Aérospatial : l'Onera, une pépite oubliée ?

On the same subject

• 

  July 15, 2019 | International, Other Defence

  With Squad X, Dismounted Units Partner with AI to Dominate Battlespace

  DARPA's Squad X Experimentation program aims to demonstrate a warfighting force with artificial intelligence as a true partner. In a recent field test, the program worked with U.S. Marines at the Air Ground Combat Center in Twentynine Palms, California, to track progress on two complementary systems that allow infantry squads to collaborate with AI and autonomous systems to make better decisions in complex, time-critical combat situations. “We are in a race with potential adversaries to operationalize autonomy, and we have the opportunity to demonstrate autonomy in a way that we don't believe any nation in the world has demonstrated to date,” said Lt. Col. Phil Root (USA), the Squad X program manager in DARPA's Tactical Technology Office. “Developing hardware and tactics that allow us to operate seamlessly within a close combat ground environment is extremely challenging, but provides incredible value.” The exercises in early 2019 in Twentynine Palms followed experiments in 2018 with CACI's BITS Electronic Attack Module (BEAM) Squad System (BSS) and Lockheed Martin's Augmented Spectral Situational Awareness and Unaided Localization for Transformative Squads (ASSAULTS) system. The two systems, though discrete, focus on manned-unmanned teaming to enhance capabilities for ground units, giving small squads battalion-level insights and intelligence. In the most recent experiment, squads testing the Lockheed Martin system wore vests fitted with sensors and a distributed common world model moved through scenarios transiting between natural desert and mock city blocks. Autonomous ground and aerial systems equipped with combinations of live and simulated electronic surveillance tools, ground radar, and camera-based sensing provided reconnaissance of areas ahead of the unit as well as flank security, surveying the perimeter and reporting to squad members' handheld Android Tactical Assault Kits (ATAKs). Within a few screen taps, squad members accessed options to act on the systems' findings or adjust the search areas. Between Lockheed Martin's two experiments to date, Root says the program-performer team identified a “steady evolution of tactics” made possible with the addition of an autonomous squad member. They also are focused on ensuring the ground, air, and cyber assets are always exploring and making the most of the current situation, exhibiting the same bias toward action required of the people they are supporting in the field. CACI's BEAM-based BSS comprises a network of warfighter and unmanned nodes. In the team's third experiment, the Super Node, a sensor-laden optionally-manned, lightweight tactical all-terrain vehicle known as the powerhouse of the BEAM system, communicated with backpack nodes distributed around the experiment battlespace – mimicking the placement of dismounted squad members – along with an airborne BEAM on a Puma unmanned aerial system (UAS). The BSS provides situational awareness, detects of electronic emissions, and collaborates to geolocate signals of interest. AI synthesizes the information, eliminating the noise before providing the optimized information to the squad members via the handheld ATAK. “A human would be involved in any lethal action,” Root said. “But we're establishing superior situational awareness through sufficient input and AI, and then the ability to do something about it at fast time scales.” The Squad X program has moved quickly through development and is already well along the transition path, due in large part to the program's focus on partnering with the services to ensure real-world efficacy. For the CACI system, that included an opportunity to test the technology downrange to get real-world information, not simulation. At the most recent experiment with the BSS, service representatives used the system to locate and identify objectives in real time. For both systems, feedback has included a desire for a user interface so intuitive that training takes an hour or less and any available action is accessible in two screen taps. Staff Sergeant Andrew Hall with the Marine Corps Tactics and Operations Group (MCTOG), an advisory teammate to DARPA's Squad X Experimentation program, says the ability to provide early input will guard against developing a product that either isn't used or is used improperly. “The feedback process, in conjunction with the actual experimentation, gives the Marines the ability to use the technology and start seeing what it can do and, more specifically, what it can't do,” Hall said. With the conclusion of third experiment, the CACI system is moving into Phase 2, which includes an updated system that can remain continuously operational for five or more hours. Lockheed Martin will conduct its next experiment in the fall of 2019. CACI's BEAM system is already operational, and the Army has committed to continue its development at the completion of Squad X Phase 2. The Army is set to begin concurrent development of the Lockheed Martin ASSAULTS system in fiscal years 2019 and 2020, and then, independent of DARPA, in fiscal year 2021. https://www.darpa.mil/news-events/2019-07-12

• 

  February 12, 2021 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  How Republicans might accept a smaller defense budget

  By: Joe Gould WASHINGTON ― California Republican Rep. Ken Calvert is willing to meet Democratic lawmakers partway in their reported plans to trim the defense budget: cut back on civilian employees, not equipment and modernization. “Like everything else in government, personnel is your biggest cost, and the civilian-to-uniform ratio ... is at an all-time high,” Calvert, the ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee's defense subpanel, said in an interview Wednesday. “Our inability to correct that trend is eating away at our military, our procurement, our readiness, all the above, and so we need to do this.” President Joe Biden is expected to release his federal budget plan in April, but battle lines are being drawn on Capitol Hill ahead of what is expected to be a tighter military budget than in recent years. While some key Republicans want to protect the military budget increases that came under then-President Donald Trump, or even build upon them, Calvert said he is open to “responsible reductions.” He is offering civilian cuts as an alternative to cutting end strength and weapons platforms. “Rather than reducing [personnel in] uniforms ― and I think there's some talk about doing that, especially in the Army ― we need to look at the civilian workforce, which is at the highest ratio to uniformed service members than it has ever been,” Calvert said. “If you're going to cut defense, are you going to cut procurement? People are arguing we need to build the Columbia-class submarine and Virginia-class submarine ― and I agree ― that we [keep the] Space Force, and [that] our satellite program is woefully behind ― and I agree. Where do you make your reductions when your overwhelming cost is personnel?” Under Calvert's bill, the Rebalance for an Effective Defense Uniform and Civilian Employees Act, or Reduce Act, a 15 percent cut to the civilian workforce overall and a cap for the Defense Department's Senior Executive Service at 1,000 employees would have to be in place by fiscal 2025 and remain through 2029. The defense secretary would be empowered to use voluntary-separation and early-retirement incentives toward the reduction. The legislation, which has been introduced several times before, was inspired by a 2015 study by the Defense Business Board that illustrated how the Department of Defense could save $125 billion over five years by slashing overhead. Still, the proposal to cut civilians would face new optics this year. As civilian voices were muted in favor of uniformed leaders under the Trump administration, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, a former general, committed under bipartisan pressure to “rebalance” Pentagon decision- and policy-making in favor of civilian leaders. It's also a different tact than that of the House Armed Services Committee's new top Republican, Rep. Mike Rogers, who plans to guard against cuts and would prefer a 3-5 percent increase in defense spending ― which Pentagon leaders say is required to carry out the 2018 National Defense Strategy. It's still early in the budgeting cycle, and the two may align. But in meantime, Calvert's approach offers something to fiscal conservatives, and it tracks with past efforts from Rogers' predecessor, former Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas. Even if Republicans can fend off a top-line cut or win an adjustment for inflation to keep shipbuilding and aircraft procurement on track, Calvert said he supports cutting the Defense Department's civilian workforce. “Hey, I hope Mike's right. I mean, he is a good friend, but I think he's a realist too,” Calvert said. “I worked with his predecessor on procurement reform, I'm trying to do some personnel reform, and we need those reforms on both sides.” For their part, Democrats swiftly rejected Calvert's legislation, making it one of the first skirmishes of the annual battle over the defense budget. The defense subpanel's new chairwoman, Rep. Betty McCollum, D-Minn., said she discussed the matter with Calvert and disagrees with him. “His proposal could lead to some of the most talented and committed DOD public servants losing their jobs,” McCollum said in a statement. “While we agree there is excess defense spending, my focus is on making smart investments that yield demonstrable outcomes by cutting waste and ending subsidies for outdated and unnecessary programs and facilities. In my view, the existing Department of Defense civilian workforce is mission critical to ensuring our national security.” The American Federation of Government Employees has historically opposed the bill, and a spokesman said funding and defense policy legislation passed last year prohibit civilian workforce cuts “without regard to impacts on readiness, lethality, military force structure, stress of the force, operational effectiveness and fully burdened costs.” With 768,000 federal employees working across all Defense Department components, the proposed cut amounts to 100,000 employees. Between 2015 and 2019, an average of just under 82,000 employees left DoD jobs each year. Calvert contends his 15 percent cut could be accomplished through attrition, not firings, and target “growth in middle management,” not the supply depots scattered around the country that have political backing. Previous cuts of civilian personnel have fueled increases in contracting costs ― and Calvert said he is open to cutting those too, in partnership with McCollum. “There would be discretion on the part of the people running the Pentagon; there are people you don't want to lose, they're in a special category, I get it,” Calvert said. “There are probably a lot of people you wouldn't miss, people up for retirement.” Democrats are more apt to take on nuclear modernization, which is projected to cost the Pentagon more than $240 billion in taxpayer dollars through 2028. In the balance is the contract for the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent, awarded to Northrop Grumman last year, to replace aging, land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles. Politico reports that progressive lawmakers and disarmament advocates are lobbying allies in the Biden administration for a pause in the GBSD program, while the Air Force and its allies in Congress, think tanks, and defense contractors are sharpening their arguments to preserve the program. Calvert acknowledged criticism of nuclear spending from House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith, D-Wash., but said big cuts to the nuclear triad lack the backing to succeed. (The panel rejected a funding cut for GBSD last year.) “I know Adam has been critical of that, but there's absolute support for redundancy of the deterrent within the Republican ranks, and so I don't see that going away. What I'm hearing so far out of the administration is that they feel the same way, so I don't think that's going to happen,” Calvert said. Austin and Deputy Defense Secretary Kathleen Hicks have voiced support for nuclear modernization broadly but stopped short of pledging to uphold the current nuclear modernization strategy in its entirety. Nuclear modernization cutbacks would “weaken the United States,” Calvert argued. “We're not just thinking about Russia; we've got China, who's rapidly militarizing space, and their missile capability is improving. Obviously we've got countries like North Korea or Iran that are building their own missile capability, so we have to have a strong deterrent to make sure we are ready for any contingency.” Jessie Bur of Federal Times and Leo Shane III of Military Times contributed to this report. https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2021/02/11/how-republicans-might-accept-a-smaller-defense-budget/

• 

  December 8, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  China second to US in global arms market with three firms in top 10 manufacturers

  United States still the leading country in arms spending and sales, followed by China, driven partly by its military modernisation Six American and three Chinese companies dominate the top 10 makers in Swedish think tank's annual ranking Kristin Huang Three Chinese arms companies have been ranked among the world's top 10 for weapons sales in 2019 in a Stockholm security think tank's annual list of the largest arms manufacturers. The United States was the leading nation in terms of both arms spending and sales of weapons, with China in second place in both respects. In the ranking by Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), six US companies and three Chinese firms made up the top 10 along with one from Britain. Aviation Industry Corporation of China, China Electronics Technology Group Corporation and China North Industries Group Corporation were ranked sixth, eighth and ninth respectively in the list of companies. A fourth Chinese arms firm, China South Industries Group Corporation, was ranked 24th among the 25 companies examined in SIPRI's report, released on Monday. Data from SIPRI's arms transfer database showed that aircraft, ships, missiles, armoured vehicles and air defence systems were the four Chinese firms' top revenue generators in 2018 and 2019, totalling nearly US$2.5 billion, with the top three buyers of Chinese weapons being Pakistan, Bangladesh and Thailand. The combined revenue of the four Chinese companies grew by 4.8 per cent overall between 2018 and 2019, to US$56.7 billion. This was the first time SIPRI had included Chinese companies in its annual ranking, having previously cited a lack of reliable data. The report said overall arms sales by the top 25 companies rose by 8.5 per cent in 2019 to US$361 billion, with the leading five all coming from the United States: Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and General Dynamics, with combined arms sales of US$166 billion. Another American firm, L3Harris Technologies, was in 10th place, while Britain's BAE Systems was seventh. The US arms industry accounted for 61 per cent of sales by the world's top 25 manufacturers last year, followed by China in second place with 16 per cent, according to the report. Six western European companies collectively accounted for 18 per cent, while the two Russian companies in the list made up 4 per cent. Zhou Chenming, a military expert in Beijing, said relatively cheap prices and good quality made Chinese weapons competitive in the global arms market. “China has invested huge money in developing cutting-edge weapons for years, and now Chinese weapons have improved their performance and are at reasonable prices which can be accepted by many developing countries,” Zhou said. But Zhou did not expect the growth for Chinese companies to continue at the same rate, partly because of international polarisation driven by China's rivalry with the US. “I think most US allies will continue buying arms from the US, and Russia will keep its own market share, and it will be quite difficult for China to increase its arms export revenue,” he said. Nan Tian, a senior researcher from SIPRI, said Chinese arms companies had benefited from the drive to modernise the country's People's Liberation Army since 2015. China was already viewed by the United States as its strongest competitor in cutting-edge military technologies such as artificial intelligence and quantum computing, according to a US Congressional Research Service report released in August. “China and the United States are the two biggest states in terms of global arms spending, with companies cut to size,” Lucie Beraud-Sudreau, director of SIPRI's arms and military expenditure programme, was quoted as saying by Agence France-Presse. The US has dominated the market for decades, but China's growth “corresponds to the implementation of reforms to modernise the People's Liberation Army”, she said. https://www.scmp.com/news/china/military/article/3112823/pla-reforms-drive-china-second-place-after-us-global-arms