Britain to equip ships with lasers to take down drones from 2027

On the same subject

• 

  January 14, 2021 | International, Naval

  For the US Navy, the future of shipbuilding (and warfare) is in the power plant

  By: David B. Larter WASHINGTON — The U.S. Navy wants to buy a next-generation large surface combatant by the end of the 2030s, but its not being built for a new kind of sensor or weapon system. The newly dubbed DDG(X) is being built for power. The Navy has, of course, built ships around advancements in engineering systems before: Nuclear power or steam engines, for example, have led to big leaps in naval design. But the large surface combatant is being built around a significant challenge. Weapons systems of the future such as high-powered electronic warfare systems, laser weapons, and high-powered radars and sensors will put an uneven and sometimes even unpredictable load on a ship's power system. That's pushing the Navy toward an integrated power system, says Rear Adm. Paul Schlise. “We're going to incorporate an Integrated Power System that has the ability to power up the weapons and sensors of the future,” Schlise said during the Surface Navy Association's virtual annual symposium. “[That's] the key to the realm here. It's DDG-1000-like, in some respects in that it'll have that integrated power system, but the most important thing is including the space, weight, power and cooling — reestablishing those margins to incorporate future systems that are not yet mature. “There's a lot of promise in some of those systems, but that integrated power system is the key to incorporating those feature systems that we're looking at, that we think are going to be part of that class of ship.” What is an integrated power system? Mark Vandroff, a former senior director of the National Security Council and a retired Navy captain who was the program manager for the Navy's new DDG Flight III program, said it's a major break from the kind of system used on Arleigh Burke-class destroyers. “A major advantage of a ship with an integrated power system is that the power generated by any of the ship's engines can be used for either propulsion or electricity, rather than having engines solely dedicated to one or another.” On today's destroyer, and on the Ticonderoga-class cruisers, the ship has separate systems that power the twin propulsion shafts, which turn the ship's propeller and generators that work exclusively to power the ship. An integrated power system, similar to what is on the Zumwalt-class destroyers, uses all the ship's engines to make electricity that turns the propellers and powers the weapons and sensors. The integrated power system on Zumwalt is a new layout that uses advanced induction motors to produce up to 78 megawatts of electrical power, far more than any previous destroyer or cruiser. But the issue with the large surface combatant is a little more complicated than just producing a ton of power. What energy weapons or advanced electronics systems do is put a huge tax on the electrical system of a ship, often requiring more power than the ship is able to produce at one time. So while the integrated power system isn't new, the kinds of demands these new systems will place on the power grid meant to run everything is a new kind of challenge, said Matthew Collette, associate professor of naval architecture and marine engineering at the University of Michigan. Therefore, the Navy must figure out how to best store energy so it can be available to meet unpredictable demands. “The issue is, this is different than integrated electric propulsion, which we've had on cruise ships and offshore supply vessels for two decades at this point, and it works really well,” Collette said. “But on those ships, all the electrical loads are pretty well behaved: They rise and fall slowly, and there's no issues with the stability of the electrical system. “High-powered radars, high-powered electronic warfare, certainly rail guns, the lesser extent lasers — they all ask for power really quickly, faster than a mechanical generator can suddenly produce it. So now you have to think about whether [you] use batteries or flywheels or capacitors or other techniques to get the energy available on the timescale that the load needs.” It's not an insurmountable problem, and it is one the Navy has used elsewhere. The electromagnetic launch system on the Ford-class, which has had its share of technical problems, operates off a flywheel energy storage system. But the new power system already has Congress nervous, and lawmakers are pressuring the Navy to build a land-based engineering site to test out the power and propulsion system before getting too deep into the design work for the ship. Collette said that's a sensible approach, and that on the timeline the Navy is discussing, the technology should be sufficiently advanced to support the new class. “There's been a ton of work done on this, and I think it's certainly something that in the timeframe of a large surface combatant, I would expect would work,” he said. https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/surface-navy-association/2021/01/13/for-the-us-navy-the-future-of-shipbuilding-and-warfare-is-in-the-power-plant

• 

  September 18, 2020 | International, C4ISR

  Space Force issues $298M contract for new anti-jamming satellite design

  Nathan Strout Northrop Grumman was awarded a $298 million rapid-prototyping contract to design a new anti-jamming communications satellite payload for the U.S. Space Force, the Space and Missile Systems Center announced Sept. 16. Under the contract, Northrop Grumman will build a payload for the Evolved Strategic SATCOM (ESS) program, a next generation constellation that will provide secure, jam-resistant, survivable communications for military leadership all over the world. The new system will be interoperable with the Advanced Extremely High Frequency satellites currently on orbit. The Space Force wants ESS to have enhanced resilience and cybersecurity capabilities. And unlike AEHF, the new satellites will have polar components to provide communications over the Arctic. Currently, the Enhanced Polar System satellites are used to extend the AEHF network to the polar regions. The Space and Missile Systems Center could award up to three rapid-prototyping contracts in 2020, according to the Space Force's fiscal 2021 budget request, before selecting a final contractor to build out the constellation. It's not immediately clear how many ESS payloads would be in the constellation, or what satellites they'll be hosted on. “Northrop Grumman looks forward to building on more than 40 years of successfully delivering protected satellite communications solutions to our customers,” said Cyrus Dhalla, vice president, communications systems, Northrop Grumman. “ESS is critical to extending our nation's secure satellite communications infrastructure, as it will provide strategic users with assured, uninterruptable connectivity without fear of discovery anywhere on the globe.” Work is expected to be completed May 2025. https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/c2-comms/2020/09/17/space-force-issues-298-million-contract-for-new-anti-jamming-satellite-design/

• 

  January 14, 2019 | International, Land

  Here’s when the Army will pick three companies to build the M16/M4 and SAW replacements for soldiers and Marines

  By: Todd South By the end of this summer, the Army plans to pick three vendors to build prototypes of the weapons that will replace the M16/M4 and the Squad Automatic Weapon for both soldiers and Marines, both in a new, common cartridge. In the coming weeks, officials will release the official “prototype opportunity notice” with detailed expectations of the new weapons family, including not only the new caliber but also what it wants from the weapons' fire control system. Companies will then have between two and four months to submit their samples for Army officials at Program Executive Office Soldier, Crew Served Weapons to evaluate. At the same time, submissions for a SAW replacement, which was part of an earlier effort that helped lead to this approach, will undergo test-firings in July. That will then close the previous prototyping. Once officials select the three vendors in late summer, officials said, they are expected to have 27 months to mature and finalize the weapon. That means the long-awaited replacement for the basic weapons at the core of Army and Marine squad firepower could be ready for troops by 2021. That far outpaces what used to be the norm for acquiring new weapons, Lt. Col. Jason Bohannon, head of PEO Soldier, Crew Served Weapons, told Military Times in a recent interview. That was because the program was approved last year for rapid prototyping. Bohannon said that allowed the program to “jumpstart” weapon and fire control development. Otherwise, the simple requirements approval portion would have taken at least two years. The testing on the first initiative from last year, the SAW replacement, allowed for what Bohannon called an “unprecedented dialogue with the small arms industrial base.” For more than a decade, researchers and industry experts have advocated for an intermediate caliber replacement for the 5.56mm round. Some advocated for simply converting existing 5.56mm rifles to a 6mm caliber with upper receiver swaps. The Army as a whole received a lot of criticism from experts in those areas for continuing on with the 5.56mm, even with enhanced round versions of the caliber. But, Bohannon said that the Army had squeezed out advances not only in the round but also in the weapons platform of the M16/M4, which has seen hundreds of modifications since it first hit units more than half a century ago. For true “leap-ahead” changes, Bohannon said, “You really had to take a systems approach.” Less than a year ago, the search for a replacement caliber was being kept within the intermediate range, anything from 5.56mm to 7.62mm, the existing calibers used in small units. Most saw something in the 6mm range as ideal, based on decades of ballistics research and advocacy. The service narrowed in on the 6.8mm round, but it has kept how that round is delivered up to industry submissions — they're looking for weight savings so polymer, cased telescope, and hybrid materials such as stainless steel, are all on the table. But while it doesn't get as much attention as the new round, the fire control system is likely as important to the new system. For that, officials are expecting the submission to have three fire control capabilities built into one device — a laser range finder, ballistic computer and disturbed reticle. Those are advancements that put basic infantry shooting on par with sniper equipment. And they're not the end of development. The fire control will have to be compatible with the upcoming Enhanced Night Vision Goggle-Binocular, expected to field near the end of the year and with the Family Weapons Sights-Individual system, which includes thermal capabilities and Rapid Target Acquisition that allows troops to shoot around corners and fire quickly from the hip, if necessary. Those capabilities are on a longer timeline, as tech evolves, mostly to avoid strapping too many accessories onto the weapon. To that end, they've built an open architecture system requirement into the fire control so that future features and hardware can work together, Bohannon said. Originally, the Army was looking to start with a SAW replacement and work the rifle/carbine replacement afterward, but that changed with the most recent prototype notice. Following that notice, Brig. Gen. Anthony Potts, who leads PEO Soldier, told Military Times that the new approach is to develop both along the same path, with the same round, so that designers can find the best fit for ammo in both weapons, much like existing M4s and Squad Automatic Weapons both fire the 5.56mm. The first prototype, which will see test firings of weapons systems in July, resulted in five companies being selected. Those companies are: AAI Corporation Textron Systems FN America LLC (two prototypes) General Dynamics-OTS Inc. PCP Tactical, LLC Sig Sauer, Inc. Though they won the right to participate in that first set of submissions and testing, it doesn't mean any of them has a free pass into this next effort. According to the draft prototype notice from October, once production begins, companies will be expected to build at least 200 weapons per month. Within six months of the award, they need to pump out 2,000 weapons a month within three years for a potential total order of 250,000 weapons systems, both NGSW-R and NGSAR, over a 10-year period. That cashes out to $10 million the first year and an estimated $150 million a year for the higher production rate years. https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2019/01/11/heres-when-the-army-will-pick-three-companies-to-build-the-m16m4-and-saw-replacements-for-soldiers-and-marines