Boeing-Leonardo Team Scoops Up $2.38B UH-1N Replacement Deal

On the same subject

• 

  February 4, 2024 | International, Land

  North Korea tested firing cruise missiles on Feb 2 -KCNA

• 

  November 30, 2018 | International, Land

  With nod to Paris, MBDA claims lead on EU tank-killing missile

  By: Sebastian Sprenger COLOGNE, Germany — Missile-maker MBDA is banking on a new European Union project to help boost wider adoption of its Missile Moyenne Portée anti-tank weapon on the continent. The confidence by executives stems from last week's European Council approval of a Beyond-Line-of-Sight Land Battlefield Missile System. The project is one of 34 efforts under the union's new Permanent Structured Cooperation scheme, or PESCO. The framework is meant to unify military capabilities of the member nations with an eye toward establishing the EU as a military player on the world stage. The new missile project offers an glimpse into PESCO's nascent process for turning political ambitions into actual hardware made by national vendors. Such is the case here, says MBDA, which released a statement saying its MMP anti-tank weapon had been “endorsed” by the EU even though the official, one-paragraph project description makes no mention of a specific weapon. Company executives told Defense News that the MMP is what defense officials in France — which has the project lead together with Belgium and Cyprus — had in mind from the start when offering the project under an EU umbrella. The weapon, they argue, is the natural choice because it is already in service with French forces and because it is the sole wholly European option available. (MBDA is a joint venture of Airbus, BAE Systems and Leonardo.) A spokeswoman for the French delegation to the EU in Brussels did not respond to multiple requests for comment. The guided MMP, which boasts a range of 4 kilometers, can be fired by dismounted soldiers or from vehicles. Its competitors include the American-made Javelin and variants of the Spike, designed by Israel's Rafael. The Israelis market their offering through the Germany-based company Eurospike, and the missiles are produced in that country. But MBDA argues the “design authority” for both competitors lies outside of Europe, which means the joint venture would be ineligible for a role — and funding — under PESCO or its associated funding stream, the proposed €13 billion (U.S. $15 billion) European Defence Fund. It remains to be seen whether the apparent PESCO blessing can help propel the MMP weapon to greater popularity in European armies. There is already lower-hanging fruit included in the partnership with project co-sponsor Belgium: Brussels plans to buy a new fleet of armored combat vehicles from France's Nexter, a portion of which stands to be equipped with an anti-tank weapon. That's where EU funding support could come into play. Players of any PESCO project can get EU co-financing for the modification work required to make one weapon interoperable for several partner forces. On paper, the EU missile project has ambitious goals. The weapon eventually chosen — presumably the MMP — “is intended to be integrated on an extensive variety of platforms,” a PESCO project overview states. “The project includes joint training and formation aspects. A dedicated ‘users club' is envisioned develop a common European doctrine on BLOS firing.” Industry officials expect an initial kickoff meeting of the partner nations to hammer out a way ahead, though the timing is unclear. At that point, there could be a formal commitment to the MMP weapon. MBDA, for its part, is painting a purely altruistic picture of what's to come for the missile. “France is opening a collaborative approach for how to use it,” a spokesman told Defense News. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2018/11/29/with-nod-to-paris-mbda-claims-lead-on-eu-tank-killing-missile

• 

  May 6, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Land

  The Army’s future vertical lift plan may have a supplier problem

  By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — Army rotorcraft programs could net industry an average of $8 billion to 10 billion per year over the next decade — but defense companies can expect major challenges for its lower-tier suppliers, some of whom might choose not to come along for the ride. Those are the findings of a new study by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, released Wednesday. It follows a November report outlining cost concerns about the service's Future Vertical Lift (FVL) plan. The Army plans to field a future attack reconnaissance aircraft, or FARA, by 2028 and a future long-range assault aircraft, or FLRAA, by 2030. The modernization program is one of the top priorities for the Army. First, the good news for industry. The study found an annual market of $8 billion to 10 billion for Army rotorcraft programs over the next decade, with a potential dip occurring only in 2026, when the two new programs are spinning up. That's a strong figure that should keep the major defense companies happy. However, lower-tier companies may find themselves unprepared to actually manufacture FLRAA and FARA parts, given the newer production techniques the Army plans to use — things like additive manufacturing, robotics, artificial intelligence, digital twins, and data analytics. And if that happens, the service could face a supplier problem that could provide a major speed bump for its plans of having the systems ready to go at the end of the decade. Convincing those suppliers, many of whom lack cash on hand for major internal investments at the best of times, to put money down in the near term to redevelop their facilities and retrain people is going to be an “expensive issue,” said Andrew Hunter, who co-authored the study for CSIS along with Rhys McCormick. “They need a really compelling reason to invest.” “For a company that is devoted to the defense aviation market, they don't necessarily have a choice to not make the transition,” Hunter told reporters in a Tuesday call. “However, there is a dollars and cents issue, which is you have to be able to access the capital. If you can't, the primes will quickly go somewhere else.” And some companies with a broader market share in the commercial world may decide investing in modernization isn't worth the effort and simply leave the defense rotorcraft market, leaving the primes to scramble to find replacements. In that case, Hunter said, the primes could potentially look to bring that work in-house. Companies “are looking at the equation” of the commercial versus defense markets when making these decisions, said Patrick Mason, the Army's top aviation acquisition official. But he noted that the recent COVID-19 pandemic, which his hitting commercial aviation firms particularly hard, may cause some companies to consider the benefits of defense, which is historically smaller but more stable than the commercial aviation world. Mason also emphasized the importance of keeping suppliers with experience in the unique heat requirements or material aspects as part of the service's rotorcraft supply chain, saying “Those are the ones we remain focused on because those are the ones who could end up as a failure.” https://www.defensenews.com/2020/05/06/the-armys-future-vertical-lift-plan-may-have-a-supplier-problem/