CISA and ONCD Award the Winners of the Fifth Annual President’s Cup Cybersecurity Competition | CISA

On the same subject

• 

  March 24, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  COVID-19: Farnborough Cancellation Another Blow For Defense Biz

  "Looking ahead, defense acquisition is in uncharted territory," says Air Force acquisition head Will Roper of the effects of the COVID-19 virus. By THERESA HITCHENS WASHINGTON: While the cancelation of the biennial Farnborough Air Show due to the COVID-19 pandemic may not have an immediate impact on the bottom lines of aerospace firms in the defense sector, the decision to close one of the world's top two airshows is yet another harbinger of pending upheaval in the overall market, analysts say. In particular, it deprives US firms of publicity abroad and highly valuable face-time with customers and potential customers from foreign governments. “Things like Farnborough are important to US aerospace companies because they help to facilitate sales and marketing,” said Todd Harrison, director of the Aerospace Security Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). “It's traditionally been a place where you show off your latest technology and latest systems, but it's also where you finalize deals that have been in the works for a while. And so, some of that can still happen, but some of it may not happen.” Richard Aboulafia, a veteran aircraft industry analyst at Teal Group, echoed: “It's just a reflection of a sad reality: economic time has simply come to a halt for our industry and for others. That means fewer big opportunities to meet clients, advertise products and capabilities, share information, and look for opportunities. Big air shows are essential for these, but here we are.” The Farnborough Air Show — which takes place south of London — registered representatives from 96 countries in 2018, and some logged $192 billion in orders and contract commitments. The cancelation of the 2020 show, slated for July 20-24, was announced today. “I don't see the cancellation of Farnborough as a big blow to defense contractors. It is generally a way of raising their profile, but has no immediate impact on their business prospects,” said Phil Finnegan, Teal Group's director of corporate analysis. That said, Finnegan and a number other analysts agreed, the aerospace market is in for a rough ride — and not just on the commercial side as airlines see their profits for 2020 nosediving, making it increasingly unlikely that they will invest in new planes. “Looking ahead, defense acquisition is in uncharted territory. Near- and far-term impacts of Coronavirus evolve daily,” Air Force acquisition head Will Roper said this afternoon. “As we complete our first week of response, our teams navigated potential work stoppages, changing local and state directives, halted supply chains, and gearing up to support any national Defense Production Act requirements.” The Defense Production Act, which allows the government to order companies to boost production or produce new things, was invoked last week by President Donald Trump. Finnegan said “the biggest threat to defense contractors will come to those with significant commercial aerospace operations. The cash flow drain from those operations potentially could hurt them. “It also reiterates the importance of maintaining a balance in operations,” he added. “Obviously, in recent years commercial aerospace has offered greater growth and potentially high profit margins. This crisis reiterates the importance of a diversified approach to defense and aerospace to take advantage of the stability of the defense market in a crisis.” Indeed, several other long-time industry analysts said that DoD may face price hikes as firms try to shift the costs of commercial overhead to the defense contracts — especially for spare parts. Further, Harrison noted, governments around the world are going to be cash-strapped and likely loathe to make new commitments to large buys of new fighter jets or drones. According to the latest report from the Aerospace Industries Association, US aerospace and defense exports in 2018 amounted to $151 billion: civil aerospace accounted for the majority with $131.5 billion; defense products the remaining $19.5 billion. “So, Farnborough may not be the reason that sales go down, It's more of a symptom of the fact that there just aren't going to be as many opportunities for a while,” he said. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/03/covid-19-farnborough-cancelation-another-blow-for-defense-biz

• 

  October 21, 2023 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR

  The fight in Gaza will be hell, military experts in urban combat say

  A ground offensive in Gaza promises to be long, brutal and costly.

• 

  October 15, 2019 | International, Aerospace

  Army-developed multimission launcher ‘off the table’

  By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — The Army spent years internally developing its own multimission launcher for the Indirect Fires Protection Capability program — designed to counter threats like rockets, artillery and mortars as well as cruise missiles and unmanned aircraft systems. But that grand plan is now officially off the table. The service has purchased two Rafael-made Iron Dome systems as an interim solution to get after the cruise missile defense capability gap, but it's taken a step back to rethink its enduring IFPC program strategy. While much is up in the air, it's certain that the launcher that will ultimately be part of the IFPC program won't be the MML. “It'll be something different that we will develop,” Brig. Gen. Brian Gibson, who is in charge of the Army's air-and-missile defense modernization, told Defense News at the Association of the U.S. Army's annual conference. As of 2016, the Army had spent $119 million to build MML prototypes, which included owning the technical data rights. The cost of developing the system outside of the Army would have been about three times as much according to the service at the time. Over the course of its development, the launcher was able to defeat a cruise missile target and an unmanned aircraft system using an AIM-9X missile at White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico, and fired the Miniature Hit-to-Kill (MHTK) and Tamir missiles as well. The U.S. Army had awarded three $2.6 million contracts in the summer of 2018 for the first phase of a program to find a second interceptor — the Expanded Mission Area Missile (EMAM) — for the MML. Also already selected was the first interceptor for the launcher, the Sidewinder. Lockheed Martin's MHTK missile and two missiles from Raytheon were chosen to be qualified for the launcher: Sky Hunter, the U.S. version of the Iron Dome missile Tamir; and the Accelerated Improved Interceptor Initiative missile. The effort to qualify the MHTK has been paused, Scott Arnold, Lockheed Martin's vice president and deputy of integrated air-and-missile defense with the company's Missiles and Fire Control business, said at AUSA. The company did not have an intercept test, but was able to move the MHTK missile through some testing prior to the Army's decision to pause the program. The Army may take technologies developed as part of the MML effort and spiral them into a future launcher, “but there were a lot of things, with all the right reasons, that launcher turned out the way it did,” Gibson said. An assessment of the launcher determined it was not sufficient for an enduring capability, he added. “All the variables of when you define a new piece of hardware matter and, for air defense, it really comes down to angles you launch things at, whether it's vertical or whether it's horizontal, and the applicability of how many different interceptors potentially you can put in,” Gibson said. “Those are all lessons learned from MML and it matters on the threat set.” The one-star added that he is confident the Army is capable of developing something appropriate on the right timeline when it comes to a launcher for the enduring IFPC plan. And while the service doesn't want to buy beyond the two batteries of Iron Dome already purchased, the Army is considering the feasibility of taking its launcher and missiles for the future IFPC program. The Army has until the end of 2023 to field an initial enduring capability or, by law, will have to buy more interim Iron Dome systems. https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/ausa/2019/10/15/army-developed-multimission-launcher-off-the-table