-Eat are constantly tested. NSRDEC photo by David Kamm

“We tried a lot of different polymer materials, but the high acid content of the Tabasco caused problems over time,” Whitsitt recalls. “That’s why we kept using the glass bottles. But now we’ve found the magic combination of polymers and materials. In collaboration with Heinz (H.J. Heinz Company, makers of Heinz ketchup, etc) we designed a flexible pouch that we can put the Tabasco in that meets our minimum shelf life standard. We’ve achieved massive cost savings and again, decreased the weight of the MRE.”

The solution to the pesky Tabasco sauce problem is a good example of how the CFD leverages relationships with industrial and academic partners, other government agencies and its customers. It’s also an illustration of the unusual challenges the directorate faces when creating combat rations.

“We have a number of unique constraints,” Whitsitt affirms. “The MREs have to be shelf-stable for an extended period of time [three years minimum]. That involves food processing and packaging technology and polymer science. It has to be shipped around the world so the challenge there is creating something that’s lightweight to save fuel and shipping costs. They also have to be air-droppable and able to withstand impacts from different heights. More than that, they must be able to withstand rough handling, being dragged through mud, etc. And at the end of the day, they have to taste good so that the nutrition being delivered will benefit the warfighter.”

In the next installment of this story we’ll discuss the number one challenge for the MRE, detail a couple of the weirder myths surrounding the ration, and learn about the MRE and disaster relief.

First produced in 1981, the MRE ushered in a new era of combat feeding. Gone were the cumbersome metal cans which enclosed the rations that preceded it – from the Vietnam-era “Meal, Combat Individual” stretching back to the “C” and “K” rations of the Korean conflict and World War II.

Food processing and packaging technologies first developed for NASA in the early 1960s to support manned space flight were incorporated into the new ration. The “space age” MRE offered increased portability and shelf life to late 20^th century warfighters while reducing the weight and associated strain on their increasingly burdened backs.

A U.S. Air Force officer eats a Meal Ready-to-Eat (MRE) during Operation Urgent Fury. Even though MREs were used during combat operations before Operation Desert Storm, their first real test came in that conflict. DoD photo

Alternately celebrated and derided – a butt of jokes and source of myths – the MRE has evolved significantly over the last 30 years, providing nutrition to warfighters in conflicts ranging from Operation Desert Shield /Desert Storm (ODS) to the decade-long actions in Afghanistan and Iraq. Today, the MRE is a continuously updated and improved combat ration, tailored to the ever-changing tastes and nutritional needs of the modern warfighter.

First fielded in 1983, the MRE was created to support dismounted warfighters conducting operations on the battlefield away from organized food service capability. Eight menus were available, each including a main entrée portion and side items like bread, peanut butter, different types of spreads and cheese. Accessory packets were included with items like salt, sugar and napkins. The first MREs were also fielded with cigarettes, which just goes to show how times have changed.

Initial reviews weren’t overwhelmingly positive. Warfighters reported that many of the meals were bland, with little differentiation. Never intended for extended consumption, the ration was designed as a primary source of nutrition for approximately three weeks. By that time the military’s logistics chain was supposed to have caught up with those in the field, providing enough food service equipment for the transition to a “group ration.”

But as Jeremy Whitsitt, a technology integration analyst with the U.S. Army’s Combat Feeding Directorate (CFD) observes, reality doesn’t always jibe with doctrine in the fog of war.

U.S. Army Pvt. Jason Link of C Company, 2nd Battalion, 12th Cavalry Regiment, 1st Cavalry Division eats a Meal, Ready-to-Eat (MRE) while on a break during construction of a new command post in Ghazaliya, Iraq Jan. 14, 2007. The quality of MREs has improved constantly over the years since their introduction. U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Martin K. Newton

“The MRE saw its first battlefield action in ODS, and many warfighters consumed it for extended periods, so we got a lot of feedback,” Whitsitt explains. “Basically, the MRE was not doing the job. People felt it was poor quality and the types of items that it included didn’t really reflect the tastes and preferences of the demographic that was consuming it.”

The feedback was warranted, Whitsitt admits. The Army had a kind of “father knows best” mentality when it came to the meals included in the MRE, he says. Much of it was American comfort food. But traditional meat-and-potatoes didn’t really resonate with the 18 to 24-year-olds, primarily from the south, who fought in ODS. Located at the Natick Soldier Research, Development & Engineering Center, Mass., the CFD was a bit out of step with modern tastes.

During the conflict, warfighters came up with a litany of unflattering versions of the acronym M-R-E, including: “Meals, Rejected by Everyone,” “Meals, Refusing to Exit,” “Meals Rejected by Ethiopians,” and worse. The CFD knew it had to make significant changes. The turning point came, somewhat dramatically, in 1991.

“It sounds like a concocted story, but it’s true,” Whitsitt attests. “The director of the CFD was sitting in his office one Friday afternoon when he got a call from the Pentagon, informing him that Gen. Colin Powell, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, would like to see him in his office on Monday morning.”

“So, the director of a relatively small joint-service program said to himself, ‘I’d better get down there!’  He showed up in Gen. Powell’s office that Monday and Gen. Powell held up an MRE. He said, ‘I have two words for you. Fix it!’ The director nodded and said, ‘Yes sir!’ He turned and walked out and that was it.”

That spurred the directorate’s continuous product improvement (CPI) program, a process that has transformed the MRE. By 1993 the ration’s menu base had been increased from 12 to 24 selections, and from that point forward the CFD has conducted annual field tests, sending a group of scientists, engineers, nutritionists and dieticians into the field with warfighters in their environment.

The flameless ration heater in action. U.S. military troops based at the Kandahar International Airport in Afghanistan are only served hot meals every four days. The rest of the time they prepare Meals, Ready-to-Eat (MREs), like this Chicken Teriyaki being prepared in the Air Force morale tent on Feb. 18, 2002. U.S. Air Force photo by SSgt. Derrick C. Goode

“We have a control group, consisting of current MRE offerings, and a test group with new items that the warfighters haven’t seen before,” Whitsitt explains. “There are new entrée items and side items including candy and bakery-type items, a range of new options. We collect a tremendous amount of data and come back and look at the items as they were rated in the tests. A lot of the highest rated test items will replace lowest rated control items.”

The result is that today’s MRE is updated annually. Typically there are two to three new main entrée items and a whole host of side items that are introduced each year. Another product of the CPI program is the “flameless ration heater,” a device that allows warfighters to have a hot meal anywhere.

“That’s been a part of every MRE since 1995,” Whitsitt reports. “Basically it’s a magnesium and iron compound incorporated in a fabric pad, over-wrapped in a little plastic pouch. The warfighter tears the top of the pouch open, slides their entrée in and adds an ounce of water. The water sets off a chemical reaction which heats up their entrée. In about ten minutes it raises the temperature about 100 degrees.”

With the new millennium came Operations Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan and Iraqi Freedom in Iraq, and an acknowledgement that the paternalistic style of combat feeding that marked most of the 20^th century was gone for good.

“We’ve gone from the father-knows-best mentality to a very customer-focused, customer-driven improvement program,” Jeremy Whitsitt stresses. “Today’s MRE is 100 percent warfighter-recommended, warfighter-tested, and warfighter-approved.”

In part two of our feature on the 30^th anniversary of the MRE we’ll explore the contemporary efforts being made by the Combat Feeding Directorate to keep this ubiquitous military ration current.

ATAC is one of the most advanced, longest-lived providers of outsourced flight support to the U.S. military. For nearly two decades the company has offered airborne tactical training, threat simulation and research and development support for the U.S. Navy and other clients.

Headquartered in Newport News, Va., at Newport News-Williamsburg International Airport/Patrick Henry Field, ATAC operates a fleet of tactical aircraft suitable for a variety of training and simulation missions. The firm owns and leases a mix of fighter/attack aircraft, including six Israeli Aircraft Industries Kfir C2s, 15 MK 58 Hawker Hunters, and two McDonnell Douglas A-4N Skyhawks. Two Aero Vodochody L-39s will soon join the fleet.

Company pilots are ex-Navy and Air Force, most with U.S. Navy Strike Fighter Tactics Instructor program (TOPGUN) or U.S. Air Force Weapons School credentials. Maintenance personnel are primarily ex-military as well, with many years of experience and the requirement to conform to a military oversight program.

ATAC was launched in 1994 when two Air Force Academy graduates, Jeffrey Parker and Larry Payne, saw an opportunity. By the mid 1990s, hefty military downsizing had almost completely stripped the Navy and Air Force of the adversary squadrons which had long provided organic “red air” or adversary training for active duty fighter squadrons. Parker and Payne started ATAC with the idea of providing commercial tactical flight services to fill in the gaps.

Ironically, it was the Navy that first took up ex-Viper driver Parker and T-37 flight instructor Payne on their offer. ATAC was initially a subcontractor to Flight International/L-3 Communications, supporting the flight test community at NAS Patuxent River, Md. The Navy remains the company’s primary customer today, procuring their services via a Commercial Air Services (CAS) contract managed by Naval Air Systems Command’s PMA-207. It’s an arrangement much like the one the Navy has with Omega Air Refueling Services, Inc.

Michael Picatti, a maintenance contractor with Airborne Tactical Advantage Company, boards a MK 58 Hawker Hunter aircraft to conduct preflight maintenance during Valiant Shield 2010 at Andersen Air Force Base, Guam, Sept. 16, 2010, a joint training exercise with Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force units focused on engagement of units at sea, in the air, and on land. DoD photo by Senior Airman Nichelle Anderson, U.S. Air Force

Through the 1990s, ATAC pioneered outsourced adversary support and training, becoming more and more familiar to Navy leadership. The firm operated on short term contracts for L-3 Communications/Flight International through the year 2002, when a new CAS contract led to the split of ATAC and L-3 to simplify operations. The company turned an important corner between 2004 and 2005, when it acquired the ability to simulate enemy airborne jamming.

Recently retired Navy Capt. Thomas “Trim” Downing, ATAC’s director of adversary programs, is a former air wing commander (CVW-11), TOPGUN CO and Joint Strike Fighter Requirements Office head. He explains that in the wake of the U.S/Indian joint exercise “Cope India 2004” (wherein USAF F-15Cs were famously defeated in limited ACM engagements with Indian AF fighters) the Navy got serious about EW. ATAC’s ability to offer red-air training complete with realistic enemy jamming simulation impressed naval leadership.

“I’ve been working with ATAC since I was the CO of TOPGUN in 2004,” Downing recalls. “I had flown against them many times throughout my career. When I was the CO at Fallon was in the period right after the ‘Cope India’ exercises. One of the lessons to come from that experience was that the practice of electronic warfare (EW) had advanced in other parts of the world while we in the Navy had stagnated in that area to some extent. By that time, every threat airplane out there had an [EW] pod.”

“One of the key attributes of ATAC is that we can gain capability rapidly,” he continues. “Probably the most important thing ATAC did during that period was bringing onboard a jamming capability. That was really valuable for Navy flight crews to train against and increased our credibility. In fact, we now carry jamming pods on about 95 percent of our sorties. We actually carry pods that are government furnished equipment and they are very sophisticated.”

An ATAC MK 58 Hawker Hunter fighter plane flies past a close-in weapon system (CIWS) 20 mm gun mount that will be tested during a towed drone unit (TDU) engagement. The aircraft will act as a tow aircraft for a TDU that will be engaged by the CIWS 20 mm gun mount aboard the amphibious transport dock ship USS Juneau (LPD 10). U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Michael D. Kennedy

To date, ATAC has delivered more than 24,000 flight hours of support to the U.S. military. With aircraft stationed at NAS Point Mugu, Calif., NAS Fallon, Nev., MCAS Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii and Naval Air Facility Atsugi, Japan, ATAC is a part of most of the Navy’s major training exercises and evolutions.

The firm’s pilots and aircraft can be found participating in JTFEX and COMPTUEX exercises, Strike Fighter Advanced Readiness Program (SFARP) training, Air Wing Fallon training, Strike Fighter Tactics Instructor (TOPGUN) training, unit level training and Airborne Air Intercept Controller training. In the air-to-ground/sea arena, ATAC conducts JTAC (Joint Terminal Attack Controller)/FAC-A training, simulated close-air-support training, and subsonic and supersonic air-to-surface missile simulations, among other missions. R & D sorties have also been conducted in support of ship self-defense programs, RAM-TSS (Rolling Airframe Missile Program) and the ALE-50/55 towed decoy systems.

“We’ve participated in every one of the COMPTUEX, JTFEX and [NAS] Fallon Air Wing training cycles since 2005,” says Downing. “We’ve flown over 1,100 hours of JTAC support in the last two years. There’s a great need for JTACs with the current conflicts and the limiting factor in getting them trained was having enough airplanes available to get them their required controls.”

ATAC has also continued to execute the “ship services” mission that has been a feature of its work since the company began operations, flying missile profiles against ships for initial air controller training for the ships’ controllers.

“The operations specialists on cruisers and destroyers need a certain number of controls [controlling intercepts] during a certain time period in their training,” Downing explains. “Let’s say there’s an Aegis cruiser with controllers in need of this training. We can run missile profiles against the ship so they can test themselves against that type of threat or we’ll send a couple airplanes out to a ship to run intercepts to allow the ships’ controllers to get their basic qualifications.”

The USAF and Air National Guard have utilized ATAC for adversary support in “Red Flag” exercises, F-15 Operational Readiness Evaluations, F-22 Raptor training and in support of Special Operations Command SOTAC (Special Operations Terminal Attack Controller) courses.

Though the Air Force does not embrace outsourced flight support the way the Navy does, the service avails itself of ATAC’s capabilities via MIPR (Military Interdepartmental Purchase Request) money, effectively buying a few of the hours the Navy contracts for with the company.

“The Navy is ‘the make-it-happen’ service,” Downing says. “We’re smaller and whatever works best, that’s the way we want to do it. For the Navy it became a matter of realizing that we were going to have to outsource or we weren’t going to get the training we needed. So it’s not emotional for the Navy anymore.”

An ATAC Kfir, one of several operated by the company as adversary aircraft. Photo courtesy of ATAC

Downing and ATAC believe outsourced flight support, particularly the kind of support they offer, could expand.

“Things are going to be different in the new budget environment than in those of the past,” Downing opines. “We’re going to lose force structure and manpower. It’s well understood that manpower is where your long term costs are. If you look at what it costs for an ATAC flight hour, $6,000, that covers everything. The Navy doesn’t sign up for Delta Dental and TRICARE or retirement payments or anything else when they utilize our services.”

“Organic adversary support is going to cost even more in the future when you consider the advanced capabilities you will have to present and the cost of operating aircraft like F-22 and F-35. Right now, 50 percent of the Navy’s red air is done out of their hide [operational budget].”

Airframe fatigue is another cost. Over the last decade, the Navy has transitioned its reserve air wing units (CVWR-20) from a force that picked up the adversary support mission which traditional aggressor squadrons once flew, to a force prepared to deploy in support of the GWOT. Consequently, active squadrons have been called on to provide their own red air support. This further stresses the Navy and Marine Corps’ existing airframes and contributes to the fighter gap which exists today.

ATAC also sees opportunity for growth internationally.

“There are RFPs out now from a couple entities in Europe,” Downing reports. “Asia hasn’t taken off yet but I think it will. The Middle East is also an area where I really think this concept will take hold. If you look at how many countries are buying the F-35 or trying to buy it, they’re all going to have the same issues as far as training.”

Now under long term contract, ATAC’s future looks promising in the near term. While the USAF may not be comfortable yet with significant outsourcing of tactical air services, the Navy’s relationship with ATAC has become more professional, productive and commonplace.

“When we walk into the auditorium at TOPGUN and sit down for a red air brief, it’s not a big deal for them to see us there,” says Trim Downing. “They’re very comfortable with who we are and how we are going to perform.”