Canada's top admiral says navy staff, resource needs in 'critical state' | Reuters

On the same subject

• 

  November 21, 2023 | International, Naval

  North Korea claims it successfully put spy satellite into orbit

  North Korea claimed Wednesday to have successfully placed a spy satellite into orbit with its third launch attempt this year.

• 

  March 5, 2019 | International, Aerospace

  Singapore moves to buy four F-35s, possibly eight more afterward

  By: Mike Yeo MELBOURNE, Australia — Singapore will seek to buy four Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighters for a start, with an option to purchase eight more, according to the southeast Asian nation's defense minister. Speaking in Parliament on Friday, Ng Eng Hen said Singapore will submit a letter of request to the United States for the purchase, adding that “Singapore has the endorsement of both the U.S. administration and the Department of Defense for our proposed purchase of F-35s.” He did not disclose which version of the F-35 Singapore will request when asked by lawmakers, although he was quoted as ruling out buying the “aircraft-carrier version” of the F-35, and told Parliament that the unit price of the aircraft “ranges from U.S. $90 million to U.S. $115 million.” The prices he quoted are the respective unit prices of the F-35A conventional-takeoff-and-landing version and the F-35B short-takeoff-and-vertical-landing version under the latest LRIP 11 contract signed in September 2018 between the DoD and manufacturer Lockheed Martin. Earlier reports suggested the land-scarce island nation is keen on the F-35B for its ability to operate from short runways. He also told Parliament that the total cost of ownership of an F-35 fleet including maintenance across its lifespan will be similar to Singapore's current fleet of Boeing F-15SG Eagles. He added, however, that the Defence Ministry “will continue to work with the U.S. Department of Defense to optimize operating and maintenance costs.” Singapore currently operates a fleet of 60 Lockheed Martin F-16C/D Block 52/52+ Fighting Falcons and 40 F-15SGs. It wants the F-35 to replace the former, starting from around 2030. The country typically makes its combat aircraft acquisitions in small, incremental batches, so the relatively small order is not much of a surprise. If the option for the additional aircraft is picked up, Singapore will have the numbers to launch a training detachment, likely based in the United States, to train pilots and maintainers. This is similar to the acquisition structure Singapore adopted for its F-15s and F-16s, with the country currently maintaining a joint U.S. Air Force-Republic of Singapore Air Force training unit for each of those aircraft types in the U.S. made up of personnel from both countries, in Idaho and Arizona respectively. https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/avalon/2019/03/01/singapore-moves-to-buy-four-f-35s-possibly-eight-more-afterward/

• 

  December 9, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  NATO needs a strategy for emerging and disruptive technologies

  By: Lauren Speranza and Nicholas Nelson The incoming Biden administration is expected to reassert ties with Europe, hoping to leverage America's allies and partners at NATO in the great power competition with China and Russia. As U.S. and European leaders set their collective agenda at the next NATO summit, a top priority should be establishing a NATO framework for emerging and disruptive technologies (EDT). For the United States, it is important that the alliance adapt together to defend against algorithms and bots, as much as bullets and bombs. Europe shares this mindset but differs from the United States on key defense tech issues, such as regulation, data, and stakes in national champion companies. To avoid the dangerous transatlantic rifts of the last four years, Brussels and Washington must bridge that gap and forge an alliance approach to EDT. NATO has acknowledged the need to harness the power of such technologies, but current efforts have produced innovation theater, as opposed to fundamental organizational change. NATO lags behind in critical areas such as 5G, hypersonics, artificial intelligence (AI), unmanned systems, and quantum science. In the past, NATO has used frameworks to get member states to agree on priorities, dedicate resources, and empower authorities to act. Looking to the next NATO summit, transatlantic leaders should champion an EDT framework built around four practical pillars: Establishing an organic assessment and coordination capacity at the strategic level. To fulfill its potential as the transatlantic coordinating tool on the security dimensions of EDT, the alliance needs an in-house capability to assess challenges driven by rapidly evolving technologies. It must examine the advantages and vulnerabilities of adversaries and competitors, as well as gaps in NATO's approach and capabilities. NATO must explore how EDT can be applied to tackle below-threshold threats, enhance defense planning, boost exercises, and support decision-making. Building on ongoing efforts, this should occur at the strategic level of the alliance, fusing civil and military perspectives and data to inform the development and introduction of cutting-edge EDT. It must also include a more robust mechanism for aligning capabilities and gaps across members, key partners, and the European Union. As defense budgets contract amidst the Covid-19 crisis, this approach will maximize return on investment and improve NATO's strategic edge. Seeding the market by improving engagement with industry. A strategic assessment function will not be valuable unless industry leaders are engaged and incentivized. NATO needs to connect to the private sector early and often, clearly communicating its priorities and requirements while providing accessible opportunities for industry, including non-traditionals, to readily sell into the alliance. Too often national and international defense organizations do not provide discernable paths to revenue for these companies, artificially limiting their industrial bases. The long lead times for these projects are often unattractive or unfeasible, especially for small companies and start-ups where radical innovation takes place. To remedy this, the alliance should look to the U.S. Department of Defense, which has succeeded in attracting startups and non-traditionals to its ecosystem through rapid awards, proof-of-concept contracts, and matching venture capital funds that start-ups receive. Enhancing standardization and interoperability by creating a system of systems. To meet the challenges of future warfare, the alliance must be able communicate and operate across militaries, capabilities, and domains. This requires more standardized, secure, and resilient platforms, systems, and infrastructure. NATO needs an EDT strategy for integration, not just innovation. Leading candidates for Biden's Pentagon team have emphasized this priority, supporting a CJADC2 concept – a “network of networks” to ensure reliable command and control. The alliance should leverage CJADC2 as a better framework for standardization and interoperability, paving the way for more complex joint operations. This requires a change in doctrine and a shift away from platforms to create a system of systems. Going forward, NATO needs this same approach to rapidly develop and deploy emerging defense and dual-use technologies for conventional and hybrid conflicts. This involves placing big, transformative bets on critical technologies, such as unmanned air and maritime systems, artificial intelligence (AI), and hypersonics. Coordinate with the EU. NATO should better leverage its ability to assign capability and spending targets to encourage its members to innovate. For instance, to complement the 2 percent of GDP defense spending benchmark, NATO could mandate that allies invest a certain portion of that into emerging technologies. It should also rework the 2 percent metric to include civilian investment in dual-use technologies that may fall outside of traditional defense budgets. Where NATO lacks the capacity to enforce these standards, the European Union brings the legislative and budgetary authority to promote them. NATO and the EU should coordinate research and development, provide seed funding toward these targets, and reinforce them with legal tools where possible. NATO and the EU should also initiate a strategic dialogue to address fundamental issues of tech governance and data sharing. The ability to employ emerging and disruptive technologies more effectively than competitors such as China and Russia will shape the global role of the United States and the transatlantic alliance in the coming decades. NATO has begun to talk the talk, but now it must walk the walk. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/2020/12/08/nato-needs-a-strategy-for-emerging-and-disruptive-technologies/