As a component of the United States’ global ballistic missile defenses, a sea-based system offers several important advantages.

It’s highly mobile and has low vis-ibility. It doesn’t require other countries’ permission to deploy and use. And it can be positioned strategically to increase its ability to track and intercept targets.

But while the U.S. Navy’s cur-rent sea-based ballistic missile defense (BMD) system is designed to intercept missiles above the Earth’s atmosphere in the midcourse phase of flight, it lacks the capability to destroy ballistic mis-siles closer in, when they have entered the terminal phase.

That’s a concern, because it limits the ability of BMD-equipped cruisers and destroyers to protect themselves — as well as on-shore assets such as bases and airfields — from imminent attack.

To fulfill the need for a more complete BMD arsenal, the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) has announced

When Skunk Works® engineers produced the first scale model of the F-117 in 1975, they dubbed it “The Hopeless Diamond.” Its faceted flat panels were radically different than the sleek, curved lines of other military aircraft of the day, and there were doubts about whether the design would fly — literally.

But as the world now knows, the early nickname was a misnomer. The world’s first stealth aircraft turned out to be far from hopeless. Lockheed Martin produced 59 Nighthawks for the U.S. Air Force, which relied on the aircraft as a vital part of all major air campaigns after the first F-117 squad-ron went operational in 1983.

“This is a strategic weapon that really reshaped how the Air Force looked at strategic warfare,” said Lt. Col. Chris Knehans, commander of the 7th Fighter Squadron at Holloman Air Force Base, N.M. “It doesn’t matter what defenses you put up, how deep you try to hide, or how much you sur-

round yourself with collateral damage, this airplane will come and get you.”

The occasion of Knehans’ remarks was the Air Force’s announcement in 2006 that the F-117’s remarkable story would soon draw

to a close. With the newer Lockheed Martin F-22 and F-35 coming on line, the Air Force decided to retire the F-117 and redirect the resources needed to keep it flying.

May 2008

Volume 14, No. 5

2

Information Systems & Global Serviceshelps center for missing children.

Agency AssistanceNew column features employeeessay on ability in the workplace.

Employee Perspective

3

Advanced Technology Laboratories’autonomous car runs laps at Grand Prix race.

On Track

12

Lockheed Martin Foundationawards annual scholarships.

National Merit

9

See PAC-3 p. 8

They patrol the streets of Baghdad. They forecast the weather in Mosul. They build bridges in Kandahar. The soldiers, sailors and airmen serving in Iraq and Afghanistan are not only Lockheed Martin customers; in many cases, they are also fellow employees.

As the U.S. honors the contribu-tions of all its servicemen and women during National Military Appreciation Month in May, employees across Lockheed Martin feel a special con-nection to the people who have left the safety of their homes to answer the call to duty.

Hundreds of Lockheed Martin reservists and guardsmen, as well as ser-vicemen and women who have come to work for the Corporation since leaving the military, have seen action in Operation

Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. Some are still in theater. Many are back at their Lockheed Martin jobs. Several have received Purple Hearts. And they all deserve our thanks.

“I can’t think of a more personal reinforcement of our motto — we never forget who we’re working for — than working side by side with people who have served and continue to serve in the military,” says Bob Stevens, Lockheed Martin chairman, president and chief executive officer. “When you look people in the eye and know that they’re willing to put their life on the line for our coun-try — and that your work might impact their very survival — that’s a powerful reminder of why our commitment to our customers can never waver.”See Military p. 4

Lockheed Martin employees who deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan share their stories

Goodbye To A GhostF-117, world’s first stealth fighter, disappears into retirement

New TargetPAC-3 Missile takes aim at sea-based terminal ballistic missile defense

Rich Hursh survived a mess hall suicide bomb attack in Mosul, Iraq, that killed 22 people, including two of his close friends. Rather than dwelling on the tragedy, Hursh, who works part-time at the Lockheed Martin Center for Innovation in Suffolk, Va., has chosen to focus on the positive: he’s alive, he plans to graduate with a degree in mechanical engineering, and he’s proud of the service he performed in Iraq.

The world’s first stealth aircraft, the “ghostly” F-117 retires from service.

Serving With Pride

See F-117 p. 6

2

IN THE SPOTLIGHT

The following have recently received national recognition for achievements in leadership, technical excellence and professional expertise.

Paul Scott, Business Development ana-lyst at Aeronautics in Fort Worth, Texas, has been named the first Franklin Fellow under a new U.S. Department of State program in which mid-career and senior employees of universities, non-governmental organizations, and private corporations work as consultants for a year at the Department.

The goal of the Franklin Fellows Program is for Fellows, serving as consultants, to provide advice, views, opinions, alternatives or recommenda-tions on foreign policy issues facing the nation.

Scott is using his background in international business development to focus on arms transfers and regional security matters in the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs.

Woman Engineer magazine asked its readers to list the top 50 companies and top 20 government agencies where they would most like to work, or that they believed would provide the best work-ing environment for women. The results

of the 2008 survey show Lockheed Martin at No. 2 on the companies list, and Sandia National Laboratories, which is operated by Lockheed Martin for the Department of Energy, at No. 9 on the government agencies list.

F-16 Field Service Representative Thomas Smoot was recognized as “Action Officer of the Year” at the 2008 Air Force Association’s Salute to the Air National Guard. Smoot received the award for his support of the F-16 Weapons Systems Management Team.

Aeronautics engineer Smoot worked with other systems engineers and the Air National Guard-Air Force Reserve Test Center in developing critical items to enhance F-16 maintainability and availability. On a team of maintenance and opera-tions officers, enlisted maintainers and contractors, he is the first Department of Defense contractor to receive the award. ■

Aeronautics Employee Is Named First Fellow In New U.S. State Department Program

Corporation Ranks High On Woman Engineer Survey

Paul Scott is the first to be named to the U.S. Department of State’s new Franklin Fellows Program.

F-16 Field Service Representative Tom Smoot, second from right, is presented the Air Force Association’s “Action Officer of the Year” award by, from left, Tom Veltri, vice president of Salutes AFA; Lt. Gen. Craig McKinley, director, Air National Guard; and Chief Master Sgt. Dick Smith, Air National Guard.

Air National Guard Honors F-16 Systems Engineer

Every day, 2,100 children are reported missing in the United States. The vast majority are found quickly, but a miss-ing child is every parent’s worst night-mare. It’s during that time that they can turn to the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC).

The nationwide organization col-laborates with local and federal law enforcement to help quickly find missing children and bring them home safely. NCMEC’s technology challenges — using integrated information technology (IT) to support fast, intelligent deci-sion making — are a natural fit for the Corporation’s expertise.

In fact, the Information Systems & Global Services (IS&GS) business area is volunteering its help. Engineers from the Technical Resource Center, where new hires work on temporary assignments while awaiting security clearances, are providing a wide range

of technical support to NCMEC’s head-quarters in Alexandria, Va.

Technology is at the heart of NCMEC’s operations. It was among the first to use sophisticated age progression techniques to project what a child might look like years later. The U.S. Department of Justice’s AMBER Alert system, for which NCMEC is a distributor, uses the latest in satellite communications to instantaneously notify law enforcement and media outlets about kidnappings. Additionally, NCMEC’s Exploited Child Division applies the latest tools to locate both victims and online predators.

NCMEC’s CyberTipline, a report-ing mechanism for child sexual exploi-tation, has handled more than 546,600 leads. Since its establishment in 1984, NCMEC has assisted law enforcement with more than 138,400 missing child cases, resulting in the recovery of more than 121,500 children.

“Thanks to the dedication and com-mitment from Lockheed Martin, NCMEC employees are able to remain steadfast in their efforts to help missing and exploited children,” noted John Rabun, NCMEC chief operating officer. “One of the most rewarding aspects of this partnership is that Lockheed Martin has voiced a willingness to help NCMEC wherever we need assis-tance — ranging from the highly sensi-tive and critical needs of locating missing children to a desire to serve the technol-ogy needs of our staff. This partnership is evolving with one solid priority — finding and rescuing missing and exploited chil-dren in the shortest possible time.”

One team is developing a sophisti-cated application that can predict where a kidnapper is likely to flee with a victim. The system combines statistical, histori-cal and behavioral data with a detailed geospatial engine to map out where and how far the kidnapper is likely to travel.

The application will help NCMEC’s Team Adam, a corps of retired law enforcement professionals who provide rapid, on-site assistance to law enforcement agencies in cases of missing and exploited children. It will enable them to assist the agencies they work with to refine their search and track down missing kids faster.

Other engineers are conducting a comprehensive study of the Center’s IT architecture, looking for ways to improve overall reliability and disas-ter recovery. Other activities include upgrading NCMEC’s financial manage-ment systems, improving its databases, deploying IT infrastructure (to include rolling out more than 400 laptops), and enhancing the Center’s Web site.

Steve Liptak, currently director of Business Operations in Corporate Shared Services, was inspired to start the proj-ect after visiting NCMEC in early 2007 when he was working in IS&GS’ Global Security Solutions (GSS) company. “When you go there and hear about their mission, you can’t help wanting to contribute in some way,” he noted. “The stories could be heartbreaking, like when they’re dealing with abuse or kidnappings, and they could be elating, like when they reunite children with their parents. I left knowing that we had to do something to help.”

Liptak, along with Lonnie DeHart, intelligence analyst at GSS, and Howie Rogers, Business Development senior manager, were instrumental in forging the initial relationship with NCMEC and framing the partnership.

Alisa Jones, IS&GS software engineer, serves as the Lockheed Martin account manager for NCMEC and leads the support team of 10 engineers. Jones explained that her team’s goal is to help NCMEC focus on its core mission. “A lot of the IT and project management efforts we do can really help make their life easier,” she said. “It’s a good envi-ronment here, and it’s great to be work-ing for a good cause.” ■

Members of the software and systems engineering team supporting the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children are, from left, Tri Duong, Gregory Ruhlin, Candice Campbell, Dustin Haralson, Alisa Jones, James Finley, James Johnson and Gagandeep Singh.

Gone MissingEmployees support National Center for Missing & Exploited Children

For more information about NCMEC, visit http://www.missingkids.com/. For more information about the IS&GS

role, contact Alisa Jones at 703-293-5874 or alisa.jones@lmco.com.

3

I am a young woman with ability. But I rely on leg braces to walk, and sometimes with much dif-ficulty.But my physical disability does

not define me. That’s because even with my physical limitations, I still have something far more defining; a can-do attitude and positive outlook.

Thirty years ago, my future did not look so bright. When the attending doctor and nurses didn’t respond to my parents’ joy at the arrival of their baby girl, my mother immediately knew something was wrong; very wrong. I was born with a birth defect called spina bifida.*

Although not an optimist by nature, my mother thought the doc-tors can surely fix the problem. She would gradually learn that even the best medical technology in 1975 was no match for the many complexities of spina bifida. That’s still true today, unfortunately.

Another doctor had shared with my parents all he had learned about spina bifida from a textbook. Then he added, “She is one of the lucky ones, if there are lucky ones.” Although much of the doctors’ predictions were correct, it seemed that the rainfall of an entire lifetime had been dumped upon my mother all at once. Later there would be many physicians who would handle the harsh realities of my condition with care and competence.

Growing up was not easy, and school was often challenging. Luckily, I started off attending a Montessori nursery school, where I would have the

benefit of learning in an environment that was also conducive to socializa-tion. When I was first enrolled, I walked with the aid of a walker. Soon I would leave it behind. My classmates and I sat on mats at times and were responsible to return our mats to the proper storage area. My teacher told my parents that I would crawl with my mat so I could do what the other children were doing. I just wanted to be like everyone else.

I loved music and decided to play the trumpet when lessons were offered in fourth grade. I chose that instrument because I could hold the trumpet with my right hand. My left hand and arm are not very functional. I became part of district band and later, in high school, asked if I could join the marching band. This choice was complicated by the fact that I wore bilateral leg braces and couldn’t march. But my band instructor was determined to help me, a kindness for which I will be forever grateful. He initiated a drum pit, front and center on the field, where I could play along with my classmates. For this I had to learn to play the timpani and bells. But it was worth all the extra effort just to be considered a member of the marching band.

Amazingly, as I grew, many of the myriad of doctors I visited actually discouraged me from going to college and pursuing what most people would consider a “normal” life. But with a great deal of faith, determination and support from my family and friends, I persevered.

In 1999, after finishing what was a challenging college career, I began

pursuing another career. I found a job editing publications for a large defense company in Orlando, Fla., where I write articles that focus on the busi-ness, the diverse talent and the many successes of our employees. From the first day I arrived on the job, I was well received by people who recognized my abilities, and did not judge me on how I walked or how I looked.

And the company I work for respects people and creates an atmo-sphere where the physically challenged are readily accommodated, giving those of us with physical limitations the chance to demonstrate the intrinsic value of every person. The company has done everything it could possibly do to make certain my work space is accessible and safe, and I am grateful.

I am willing to work hard to minimize my limitations and maximize my abilities. Having a job means having a sense of self-worth. Having a job shows other people my

value and is an expression of my spirit and desire.

I hope I can in some small way be an example to others of someone who has learned to manage life within boundaries not of my own making. And I’ve been able to find happiness in spite of the hand I was dealt — acknowledg-ing it has not always been easy.

My message to those who are disabled is to live life beyond your disability. I am! ■

* Spina bifida is a defect of the spinal column resulting from the failure of the spine to close properly during the first month of pregnancy. Spina bifida may cause varying degrees of paralysis, loss of feeling in the lower limbs and incontinence. It is usually accompanied by the accumulation of fluid in the brain. This birth defect results in a lifetime of need for medical interventions. Very few people are aware that spina bifida is the number one disabling birth defect.

Focusing On Ability By Shannon Benfield

This first appearance of the “Employee Perspective” column in LM Today fea-tures an essay by Shannon Benfield, publications editor at Missiles and Fire Control in Orlando, Fla. Benfield was recently recognized by CAREERS & the disABLED magazine for her professional and personal achievements, and her contributions to the workplace and community.

Employees are invited to share additional perspectives on topics of inter-est in future “Employee Perspective” columns. Send suggestions to editor Mona Coan at mona.coan@lmco.com, 301-897-6491.

EMPLOYEE PERSPECTIVE

Dr. Ray O. Johnson, senior vice president and chief technology officer for the Corporation, at right, shakes hands with Dr. Jim Coleman, vice provost for research, Rice University, upon reaching agreement to establish the Lockheed Martin Advanced Nanotechnology Center of Excellence at Rice University, or LANCER. Lockheed Martin and Rice University researchers are teaming to investigate the breakthrough area of nanotechnology, which refers broadly to a field of science and technology whose unifying theme is the control of matter on the atomic and molecular scale. LANCER will concentrate on materials and composites, including ultra lightweight, super-strong materials that can have significant implications for people, systems, vehicles and aerospace platforms. Direct benefits include reduced transportation and logistics costs through energy savings and efficiencies, longevity and enhanced personal protection for military and first responder applications. Additional areas of research will include super-sensitive detectors with space-based applications, fast communications systems, greatly improved devices for energy generation and storage and more. Research projects will begin in June. LANCER will be based at Rice’s Richard E. Smalley Institute for Nanoscale Science and Technology, and supported through an initial commitment for funding from the Corporate Engineering & Technology organization and the Electronic Systems business area. For more information, see http://lancer.rice.edu.

Corporation Partners With Rice University On Unique Nanotechnology Research Program

Shannon Benfield, editor at Missiles and Fire Control in Orlando, Fla., displays a plaque of recognition she recently received from CAREERS and the DisABLED magazine. Benfield relates her personal story of perseverance and promise in the “Employee Perspective” column.

4

Lockheed Martin supports its employees who have been called up by providing differential pay, benefits continuation and job reinstatement. The Corporation has about 1,100 active Reservists and Guardsmen, and during the first quarter of this year alone, 119 of those employees were on military leave.

In addition, the Corporation actively recruits returning veterans for Lockheed Martin jobs. A military rela-tions team formed in 2005 attends 160 to 170 military job fairs and similar events per year, and in 2007 the Corporation hired 964 transitioning military veterans. Those employees are adding to Lockheed Martin’s population of veterans, which stands at about 20 percent.

“They bring an understanding of our customer, and often they’ve worked on our products and beside our prod-ucts,” says Teri Matzkin, corporate man-ager of Strategic Sourcing and Military Relations. Plus, she adds, “Veterans are used to ramping up quickly to learn things and they know what it means to work together as a team.”

Providing inspiration

In addition to bringing a customers’ perspective, they’re often an inspiration to other employees. Rich Hursh, a junior at Old Dominion University, works part-time at the Lockheed Martin Center for Innovation in Suffolk, Va., where fellow employees have been impressed by his quiet resolve to contribute.

Hursh survived a mess hall suicide bomb attack in Mosul, Iraq, that killed 22 people, including two of his close friends. With two collapsed lungs, mul-tiple broken ribs, a smashed shoulder blade and a missing thumb, he arrived at Walter Reed Army Medical Center on Christmas Day 2004.

Rather than dwelling on the tragedy, Hursh chooses to focus on the positive: he’s alive, he plans to graduate next May with a degree in mechanical engineering, and he’s proud of the ser-vice he performed in Iraq.

“We did a lot of humanitarian work,” he says. “We built roads, fixed generators and installed new genera-tors — that kind of thing. It was very rewarding to be able to help people.”

Although his military days are over, he’s hoping to eventually work full-time

for Lockheed Martin and continue to con-tribute to national defense as a civilian.

This summer, Hursh will serve his third summer internship at the Center for Innovation, where he has already had an impact, says Kemp Littlefield, director of Operations Analysis.

“He was the best qualified candi-date we had for the internship, and he repeatedly demonstrates to us that we made the right choice,” Littlefield says. “He is by far the most mature, mission-

focused intern we have ever had. He jumps in and makes things happen.”

In addition to attending school and working part-time, Hursh also finds time to serve as vice president of the local chapter of the Association of the United States Army and work with the Wounded Warrior Program that serves injured ser-vice men and women — and that helped Hursh during his recovery.

Another wounded warrior who has launched a career with Lockheed Martin

is Robbie Strauch, who joined Missiles and Fire Control (MFC) in Dallas last year, providing security for the PAC-3 Missile and MEADS programs.

Strauch was patrolling the streets of Baghdad in October 2006 as a mem-ber of the 172nd Stryker Brigade com-bat team when an improvised explosive device detonated beneath his vehicle. The blast penetrated the vehicle just inches in front of his feet, and he suf-fered burns over much of his body.

Today, he’s fully recovered, but he knows he’s lucky to be alive. “I prom-ised my wife I would never do anything overtly dangerous again,” he says with a chuckle. But Strauch admits that some-times it’s hard to stay on the sidelines. “When I hear of soldiers being killed in the exact spots where I know I’ve stood, it makes me want to go back. But I know I can’t. Now I keep up the fight by work-ing at Lockheed Martin,” he says.

Plus, he now has a young daughter to keep him busy at home. She was born while Strauch was deployed, and he lis-tened in on the birth via telephone.

Strauch was part of the Army’s longest deployed active unit in Iraq, and he spent all of his 16-month deployment in Mosul and Baghdad. At MFC, his expertise on the urban warfare environ-ment has been valuable to engineers who ask for his perspective on certain weapons and systems.

Vital roles

The fact that many injured sol-diers recover and return to productive lives is due in large measure to the medical care they receive in the field. One person who helped ensure the availability of that care was Lockheed Martin’s Joe Stuart, an electronics tech-nician specialist at Maritime Systems & Sensors (MS2) in Marion, Mass.

An Army Reservist since he was 17 years old, Stuart spent a year in Iraq with the 399th Combat Support Hospital 3rd Medical Brigade. As the commu-nications non-commissioned officer in charge, he led a team that was responsi-ble for all aspects of the communication infrastructure, information systems net-working and radio systems at an Army base hospital about a mile from Tikrit.

On top of those duties, he traveled to clinics in the field to ensure that their communications and technology sys-tems were up and running.

“They need those systems to be able to communicate up the chain for a higher level of medical care,” Stuart explains. “It lets the next level know what’s coming, and all the data can be sent ahead. You can even take an X-ray of somebody, put it into the network and send it the whole way back to the States for a specialist’s opinion.”

After a year of being constantly surrounded by people with gunshot and shrapnel wounds, blast trauma and burns, adapting to life back home didn’t happen overnight, says the Lockheed Martin employee of seven years.

“It takes awhile to get your equi-librium back — not being under con-stant high pressure,” Stuart says. “My peers have been very supportive, and overall it was a rewarding experience.”

For many Lockheed Martin employees who have deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, one gratifying aspect of their service has been seeing the Corporation’s products in action. Tom Clark, an information systems security manager at Transportation and Security Solutions in Rockville, Md., got an up-close view of the value of an important A/OA-10 aircraft upgrade provided by Systems Integration in Owego, N.Y.

“I know the leadership over there was very pleased with the way the air-

MilitaryContinued from p. 1

Robbi Strauch is shown here in one of Missile and Fire Control’s (MFC) “Military Poster Campaign” entries, wherein employees submit photos of family members in service to be made into a poster for display. Strauch later joined MFC in Dallas, Texas, following service in the U.S. Army’s longest deployed active unit in Iraq.

Joe Stuart, at right, helped ensure that medical care was available in Iraq. Stuart, shown here with First Sgt. Charles Michaud during a dust storm near Tikrit, spent a year supporting the communications infrastructure for the 399th Combat Support Hospital 3rd Medical Brigade.

“When I hear of soldiers being killed in the exact

spots where I know I’ve stood, it makes me want

to go back. But I know I can’t. Now I keep up the

fight by working at Lockheed Martin.”

— Robbie Strauch, Missiles and Fire Control

5

plane performed and what it was able to do. It was a real success,” says Clark, a tech sergeant in the Maryland Air National Guard who worked for two months as a structural maintainer on A-10 aircraft at Al Asad Air Base in Al Anbar Province.

The Owego-supplied upgrade kits allow the A-10 to use advanced preci-sion-guided weapons. “I know our air-planes were able to help keep our guys out of harm’s way,” Clark says, “and that really made me feel good.”

Stresses and rewards

As is often the case with deployed reservists and guardsmen, the pride of service is tempered by the stress a deployment causes for the family. Clark says his absence was especially hard on his three-year-old son, Joseph.

“That was the hardest part of the trip,” Clark says. “Joseph wasn’t old enough to understand what was going on, and it was pretty rough on him. He couldn’t sleep at night.”

To ease the distress, Clark’s wife had a life-size photo made of her husband, and the family talked over a Web video system once a week, which allowed Clark to experience some of the milestones that his son was reaching.

Despite the stresses of deploy-ment, the rewards make military service worthwhile, returning Lockheed Martin employees say.

“It definitely strengthened me professionally,” says Brian Nolan, a software engineer at MS2 in Manassas, Va., who was the non-commissioned officer in charge of the base weather unit at Mosul. His team was responsible for base weather forecasting, briefing pilots and alerting the base to potential severe weather.

“I think my experiences helped build character and improved my ability to work effectively in intense situations,” Nolan says. “A helicopter battalion commander would come to me and say, ‘I need to know in next half hour if I can send up my helos.’ That’s a lot of responsibility.”

His recent weather station deploy-ment was the second for Nolan, who also was with the 3rd Infantry Division as part of the initial invasion force that charged across the Iraq desert. At the time, he was still in college, and the experience matured him quickly, he says.

“We drove for 128 hours, and all you could see through the dust was tail-lights in front of you, and you were just praying you were following the right vehicle and nothing was going to hap-pen,” Nolan recalls.

When he got home, he redoubled his commitment to his studies and then landed a job with Lockheed Martin two and a half years ago. When it came time for his second trip to Iraq, the company couldn’t have been more supportive, he says.

“I told HR I was deploying and they said talk to your manager and fill out the forms, and that was it,” Nolan says. “Then when I got back I called them and walked back into my old job. It couldn’t have been any easier.”

The power of teamwork

Another MS2 employee, Jeff Conant, says he came back from Iraq with a renewed respect for the power of teamwork. The electronic technician at Syracuse, N.Y., deployed with the 174th Fighter Wing to Tallil Airbase, where he was the night shift supervisor in charge of keeping 18 large power generators running and maintaining 30 standby generators. He also maintained the base’s aircraft arresting system.

“We had some intense storms that made a muddy mess of everything and

knocked out the generators, so we were kept pretty busy,” Conant says. “We couldn’t have those power plants go down, because the whole base depended on them.”

What impressed him most was the way the power production team pulled together, even though its members were from diverse backgrounds and there was a complete turnover every four months.

“You have these 18 guys come in, half active duty, half guard, and you hope everybody is trained well and does their job,” Conant says. “And they do. There’s only a one-day overlap with the team that’s leaving, and they say, ‘Here’s what you have to do, here’s the computer and see you later.’ It’s really pretty amazing to see a team come together that fast.”

Conant says he feels a similar sense of teamwork at Lockheed Martin, where his fellow employees rallied around him when they found out he was

preparing to deploy to Iraq. Many came by to wish him well, and they held a party at work before he shipped out.

Support from his fellow employ-ees also helped Ray Epperson stay connected during his year-long stretch in Afghanistan. A special technology coater on F-22 aircraft at Aeronautics in Marietta, Ga., where he has worked for 23 years, Epperson deployed with a Navy team that helped the Army Civil Affairs group perform public works projects.

As a chief petty officer, he helped manage the flow of materials into and out of bases in Kandahar and Bagram, from where his provincial reconstruction team went into villages to undertake projects such as building roads and bridges and digging wells. The team managed the projects but used local contractors for the work.

One of the highlights of Epperson’s days in Afghanistan was the arrival of care

packages from workers at Marietta. “The people in my department were fantastic. They sent me things like chocolate and coffee and big boxes of stuff that I would share with the other guys,” he says. “One time we were low on toothbrushes, and they sent a whole box of them.”

Desire to contribute

Many employees at Lockheed Martin UK (United Kingdom) have been on the front line of the world’s hot spots.

George Evans, for example, recently spent six months in Afghanistan supporting British troops operating in Kabul and Helman Province. The proj-ect engineer at LMUK INSYS was the operations warrant officer in a unit that supplied interpreters and other special-ized skills to British forces in theater.

Being an Afghan interpreter is a dangerous job, Evans says, but one that the Afghans performed with honor. “They are very highly regarded by the men,” he says, “and I heard many tales from the fighting units about them going above and beyond what was required of them.”

While Evans was in Afghanistan, four interpreters died and 12 were seri-ously wounded. One of his jobs was to make every attempt to see that the bodies

Dicky Lewis, an operational specialist at Lockheed Martin UK Integrated Systems, patrolled the waters as a Sea King Mk7 helicopter operator.

George Evans, project engineer at Lockheed Martin UK INSYS, recently spent six months in Afghanistan supplying interpreters and other specialized skills to British forces.

“People should take every opportunity to sit down with

a vet and talk to them. I don’t think you have to serve in

the military to appreciate the freedom we have in this

country, but it’s good to get the perspective of a vet.”

— Jeff Owen, logistics engineer, Space Systems

Software engineer Brian Nolan was in charge of the base weather unit in Mosul, Iraq. He is shown here outside the weather station during a rare snow storm. “It [service] definitely strengthened me professionally,” Nolan says.

See Military p. 10

6

Bittersweet farewell

On April 22, the final four opera-tional Nighthawks arrived at Lockheed Martin Aeronautics in Palmdale, Calif., where employees have continued to sup-port the F-117 program through a total system sustainment program (TSSP) contract. Employees were recognized for their support of the aircraft system, and many left their mark on one of the four jets by signing a bomb-bay door. The air-craft then joined the other retired F-117s at the Tonopah Test Range in Nevada.

“It’s bittersweet,” said Mike Sullivan, who joined the F-117 pro-gram in 1979 and is now manager of program operations. “It’s great we’re having a ceremony to recognize the many contributions of the F-117. I’m

certain there are many soldiers and air-men who came home alive because of that aircraft. But I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t sad to see it go.”

The F-117 began with the seed of an idea — that an aircraft could be nearly invisible to radar if its edges were properly configured — and quickly grew into a full-scale attack air-craft through the efforts of the legendary team of innovators at Lockheed Martin

Advanced Development Programs, known as the Skunk Works.

Recognizing the tremendous strate-gic advantage offered by a virtually unde-tectable aircraft, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency in 1974 chose five companies to develop concepts.

Several prototypes later, the Air Force awarded a contract to Lockheed Martin in 1978 to produce the first five F-117s. Just 31 months later —

a remarkably fast turnaround even by Skunk Works standards — the Nighthawk made its first flight in June 1981.

The Skunk Works’ unique environ-ment was what allowed it to happen. To compress the schedule, manufacturing began before the development was com-plete, and it was common for engineers to walk onto the manufacturing floor to confer with production managers and make design changes even as the first aircraft made its way down the line.

“It was a magical time,” Sullivan says. “There was tremendous cama-raderie, and I don’t think I ever heard anyone complain even when we were averaging 10- and 12-hour work days.”

Total secrecy

Like many Skunk Works projects, the F-117 program was conducted in total secrecy, and that was difficult for people like Sullivan, who were excited by what they were accomplishing. “The number one tenet on the program was secrecy,” he said. “That was above everything else, even cost and schedule.”

As aircraft were completed, they were loaded at night onto C-5 cargo aircraft to be transported for flight test-ing. Sullivan recalls one evening when he and some friends were at a popular restaurant in the hills outside Burbank, Calif., and they heard the roar of a C-5 overhead. His friends, who weren’t the on the program, asked him if he knew what it was. “I just shrugged and said, ‘No idea. Must be a 747.’”

The cloak was so complete that when Ben Rich, head of the Skunk Works at the time, was selected to receive the Defense Department’s Distinguished Service Medal in 1981, he accepted the award in a secret cer-emony in then Defense Secretary Harold Brown’s office.

As more officers within the Air Force were briefed on the new stealth aircraft, some were initially skeptical of its viability. One skeptic was Col. George Zielsdorff, who at the time was a program manager for another Air Force aircraft, the F-16.

“I still remember the day I saw it for the first time,” he said. “It was really

F-117Continued from p. 1

The final four operational Nighthawks were on display at Lockheed Martin Aeronautics in Palmdale, Calif., in April for an employee tribute ceremony.

“I still remember the day I saw it for the first time.

It was really strange looking, and my initial

thought was, ‘That will never fly.’ Then I was informed

that it had been operational for a year and a half.

It was a real shock.”

— Col. George Zielsdorff

Ralph Heath, executive vice president of Aeronautics, signs the bomb-bay door of jet 843, the last F-117 built.

7

strange looking, and my initial thought was, ‘That will never fly.’ Then I was informed that it had been operational for a year and a half. It was a real shock.”

Zielsdorff quickly got over his shock and developed a long relationship with the Nighthawk. Today, he is the Lockheed Martin Aeronautics vice presi-dent in charge of the F-117 and U-2 pro-grams, and he has been affiliated with the F-117 program off and on — for both the Air Force and Lockheed Martin — for nearly 20 years.

Over the years, he said, he came to appreciate that many of the biggest chal-lenges of designing the F-117 came from some of the smallest details. How to incor-porate the sensor probe, exhaust system, infrared targeting system and many other features all tested the team’s ingenuity.

“The features that you would nor-mally find fairly easy to incorporate on a typical aircraft turned into a big deal on the F-117,” Zielsdorff said. You had to have them, he noted, but they couldn’t compromise the stealth characteristics of the aircraft, which had a radar cross-section about the size of a sparrow.

Remarkable performance

Eventually, one of the F-117’s stealthy characteristics was compro-mised. After years of wild speculation about a secret airplane developed at the Skunk Works, the Air Force acknowl-edged the existence of the Nighthawk in 1988 and released a grainy photograph.

But the plane’s radar invisibil-ity remained intact, of course, and its was never more apparent than during Operation Desert Storm in 1991, when Nighthawks were the only attack aircraft that the Air Force flew over a heavily defended Baghdad. Over the course of the

operation, F-117s flew nearly 1,300 sor-ties over Iraq and Kuwait without a single combat loss. And although Nighthawk pilots flew only 2 percent of the total com-bat sorties, they struck 40 percent of the most highly defended, strategic targets.

“It was a remarkable contribution to that war and all done over one of the most hostile air environments in the history of the world,” said Gen. Bruce Carlson, commander of the Air Force Materiel Command, during an F-117 retirement ceremony at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in March.

Lockheed Martin employees who supported the F-117 over the years took great pride in the aircraft, and it showed in their performance on eight modification programs and ongoing technical and main-tenance activities under the TSSP contract.

“We earned 100 percent of our award fees from 1999 forward, and we had 100 consecutive on-time deliver-ies out of our depot on aircraft cycling through,” Zielsdorff said. “In other words, when we committed to a date, we gave the aircraft back to our customer by that date 100 consecutive times. That’s quite an achievement for a depot team.”

A proud legacy

The program’s achievements reflected the quality of the employees who served at all levels, including pro-gram leadership. Among former F-117 program managers, Ross Reynolds has gone on to become vice president for air mobility programs, John Larson is vice president for F-16 programs, and Cheryl O’Leary is the new vice president and site manager at Palmdale.

The number of employees who work on the F-117 program will gradu-ally recede in the months ahead, as the

wrap-up work is completed, Zielsdorff said, but every one of the hundreds of people who contributed to the program over the years can take heart in knowing that the legacy of the Nighthawk will live on.

The stealth expertise that Lockheed Martin developed on the F-117 program can be found today in the F-22 and F-35, which have inherited many of the revolutionary technologies developed for the Nighthawk.

“Whenever its nation called, the F-117 answered, providing capabili-ties that had never been known before,” said retired Gen. Lloyd “Fig” Newton, one of the first F-117 pilots and former commander of the 49th Fighter Wing at

Holloman AFB. “If we needed the door kicked in, the stealth was the one to do it. Never before had such an aircraft existed.”

Now, the F-117s have gone back to the Tonopah Test Range, where for much of the 1980s they flew in total secrecy and only at night. Although it’s unlikely they’ll be doing much flying ever again, combat aviation has been changed forever because of them. ■

The F-117 program was conducted in total secrecy, and was produced on a compressed schedule where manufacturing began before development was even completed.

Ben Rich, head of the Skunk Works at the time of the F-117 secret development, received the Defense Department’s Distinguished Service Medal, which he accepted in a secret ceremony.

For more information about the F-117’s retirement, contact communicator Dianne Knippel at

661-572-4153. Detailed timelines and other information can be found at www.f-117a.com, an unofficial not-for-profit Web site. See the F-117 in the May edition of the LM1 corporate news video.

“It’s great we’re having a ceremony to recognize

the many contributions of the F-117. I’m certain

there are many soldiers and airmen who came

home alive because of that aircraft.”

— Mike Sullivan

The last F-117 built, aircraft 843, is shown at the retirement ceremony with the American flag painted on its underside.

George Zielsdorff, Aeronautics vice president of F-117 and U-2 programs, presides over the F-117 retirement ceremony in Palmdale, Calif.

8

its intention to develop a sea-based terminal BMD capability, and Lockheed Martin, recognizing the system’s importance, has made the development of that capability a corporate priority program.

Not many years ago, the prospect of introducing a Lockheed Martin missile onto a Navy surface ship seemed unlikely at best, because the market space has been dominated by Raytheon’s Standard Missile for many years.

Now, however, Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control (MFC) can offer the Navy a hit-to-kill intercep-tor that has been developed specifically for providing the capability the Navy is seeking. The Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) Missile has performed success-fully in battle for the Army, and the PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhancement (MSE) will be even more power-ful, agile and capable of reaching distant targets.

Plus, by choosing the PAC-3 MSE as its sea-based terminal BMD missile, the MDA would be leveraging the $1.6 billion already invested by the agency and the Army to develop the PAC-3 and PAC-3 MSE interceptors. Doing so would reduce the cost, schedule and performance risk, points out Will Robinson, Sea-Based MSE program manager at MFC.

“We’re bringing to the table a missile that already has terminal BMD capability,” Robinson says. “The PAC-3 Missile has been operationally deployed with the Army in Kuwait and Iraq, and the warfighter depends on its umbrella of protection. The tremendous speed and force of the hit-to-kill impact basically dis-integrates the target, at altitude, and reduces the risk of collateral damage on the surface.”

The ability to incorporate the PAC-3 onto ships equipped with the Lockheed Martin-provided Aegis combat system has already been shown, he adds.

Two Navy-contracted feasibility studies between 2003 and 2006 determined that the integration with

Aegis could be accomplished with relative ease, notes Wayne Trimmier, PAC-3 MSE program director.

“As it turns out, there’s very little that has to be done to the missile for the marine environment,” he says. “It’s already prepared for extreme environments. Outside of an update to the existing communications hardware to transmit and receive S-Band signals, and a modified software package, we can use the same mis-sile that is delivered off of the Army production line.”

Trimmier adds that since the Army and Navy face the same worldwide ballistic threat, integrating a common joint terminal defense missile allows the nation to leverage significant savings through lower missile development and production costs, a common production line, and similar logistics.

MFC made all of these points and more when it responded to a request for information from MDA last year, and partly as a result of the RFI, the agency recently indicated its intention to solicit proposals for a sea-based terminal BMD capability.

“Just the fact that there will be a competition is a major step forward for Lockheed Martin,” Robinson says. “To get a Lockheed Martin missile on a Navy ship would be huge for us. One thing that really helps in addition to the proven capability of the missile is that the Navy has a strong relationship with other Lockheed Martin companies.”

Lockheed Martin Maritime Systems & Sensors (MS2) in Moorestown, N.J., has earned high marks from the Navy for its work on the Aegis weapons sys-tem, which it developed in the 1970s and has continu-ally upgraded to address new and evolving air, surface and underwater threats. In a test last year, an Aegis-equipped guided missile cruiser simultaneously inter-cepted a ballistic missile above the atmosphere and an air-breathing cruise missile closer to the surface. (Air-breathing threats have much different characteristics than a ballistic missile, which is why a terminal ballis-tic missile capability is needed.)

In addition, the MK 41 Vertical Launching System used on a variety of Navy vessels, including Aegis ships, is provided by MS2 in Baltimore. Both MS2 locations worked closely with MFC to determine how to integrate PAC-3 with Aegis.

“It’s another great example of Lockheed Martin companies working together to provide a better solu-tion for the customer,” Robinson says. “We’re look-ing forward to having the PAC-3 MSE evaluated as a potential solution to the Navy’s sea-based terminal BMD need.” ■

Wayne Trimmier, left, program director for the PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhancement (MSE), and Will Robinson, program manager for Sea-Based MSE, are working to incorporate the PAC-3 onto ships equipped with the Aegis combat system.

This artist’s rendering shows a PAC-3 MSE Missile being launched from a U.S. Navy ship.

PAC-3Continued from p. 1

“As it turns out, there’s very little that has to be done to the missile for the

marine environment. It’s already prepared for extreme environments.”

— Wayne Trimmier, PAC-3 MSE program director

“It’s another great example of

Lockheed Martin companies

working together to provide a

better solution for the customer.”

— Will Robinson, Sea-Based MSE program

manager, Missiles & Fire Control

For more information about the PAC-3 MSE’s potential as a sea-based terminal BMD solution, contact Will Robinson at 972-603-7904.

The Lockheed Martin Foundation announced in April this year’s Lockheed Martin National Merit Scholarship

recipients. Eighty-one scholarships are being awarded to National Merit Finalists, and two students have been named as Honorary Scholars.

The scholarship program awards $3,000 per year for up to four years of undergraduate study to National Merit Finalists who are the children of Lockheed Martin employees. The National Merit Scholarship Corporation administers this highly competitive pro-gram and notes that the Corporation’s winners, in earning the designation of National Merit Scholars, have placed themselves academically within the top one-half of 1 percent of all U.S. high school graduates.

To be considered for the scholar-ship, high school students must take the Preliminary SAT/National Merit Scholarship Qualifying Test (PSAT/NMSQT) in the fall of their junior year. Out of the 1.4 million students who take the PSAT, approximately 1,600 students are named as semifinalists. These stu-dents are notified through their schools in the fall of their senior year and invited to complete the National Merit Scholarship Application, on which they name Lockheed Martin as a parent’s employer.

From the semifinalist pool, Merit Scholarship winners are selected on the basis of their academic record throughout high school, significant activities and contributions to the school and commu-nity, test scores, the school’s recommen-dation of the candidate, and the student’s essay about personal characteristics, activities, plans and goals. To be eligible, at least one of the student’s parents must be a Lockheed Martin employee when the scholarship is awarded.

This year, the Honorary Scholar title was given to two students who received scholarship offers, but were unable to accept them due to their deci-sion to attend U.S. service academies. Service academies require that scholar-ships intended for privates and cadets be completely unrestricted, which is not possible under the Internal Revenue Service guidelines for the Lockheed Martin Foundation.

The high school seniors from the class of 2008 who have been awarded Lockheed Martin Merit Scholarships, which are funded by the Lockheed Martin Foundation and awarded through the National Merit Scholarship Corporation, are listed below. ■

National Merit Lockheed Martin Foundation awards annual scholarships

Scholar Name Parent Name Parent Business Area

Emily Adkins Carol L. Adkins Sandia Corporation

Timeer Amin Jagdish T. Amin Aeronautics Company

Lauren Ammerman Douglas J. Ammerman

Sandia Corporation

Paul Anderson Edward C. Anderson

Information Systems & Global Services

Joseph Boren Dale W. Boren Aeronautics Company

Kaitlyn Bredin Curt Bredin Electronic Systems

Jennifer Campbell David D. Campbell Aeronautics Company

Ami Chiu Hui-Ling Nieh Space Systems Company

Zev Chonoles Michael Chonoles Electronic Systems

Amy Chou Lloyd L. Chou Space Systems Company

Alexis L. D. Chuck Robert L. Chuck Space Systems Company

Joshua Cockroft Timothy J. Carrig Space Systems Company

Gregory Cohen Paul M. Cohen Aeronautics Company

Katherine Comey Jim B. Comey Enterprise Operations

Kyle Coogan David D. Coogan Aeronautics Company

Kyle Cooper Philip J. Cooper Sandia Corporation

Natalie Craik Gary C. Craik Information Systems & Global Services

Laura Cutler Robert P. Cutler Sandia Corporation

Kathryn Cwynar David J. Cwynar Space Systems Company

Thanhnhan Do Thang C. Do Electronic Systems

Alexander Dobranich

Dean and Pauline Dobranich

Sandia Corporation

David Engoron Elizabeth S. Engoron

Information Systems & Global Services

Christian Eubank Joey C. Eubank Electronic Systems

Rachel Friesel Mark A. Friesel Electronic Systems

Kevin Fuhr Kenneth Fuhr Electronic Systems

Katherine Gao Minghua Lu Information Systems & Global Services

Tara Garland Thomas P. Garland Aeronautics Company

Olivia Gerlt Patrick H. Gerlt Electronic Systems

Priyanka Gokhale Dilip S. Gokhale Information Systems & Global Services

Elizabeth Gosciniak Jeffrey J. Gosciniak Information Systems & Global Services

Paul Hasgeth, Jr. Paul E. Hagseth Aeronautics Company

Kevin Havis Charles H. Havis Aeronautics Company

Richard Held Edward B. Held Sandia Corporation

Jeffrey Herman Neal Herman Savi Technology, Inc.

Laura Hodge Robert N. Hodge Space Systems Company

Ryan Hoffman Mark W. Hoffman Electronic Systems

Katherine Hooper Kenneth E. Hooper Space Systems Company

Kelsey Horter Ernest and Mary Ann Horter

Aeronautics Company

Bryant Huang Ming Huang Aeronautics Company

Kristin Ionata Pasquale Ionata Information Systems & Global Services

Jason Jea Li-Chung Jea Electronic Systems

Rebecca Jeun Buddy H. Jeun Aeronautics Company

Scholar Name Parent Name Parent Business Area

Benjamin Johnson Robert W. Johnson Aeronautics Company

Merrick Johnson Kendall Johnson Aeronautics Company

Rachel Kolb William and Irene Kolb

Sandia Corporation

Amy Konsza Ronald K. Konsza Space Systems Company

Jennifer Kunze James R. Kunze Information Systems & Global Services

James Lang Anthony J. Lang Electronic Systems

Brandyn Lee Randy E. Lee Aeronautics Company

Yi Li Bing C. Li Electronic Systems

Kenneth Long Douglas R. Long Electronic Systems

Alexander Marple Russell S. Marple Electronic Systems

Kyle McKeeth Ted E. McKeeth Aeronautics Company

Katie Metzger John D. Metzger Electronic Systems

Elizabeth Miller Joel D. Miller Sandia Corporation

Lisa Mondy Sandia Corporation

Aubrey Mowery Thomas T. Mowery Aeronautics Company

James Mullally James F. Mullally Electronic Systems

Priyanka Nargundkar

Raji Nargundkar Enterprise Operations

Rohan Paranjape Abhay Paranjape Aeronautics Company

Robert Perreault Mark C. Perreault Electronic Systems

James Pipe Michael R. Pipe Electronic Systems

Ashwath Rajan Mahesh and Sandhya Rajan

Sandia Corporation

Anna Schall Terri L. Purdy Information Systems & Global Services

Jay Shah Ngarling Khoe Space Systems Company

Christine Shen Yulin Shen Space Systems Company

Emily Snell Mark K. Snell Sandia Corporation

Lauren Spangler Richie Spangler Sandia Corporation

Andrew Sturner William P. Sturner Electronic Systems

Philip Su Ding Su Electronic Systems

Xin-Kan Su Xiangying Su Information Systems & Global Services

Neil Supnekar Rajendra Supnekar Information Systems & Global Services

Eric Tank Art C. Tank Aeronautics Company

Sarah Thompson Patrick F. Thompson Information Systems & Global Services

Hannah Tomlin Judy A. Howell Space Systems Company

David Tran Timothy Tran Information Systems & Global Services

Rachel Vassar Richard H. Vassar Space Systems Company

Jenny Wang Jean (Yinghe) Wang Information Systems & Global Services

Ben Warren Becky H. Warren Space Systems Company

Jennifer Wiegand Christopher Wiegand

Aeronautics Company

Charles Zheng Xuemei Du Enterprise Operations

William Zhu Ming Zhu Sandia Corporation

Honorary ScholarsStephanie Morton Maribel F. Morton Space Systems

CompanyTimothy R. Morton Electronic Systems

Michael Tope Chris L. Tope Information Systems & Global Services

9

10

of the interpreters who were killed could be returned for burial within 24 hours, in keeping with local custom.

Although his deployment was difficult for his wife, Evens says he continues to have a strong commitment to national service, in large measure because of his 22 years of active duty in the British Army’s Grenadier Guards.

“In the Grenadiers there is a saying, ‘Once a Grenadier, always a Grenadier,’ and the strong connection you feel to your battalion is hard to describe,” Evans says. “The closest I have found to this in civil life is here at LMUK INSYS.”

If duty calls again, he would be proud to answer, he adds. “I got a lot from the tour. I did a job I had never done before and learned a lot that, in time, may help me here at Lockheed Martin UK.”

That same desire to contribute and continue to learn is what motivated Dicky Lewis, an operational specialist on the Maritime Airborne Surveillance and Control program at LMUK Integrated Systems, to take a month’s leave to serve with the 857 Naval Air Squadron (NAS) in the Gulf of Aden.

Patrolling the waters between the Arabian Peninsula and the Horn of Africa, Lewis’s unit monitored the heavy surface traffic in the gulf, looking for signs of arms and narcotics smugglers, people traffickers and possible pirates.

A Sea King Mk7 helicopter opera-tor, Lewis spent many hours in the air to maintain his expertise and become more valuable to his Reserve unit and to LMUK.

“I had flown more hours in the Sea King Mk 7 during this period than I had during my last four years with the [Reserves],” he notes. “I had reached a level of competence impossible to achieve via the odd week’s visit to a dis-embarked squadron, and I had been of genuine use to 857.”

Talk to a vet

While some employees were helping build bricks-and-mortar community proj-ects while in service, Jeff Owen, a Space Systems logistics engineer at Huntsville, Ala., was helping build something a little different in Iraq — a sense of community.

“That was our mission — produce a community,” says Owen, a military police officer in the Alabama National Guard. “They didn’t understand how freedom works.”

He was a company commander at three forward operating bases, where he was in charge of training the local Iraqi police forces and helping them recruit, train and equip their officers. He also helped organize groups of citizens, simi-lar to neighborhood watch groups, to help the police.

“We did a lot of human rights education about how you treat people

in a free society,” Owen says. “We also did a lot of patrolling, going in and out of neighborhoods looking for weapons caches.”

About 95 percent of the personnel in Owen’s company saw combat action, and one of the chiefs of police with whom he worked was killed. “The good police officers were constantly threat-ened,” he says. “They put everything on the line to defend their cities.”

American service men and women also continue to put everything on the line in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Owen believes all Americans should be grate-ful for that service.

“People should take every oppor-tunity to sit down with a vet and talk to them,” he says. “I don’t think you have to serve in the military to appreciate the freedom we have in this country, but it’s good to get the perspective of a vet.” ■

Jeff Owen, logistics engineer at Space Systems in Huntsville, Ala., served as a military police officer training Iraqi police forces. “People should take every opportunity to sit down with a vet and talk to them,” Owen says.

MilitaryContinued from p. 5

Shown here in front of his squadron logo, MS2 electronic technician Jeff Conant was the night shift supervisor in charge of keeping large power generators running. Conant says he was most impressed by the teamwork, even though the team was diverse and completely turned over every four months.

The recent opening of the Security Intelligence Center in Gaithersburg, Md., provides a hub for detection, intelligence analysis and response to all internal information security incidents across the Corporation. Led by the Enterprise Services organization, the 8,000-square-foot facility is operated by analysts able to respond to growing cybersecurity threats, protecting the Corporation’s data and systems. The Center’s advanced visualization system provides overall patterns of cybersecurity activity, and its classified processing areas facilitate collaboration with government, law enforcement and contracting partners at all levels. The Center enables analysts to aggregate, correlate, and render overall patterns of activity. With this perspective, the Security Intelligence Center has a single vantage point of enterprise-wide cyber threat situational awareness. “This is a unique approach to information security, correlating incident activity to the programs and technology that attackers target,” said Sondra Barbour, CIO and vice president for Enterprise Services. “Because our customers entrust us with their most sensitive information, this center represents our ongoing commitment to protecting their data from inception to delivery.” At the ribbon-cutting ceremony in May are, from left, Bob McCants, director of Security Operations, Information Systems & Global Services (IS&GS); Bob Trono, vice president and chief Security officer for the Corporation; Bruce Tanner, executive vice president and chief financial officer; Linda Gooden, executive vice president, IS&GS; Sondra Barbour, CIO and vice president for Enterprise Services; Mayme Clinkenbeard, vice president IT Governance and Corporate Information Security Office; Allen Golland, director, Threat Response and Initiatives; John Harlow, senior project manager, Security Intelligence Center; and Rohan Amin, senior manager, Computer Incident Response Team. At right, Eric Hutchins, Security Intelligence Center analyst, starts work at the new center.

New Security Intelligence Center Responds To Cybersecurity Issues

11

Lockheed Martin employees contact the Office of Ethics and Business Conduct to report wrongdoing or to request guidance on ethical issues. Some of the allegations of wrongdoing are the result of misunderstandings and miscommu-nication – or a lack of communication – between leaders and employees.

“Open, honest communication is critical to a culture of trust,” says Alice Eldridge, vice president, Ethics and Business Conduct. “Leaders make

hundreds of decisions affecting employ-ees, and sometimes those decisions are not fully explained. Employees who do not understand the rationale behind decisions will sometimes draw an unfa-vorable conclusion about a leader’s motivation.”

Eldridge said that trust goes both ways. “Many of the most serious cases handled by our office are caused by employees who violate the trust the company places in them. Employees are always empowered to do the right thing, and we can all do our part to help sus-tain a culture that is positive, ethical and inclusive.”

The cases that follow include examples where a breakdown in com-munication or trust led to negative con-sequences.

Case Issues: Management Practices, Harassment, Facilitating PaymentsBackgroundMultiple employees working at an inter-national site alleged that a new manager there was “impossible to work with,” and created an intimidating work envi-ronment. The new manager also alleg-edly made an improper payment to a security guard at the airport.

IssuesDid the new manager create a negative work environment? Was there a violation of the company’s policy regarding pay-ments to foreign government officials?

FactsAn investigation was conducted and key findings were as follows:

Several employees interviewed • described various actions taken by the new manager that were viewed as intimidating and hostile.Other employees interviewed stated • that the site had not been effectively managed prior to arrival of the new manager. These employees described an undisciplined work environment where the previous site management allowed certain employees to do “whatever they wanted,” including actions contrary to company policies.The new manager was tasked with • instilling an increased level of dis-cipline within the workforce and to ensure employees abided by com-

pany policies. Senior management supported his actions to make posi-tive changes on the program.Various employees resented the • manager’s actions, and resisted mak-ing the necessary changes to their work habits and behaviors. This resentment led to the filing of the ethics allegations.Regarding the alleged payment to an • airport security guard, the new man-ager had experienced bureaucratic

delays in transporting company valuables through airport security. The new manager violated company policy and operating procedures by making a facilitation payment in the amount of approximately $40 to an airport security guard without obtaining prior legal approval.

Resolution and Lessons LearnedThe investigation indicated that most of the allegations against the new manager were not substantiated and had resulted in large part from a reluctance by cer-tain employees to change their behavior and work habits.

Some of the allegations were made based on employees’ misinterpre-tation of the new manager’s actions, and also because they were unaware that the program changes were directed by senior-level management and were not unilateral actions by the manager.

However, the manager had not handled implementing the changes well, and had not taken the time to fully explain why the changes were necessary and positive.

He was counseled on the need for improved communications and change management within his organization. In addition, he was reprimanded for mak-ing an improper payment to an airport security guard and counseled on the proper procedures for shipment of com-pany valuables.

This case illustrates the impor-tance of good communications between leaders and employees and the need for leaders to maintain a disciplined, profes-sional work environment. It also dem-onstrated how the new manager could have increased trust within the work group by explaining the changes that were being made.

Case Issue: Age Discrimination BackgroundEmployees alleged that their manager discriminated against older employees. IssueWas the manager discriminating based on age?

FactsThis case was referred to the Equal Opportunity Programs Office (EOP)

which conducted an investigation. The key findings were as follows:

Various long-tenured employees • believed that the manager was hiring younger employees at a higher sal-ary grade than themselves. In actual-ity, the manager was appropriately bringing in new hires at a lower sal-ary grade than the more experienced employees, who did not have vis-ibility of the new employees’ salary grade information.Several of the more experienced • employees raised a concern that their performance appraisal ratings of “Successful Contributor” were lower than those given to the newer employees and also lower than rat-ings given under the previously used appraisal system. Documentation indicated that the “Successful Contributor” ratings were justified based on the satisfactory perfor-mance of the employees involved. The newer employees received ratings (“Successful Contributor” and “High Contributor”) that were appropriately justified by per-formance. Also, the previously used appraisal system resulted in nearly all employees receiving an “Exceeds” rating that was not justi-fied based on actual performance.The manager was heard making a • comment about “too many older employees” in his department. The manager admitted making the com-ment about older employees, but stated it was in the context of a joking remark made by one of his employees.

Resolution and Lessons LearnedThe allegations of age discrimination were not substantiated.

The manager admitted that his comment about “older employees” was inappropriate and perceived as discriminatory, and he received an oral reprimand and counseling for his lapse in judgment.

The manager was also counseled on the need to provide more meaningful feedback to employees during perfor-mance discussions so that employees understood the effort required to receive a higher performance rating.

Leaders need to be aware of how their words, including joking remarks, and actions are perceived.

In this case, the manager created a perception of favoritism that damaged trust within the work group.

Case Issues: Misuse of Company Credit CardBackgroundAn auditor contacted the Ethics office to report that a department manager was 120 days past due in paying the balance on a company-issued credit card.

IssueDid the manager misuse the company credit card?

FactsAn investigation was conducted and key findings were:

The credit card in question had an • outstanding balance of more than $2,000, and included various late payment charges. The most recent payment submitted was returned due to insufficient funds.The outstanding balance included • various non-business related charges, including gasoline, personal car rental, and personal cash advances. The manager believed that the per-• sonal charges were acceptable, as long as the balance was paid off on time, since that was the practice of the manager’s previous employer. The manager acknowledged that the personal charges were in violation of company policy.When interviewed, the manager’s • director indicated that he was aware of the manager’s misuse of the com-pany credit card and had instructed the manager to pay off the balance immediately.The manager stated that the insuffi-• cient funds check was caused by his using the incorrect checkbook to pay off the balance.

Resolution and Lessons LearnedThe manager was given a written repri-mand and counseled on the proper use of the company credit card. The man-ager’s company-issued credit card was cancelled, and the outstanding balance was paid immediately.

The manager violated the compa-ny’s trust by using the company credit card

for personal items and for not paying off the outstanding balance when it was due.

The manager’s director was coun-seled on the need to be more proactive in resolving these issues and ensuring that the manager immediately stop the improper use of the company credit card.

Case Issues: Harassment, Misuse of Computing ResourcesBackgroundA manager notified the Ethics office that he had been notified by a sheriff’s investigator about suspicious e-mail activity by an employee. The employee had allegedly been contacting people outside the company in connection with a personal relationship established through the myspace.com Web site.

IssueDid the employee misuse the company’s computing resources?

FactsAn investigation was conducted and key findings were as follows:

Can We Talk?Noteworthy Ethics cases highlight importance of communication and trust

ETHICS AND BUSINESS CONDUCT

See Ethics p. 12

“Leaders make hundreds of decisions affecting

employees, and sometimes those decisions are not

fully explained. Employees who do not understand the

rationale behind decisions will sometimes draw an

unfavorable conclusion about a leader’s motivation.”

— Alice Eldridge, vice president, Ethics and Business Conduct

“Many of the most serious cases handled by our office are

caused by employees who violate the trust the company

places in them. Employees are always empowered to do

the right thing, and we can all do our part to help sustain

a culture that is positive, ethical and inclusive.”

— Alice Eldridge

Most people don’t go to auto races to see cars parade around the track in sin-gle file at 30 miles an hour. Then again, most race cars include drivers.

The Lockheed Martin autonomous car joined two others at the Toyota Long Beach Grand Prix in April for the first ever Robotic Grand Prix. While not technically a race, the cars demonstrated to 180,000 race fans that robotic cars can successfully run a lap around the challenging track without human inter-vention, guided only by their on-board sensors and software.

Before the autonomous demon-stration, the team from Lockheed Martin

Advanced Technology Laboratories (ATL) in Cherry Hill, N.J., displayed its car at the Toyota Lifestyle and Alternative Energy Expo. Race fans had the opportunity to see the car and talk with some of the engineers who developed the car’s robotics technology, which enabled the vehicle to success-fully complete the 1.97-mile circuit, which includes 11 turns.

“We are proud to introduce our car to a group of race fans who may never have expected to see Lockheed Martin or robotic cars at the Grand Prix,” said Project Manager Brian Satterfield, Lockheed Martin Advanced Technology

Laboratories (ATL). “This isn’t science fiction; it’s reality. We want to help people better understand how robotics and autonomous technology are becom-ing an increasingly important part of everyday life.”

ATL’s Robotic car, a red Toyota Prius hybrid, was the Ben Franklin Racing Team’s backup vehicle during a November 2007 event called Urban Challenge, sponsored by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). In that event, robotic automo-biles had to intelligently and safely drive themselves through a 60-mile urban course in less than six hours. The cars

had to obey traffic laws while merging into moving traffic, navigating circles, negotiating intersections and avoiding obstacles.

Of the 89 teams that initially entered the 2007 DARPA Urban Challenge, only 11 qualified to com-

pete in the final competition. The Ben Franklin Racing Team, a consortium led by the University of Pennsylvania with Lehigh University and ATL, was one of only six teams to have a vehicle successfully complete the final race.

Since the competi-tion, Lockheed Martin engineers have updated and improved their car’s

software, giving the vehicle the abil-ity to autonomously navigate complex environments, often in close contact with humans or manned vehicles, and exhibit intelligent and complex behaviors. They are transitioning this technology into the Squad Mission Support System, an unmanned off-road vehicle that Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control is developing for the U.S. military. ■

The employee, using the company’s • computing resources, established a personal relationship with a non-employee female through the myspace.com Web site.The employee admitted sending • various gifts and cash to the female, who then sent a photo, supposedly of herself, in a cheerleader outfit.Subsequently, the employee • attempted to meet face to face with the female, who was evasive in com-mitting to meeting in person.The employee then began a search of • the female in the photo, contacting

local high schools and the local library for information, eventually discovering the identity of the female in the photo. The female in the photo was not the • individual with whom the employee had established a relationship, and law enforcement was contacted by the female and her family, since they viewed the employee’s actions as a form of stalking.A forensic search of the employee’s • company computer identified numer-ous inappropriate images on the hard drive, going back several years.

Resolution and Lessons LearnedThe employee was discharged from employment. He had violated the trust the company placed in him to use company computing resources appropriately. ■

1212

Lockheed Martin Today may contain forward-looking statements relating to projected future financial performance that are considered forward-looking statements under the federal securities laws. These statements are not guarantees of the Corporation's future per-formance as actual results may vary depending on a multitude of factors. Investors should review the Corporation’s filings regarding risks and uncertainties associated with Lockheed Martin's business. Refer to the Corporation’s SEC filings, including the "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Results of Operations and Financial Condition," "Risk Factors and Forward-Looking Statements" and “Legal Proceedings” sections of the Corporation’s 2005 annual report on Form 10-K and 2006 quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, copies of which may be obtained at the Corporation's Web site http://www.lockheedmartin.com or the SEC’s site at www.sec.gov. The Corporation expressly disclaims a duty to provide updates to forward-looking statements, and the estimates and assumptions associated with them, after the date of this Lockheed Martin Today to reflect the occurrence of subsequent events, changed circum-

stances or changes in the Corporation's expectations. In addition, some or all of the following factors could affect the Corporation's forward-looking statements: the ability to obtain or the timing of obtaining future government awards; the availability of government funding and customer requirements both domestically and internationally; changes in government or customer priorities due to program reviews or revisions to strategic objectives; difficulties in developing and producing operationally advanced technology systems; the competitive environment; economic, business and political conditions domestically and internationally; program perfor-mance; the timing and customer acceptance of product deliveries; performance issues with key suppliers and subcontractors; and the Corporation's ability to achieve or realize savings for its customers or itself through its cost-cutting program and other financial management programs. These are only some of the numerous factors that may affect the forward-looking statements contained in Lockheed Martin Today.

EthicsContinued from p. 11

Lockheed Martin Corporation, Volume 14, Number 5Published for employees by Lockheed Martin Corporate Communications. Lockheed Martin Today archives are available on the Lockheed Martin Intranet at http://pageone.global.lmco.com/pageone/. The award-winning Lockheed Martin Today is printed on recycled paper using soy-based inks and is recyclable. For permission to reprint or excerpt material, contact mona.coan@lmco.com.

To subscribe, change your mailing address or obtain additional copies of this publication, e-mail your request to: today@lmdistribute.com.Corporate Communications: Ron Rand, senior vice president, Corporate CommunicationsGinny Vasan, vice president, Executive and Internal Communications

Editor: Mona Coan

Design/Art Direction: Spark Design – Silver Spring, MD

Special Reporter: Rick Sauder

Editorial Board: Mona Coan, Tom Greer, Brian Sears, Ginny Vasan, Dave Waller

Contributors: Dexter Henson, Matt Kramer, Meg Manthey, Steve O’Neill, Craig Vanbebber

Photography: Jerry Altares, Jon Hammerstein, Samantha Kupersmith, George McClure, Scott McGill, Kevin Robertson, Eric Schulzinger

Web Editorial Assistant: Elizabeth Matthews

HOME DELIVERY! You can now have the Lockheed Martin Today newsletter sent directly to your home. To obtain a copy each month, e-mail your name and address to The Jay Group at today@lmdistribute.com. In the subject line, put “Request for LM Today home delivery.” Distribution to your home will begin with the following issue.

Employees who observe misconduct should report the situation to their man-agement, Human Resources or local Ethics officer, or call the Corporate HelpLine at 800-LM-ETHIC.

Above, the Advanced Technology Laboratories team is happy with the successful run of its autonomous car at the Toyota Long Beach Grand Prix. From left are engineers Brian Satterfield, Heeten Choxi, Adam Salamon and Peter Drewes. At right, the car is shown on display at the Toyota Lifestyle and Alternative Energy Expo before the run.

“We want to help people

better understand

how robotics and

autonomous technology

are becoming an

increasingly important

part of everyday life.”

— Brian Satterfield,

project manager, Lockheed Martin

Advanced Technology Laboratories

On TrackAdvanced Technology Laboratories’ autonomous car on its own at Toyota Grand Prix

For more information, contact communicator Steve O’Neill at 856-792-9815, soneill@lmco.com.

See the autonomous car in the May edition of the LM1 corporate news video.