Air Force says restoring nukes on some B-52s would cost $4.5 million

On the same subject

• 

  September 13, 2018 | International, Aerospace

  Air Force not considering new F-15 or hybrid F-22/F-35, top civilian says

  By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — The two biggest manufacturers of military aircraft have been busy marketing new versions of their fighter jets to the U.S. Air Force, but the service's top official told Defense News in an exclusive interview that it's not actually interested in purchasing either of them at the current moment. This summer, Defense One broke two major stories about sales pitches from Boeing, which is proposing an advanced version of the F-15 to the Air Force, and Lockheed Martin, which has been pushing a hybrid version of the F-22 Raptor and F-35 joint strike fighter similar to what it is reportedly offering Japan. But just because those companies are offering new jets, doesn't mean that the Air Force wants them. In an exclusive Sept. 5 interview, Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson said she believes the service needs to expend its precious financial resources on stealthy, fifth-generation platforms — specifically the F-35 — and thus buying even an advanced fourth generation fighter like the so-called F-15X is not in the cards. "We are currently 80 percent fourth-gen aircraft and 20 percent fifth generation aircraft,” she said. "In any of the fights that we have been asked to plan for, more fifth gen aircraft make a huge difference, and we think that getting to 50-50 means not buying new fourth gen aircraft, it means continuing to increase the fifth generation.” What about a new fifth generation plane that would combine the F-35 and F-22? Wilson shut down that idea as well, saying that proposal "is not something we're currently considering.” In a statement, a Lockheed spokesman said that the company was focused on the F-35 program but also looking into generational leaps in capability “to ensure our technology, including existing aircraft, remains a step ahead of advancing threats.” Boeing declined to comment on this story. The Air Force secretary's proclamations seem to pour cold water on both Lockheed and Boeing's sales pitches, but it is always possible that others inside the service are in favor of buying the F-15X and F-22/F-35 hybrid — and that they could continue making the case to Air Force leadership, potentially winning them over. Sources that spoke to The War Zone said Boeing was in “very serious” talks with the Air Force over the F-15X, but that the service had shied away from making its interest public so as to not to derail it's number-one procurement priority, the F-35. Defense News has also heard from multiple sources that the Air Force has been in talks with Boeing over the F-15X for over a year, though it's unknown at what levels those conversations currently reside. Experts who spoke with Defense News said it's very likely that the Air Force intends to keep its focus on ramping up F-35 production for the time being, but that alternative platforms could very well be considered in future years. However, it is the F-22/F-35 hybrid, not the F-15X, that they believe stands a better chance of being adopted by the Air Force. Defense One, which broke the story about Lockheed's hybrid offer, wrote that the proposed jet would involve taking the F-22 airframe and outfitting it with some of the F-35's more advanced mission systems, though some structural changes could also be involved. “Every F-22 hybrid or derivative I've seen has been great,” said Rebecca Grant, a defense analyst with IRIS independent Research. The Air Force is in great need of such a stealthy air superiority aircraft because it only procured 183 F-22s, she said. Its other plane that specializes in the air-to-air fight, the F-15C/D, was originally fielded in the 1970s. Grant said she interprets Wilson's dismissal of the F-22/F-35 hybrid as a reflection of near-term requirements and priorities, noting that “job one is acquiring the F-35.” But in the future, that jet could be what the service decides it needs to contend with current and future threats. David Deptula, the dean of the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Power Studies and a retired Air Force lieutenant general, agreed that the service should continue buying F-35s for the time being. However, the F-22/F-35 hybrid might be a good option for the service in the future, when it begins looking for a next-generation air superiority jet, which the Air Force has variously called Penetrating Counter Air and Next Generation Air Dominance. Full article: https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/air-force-association/2018/09/12/air-force-not-considering-new-f-15-or-hybrid-f-22f-35-top-civilian-says/

• 

  December 2, 2020 | International, Aerospace

  Elbit Systems Awarded $96 Million Contract to Supply a Rotary-Wing Mission Training Center to a European Country

  Haifa, Israel, November 29, 2020 – Elbit Systems Ltd. (NASDAQ: ESLT, TASE: ESLT) (“Elbit Systems” or “the Company”) announced today that it was awarded a contract valued at approximately $96 million to supply a European country with a Rotary-Wing Mission Training Center (“Rotary-Wing MTC”) and support services to train its Air Force, Army and Navy helicopter pilots and crews. The contract will be performed over a nine-year period, with an option to extend the maintenance services for an additional 10-year period. The Rotary-Wing MTC is a networked multi-platform, mission-oriented, helicopter training center that will provide multi-level training for helicopter pilots and aircrews across the customer's Armed Forces. The new training center will enable realistic simulated tactical training using all of the helicopter's systems in a wide variety of mission scenarios. The Rotary-Wing MTC draws on the unique technologies and accumulated operational experience of the Company's fighter aircraft tactical mission training centers. Yoram Shmuely, General Manager of Elbit Systems' Aerospace Division commented: “This contract highlights the growing importance that Armed Forces place on leveraging proven technologies to enhance readiness while reducing costs.” About Elbit Systems Elbit Systems Ltd. is an international high technology company engaged in a wide range of defense, homeland security and commercial programs throughout the world. The Company, which includes Elbit Systems and its subsidiaries, operates in the areas of aerospace, land and naval systems, command, control, communications, computers, intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance (“C4ISR”), unmanned aircraft systems, advanced electro-optics, electro-optic space systems, EW suites, signal intelligence systems, data links and communications systems, radios, cyber-based systems and munitions. The Company also focuses on the upgrading of existing platforms, developing new technologies for defense, homeland security and commercial applications and providing a range of support services, including training and simulation systems. For additional information, visit: https://elbitsystems.com/, follow us on Twitter or visit our official Facebook, Youtube and LinkedIn Channels. Contacts: Company Contact: Joseph Gaspar, Executive VP & CFO Tel: +972-4-8316663 j.gaspar@elbitsystems.com Rami Myerson, Director, Investor Relations Tel: +972-77-2946403 rami.myerson@elbitsystems.com David Vaaknin, VP, Brand & Communications Tel: +972-77-2946691 david.vaaknin@elbitsystems.com IR Contact: Ehud Helft Gavriel Frohwein GK Investor Relations Tel: 1-646-688-3559 elbitsystems@gkir.com This press release may contain forward‑looking statements (within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended and the Israeli Securities Law, 1968) regarding Elbit Systems Ltd. and/or its subsidiaries (collectively the Company), to the extent such statements do not relate to historical or current facts. Forward-looking statements are based on management's current expectations, estimates, projections and assumptions about future events. Forward‑looking statements are made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, as amended. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions about the Company, which are difficult to predict, including projections of the Company's future financial results, its anticipated growth strategies and anticipated trends in its business. Therefore, actual future results, performance and trends may differ materially from these forward‑looking statements due to a variety of factors, including, without limitation: scope and length of customer contracts; governmental regulations and approvals; changes in governmental budgeting priorities; general market, political and economic conditions in the countries in which the Company operates or sells, including Israel and the United States among others; changes in global health and macro-economic conditions; differences in anticipated and actual program performance, including the ability to perform under long-term fixed-price contracts; changes in the competitive environment; and the outcome of legal and/or regulatory proceedings. The factors listed above are not all-inclusive, and further information is contained in Elbit Systems Ltd.'s latest annual report on Form 20-F, which is on file with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. All forward‑looking statements speak only as of the date of this release. Although the Company believes the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements contained herein are reasonable, it cannot guarantee future results, level of activity, performance or achievements. Moreover, neither the Company nor any other person assumes responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of any of these forward-looking statements. The Company does not undertake to update its forward-looking statements. Elbit Systems Ltd., its logo, brand, product, service and process names appearing in this Press Release are the trademarks or service marks of Elbit Systems Ltd. or its affiliated companies. All other brand, product, service and process names appearing are the trademarks of their respective holders. Reference to or use of a product, service or process other than those of Elbit Systems Ltd. does not imply recommendation, approval, affiliation or sponsorship of that product, service or process by Elbit Systems Ltd. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring by implication, estoppel or otherwise any license or right under any patent, copyright, trademark or other intellectual property right of Elbit Systems Ltd. or any third party, except as expressly granted herein. View source version on Elbit Systems: https://elbitsystems.com/pr-new/elbit-systems-awarded-96-million-contract-to-supply-a-rotary-wing-mission-training-center-to-a-european-country/?pageid=PR%20-20%20News

• 

  May 11, 2020 | International, Naval

  The US Navy’s modernization rush must not harm mine countermeasures

  By: Rep. Rob Wittman As the world continues to grapple with the COVID-19 pandemic, we are reminded that even in a time of unprecedented technological growth and development, simple and primitive threats have the ability to radically alter our way of life. In spite of astonishing medical advancements, some threats, unfortunately, remain timeless. Many people have drawn comparisons between the current coronvirus pandemic and the Spanish flu pandemic of 1918. The Spanish flu was caused by an H1N1 virus that was first identified in the United States in military personnel in the spring of 1918. It would eventually infect one-third of the global population, killing approximately 675,000 people in the United States and an estimated 50 million people worldwide. All of this was happening in the midst of the “war to end all wars” — World War I. While the homeland was battling the flu pandemic, the U.S. Navy was battling the U-boat threat in the Atlantic. In World War I, German submarines sank almost 5,000 ships, most of them merchant vessels. To help counter the U-boat threat, the United States and the United Kingdom embarked on an unprecedented and ambitious project: the construction of the North Sea Mine Barrage — a 230-mile-long underwater barrier of sea mines stretching from Aberdeen, Scotland, to Ekersund, Norway. The effort was a marvel of modern manufacturing, producing 1,000 sea mines every day. Over five months, the allies eventually laid over 70,000 sea mines, helping to contain the U-boat threat and protect allied shipping. As a second wave of the flu pandemic raged across the globe, World War I finally came to an end in November 1918. The American and British navies now had the task of cleaning up 70,000 live sea mines in the unforgiving North Sea. These primitive mines were anchored to the bottom of the sea, and the U.S. and U.K. had the advantage of knowing precisely where they were located because they had laid them. Despite those advantages, it took 82 ships and over 4,000 men — 10 times the assets that were required to lay the mines — to clean up the North Sea Mine Barrage. After almost a year of mine-clearing efforts, the operation was declared complete. Navy studies would later reveal that only approximately 40 percent of the American mines had actually been cleared, and mines continued to wash ashore for years after the end of the war. Fast forward a century and sea mines have proliferated around the world. Since the end World War II, sea mines have damaged or sunk four times as many U.S. Navy ships as any other method of attack. U.S. adversaries have paid attention. Russia was a pioneer in mine warfare and is estimated to have as many as 250,000 sea mines in its inventory. China is not far behind, with an inventory of around 100,000, including some of the world's most advanced mines. China has hundreds of mine-capable ships and aircraft, and could deploy thousands of mines a day during a conflict. To counter the mine threat, the U.S. Navy relies on 11 wooden-hulled Avenger-class mine countermeasures ships, 31 MH-53E Sea Dragon helicopters and a handful of explosive ordnance disposal platoons. The Navy wants to retire both the Avengers and Sea Dragons by 2025, while efforts to field any replacement capability have continued to falter. While the U.S. Navy has focused its research and funding on countering emerging threats such as advanced radars and hypersonic missiles, a time-tested threat waits patiently in the waters around the globe; and if we ignore the lessons of history, a centuries-old technology could lead to our defeat. Mine warfare, like public health, is an area that rarely attracts attention or significant investment until a crisis emerges. We should not wait until American lives are in peril before we take action. We need to change course immediately. First, the Navy must maintain its existing mine countermeasures forces until a credible replacement is fielded. Second, the Navy must make a significant investment to recapitalize the mine countermeasures force both in time and quantity to deliver a credible force. Unfortunately, the Navy has spent billions of dollars and wasted precious years pursuing a mine countermeasure module program that, even if it worked as advertised, would have neither the capability nor the capacity to effectively counter an enemy mine threat anticipated in our National Defense Strategy. Whether it's a pandemic or a proliferated naval threat, our citizens expect the United States to respond effectively, and we must make the necessary investments to counter the threats to our nation and our Navy. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/05/08/the-us-navys-modernization-rush-must-not-harm-mine-countermeasures/