Back to news

July 13, 2021 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

DoD budget faces multiple obstacles | Actionable Intelligence

Defense News' Joe Gould speaks to retired Major General Arnold Punaro about the defense budget.

https://www.defensenews.com/video/2021/07/12/dod-budget-faces-multiple-obstacles-actionable-intelligence

On the same subject

  • French Defence Staff chief: France is making moves to guarantee its survival in the face of existential threats

    January 11, 2021 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

    French Defence Staff chief: France is making moves to guarantee its survival in the face of existential threats

    By: Gen. Francois Lecointre The singularity of the military lies in its raison d'être: to wage war in order to guarantee France survives an existential threat. To this end, the armed forces are alone in having limitless power to use deliberate force and to kill, if that is what the mission requires. This is what distinguishes them from law enforcement agencies who use force strictly in proportion to the risks incurred and who are constrained by the notion of self-defense. This military singularity is based on several fundamental principles. Discipline: The armed forces are the strength of the nation, and it is out of the question that one should be able — for even a second — to suspect them of wishing to become emancipated from legitimate political power. They are therefore strictly and totally subordinated to this political power, the delegatee of national sovereignty. As a counterpart to this subordination, the armed forces must be involved in making the decisions that they will implement under strong ethical requirements and with the knowledge that they may pay with their blood. Moreover, this very strict subordination to political power means they must also be perfectly neutral, both philosophically and politically. Responsiveness and availability: Together these must ensure that any form of surprise — the very essence of war — is averted. Nuclear deterrence is therefore the most successful expression of military singularity, notably because it is based on an operational organization and culture that guarantees its absolute responsiveness. The capacity for independent action: On the battlefield, an army must have every skill at its disposal so that it can conduct its mission, including in a totally disorganized environment. It cannot count on the services of the state and must therefore have on hand the whole range of professions it needs to carry out its mission, including those that might seem quite far removed from the implementation of force. If we relate this autonomy to reactivity, then the question arises of conferring the former in peacetime in order to guarantee the latter when the army needs to engage. Ethics: At the moment they commit the most extreme act possible — taking life — soldiers must be able to find support in high ethical standards and a corpus of values. More broadly, this is what constitutes a military culture, shared by all civilian and military personnel in the armed forces. Based on these principles, military singularity is expressed in many ways. Beyond the rules of status or pay, which first come to mind, it is notably the modes of operation, structuring and organization that singularize our armed forces. This notably involves subsidiarity; the creation of intermediary echelons whose task is to synthesize and summarize data for subordinates; and the capacity of commanders, who hold all the levers for action, to respond as fast as possible to a crisis. Military singularity today has been weakened by a certain number of changes: an organization and operational mode that gives preference to management over command; outsourcing; the adoption of civilian flow logic, including for vital functions; and the lack of reserves in military human resources. These phenomena are obstacles to our full effectiveness. We must consolidate military singularity by modernizing our defense tool into one that is capable of fighting in all fields, with sufficient mass, organization and depth of capabilities to allow it to assume all of its functions both in war and in crisis. This is the aim of the actions we are currently undertaking with the minister of the armed forces. To meet the objective set by the president of the republic — that France should have “a comprehensive, modern, powerful, balanced defense tool, implemented by reactive armed forces looking to the future” — the Military Program Law 2019-2025 must allow us to repair our defense tool before the next military program law modernizes it. We are working to restore the foundations of an organization and a culture compatible with the purpose of armed forces: to guarantee the survival of the nation in the face of an existential threat, in a world marked by uncertainty and a return of tragedy. Gen. Francois Lecointre is the chief of the French Defence Staff. https://www.defensenews.com/outlook/2021/01/11/french-defence-staff-chief-france-is-making-moves-to-guarantee-its-survival-in-the-face-of-existential-threats/

  • Elbit Systems Awarded Approximately $270 Million Contract to Supply Rocket Artillery for an International Customer

    August 6, 2024 | International, Aerospace

    Elbit Systems Awarded Approximately $270 Million Contract to Supply Rocket Artillery for an International Customer

    Driven by its agile, collaborative culture, and leveraging Israel’s technology ecosystem, Elbit Systems enables customers to address rapidly evolving battlefield challenges and overcome threats.

  • Why the new Raytheon Technologies will eschew platforms for new technology development

    June 11, 2019 | International, Aerospace, Security

    Why the new Raytheon Technologies will eschew platforms for new technology development

    By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — “Platform agnostic.” It's a term getting a lot of play from United Technologies CEO Greg Hayes and Raytheon CEO Tom Kennedy, in the wake of this weekend's surprise announcement that the two companies would be merging into a new firm,known as Raytheon Technologies Corporation. Neither company works as a platform producer, eschewing the production of aircraft or ground vehicles and instead focusing on the technology that makes them work. It's a business model that has produced well for both firms, and in a Monday interview with Defense News, the two CEOs made it clear they see no need to deviate now. “One of the first and foremost things we absolutely agree on is, we want to be platform agnostic,” Hayes said, noting that UTC sold off its Sikorsky helicopter unit almost five years ago because “we didn't like the programmatic risk associated with platforms.” “We'll supply all the content and all the systems, all of the offensive, defensive capabilities necessary to make the system successful, but we really think it's important that we remain agnostic among the platform providers,” Hayes added. Said Kennedy, “Neither of us essentially develop platforms or sell platforms. Why that's important is, really, the amount of capital that you have to go and spend in maintaining and creating these platforms kind of takes your eye off the ball relative to investing in technology moving forward. So that was a big feature, that both companies are platform agnostic.” Instead, both men said the new firm will remains focused on developing high-end technologies which can be inserted on, or in, platforms developed by the other major defense primes. With that goal in mind, the company is preparing to spend $8 billion in R&D funds in the year following its merger. When the merger is completed in early 2020, Kennedy will become chairman of the board, with Hayes serving as CEO. Two years later, Kennedy will step down, with Hayes adding the chairman title. One area Kennedy highlighted as having good synergies is hypersonic weapons, a major interest for the Pentagon. Raytheon has already been working on hypersonic missiles, including the guidance and control systems, but UTC's experience with propulsion and materials science might be able to help deal with a specific challenge for Raytheon's weapon designers. “It just turns out when you're flying at Mach 5, you really increase your temperature on all your surfaces," Kennedy said. "If you have a propulsion system, the air is coming in at such a high speed, that creates a significant amount of heat; it has to be dissipated in a very efficient way,” Kennedy said. “And one of the areas that the United Technologies has, really based in the Pratt & Whitney guys, is all the technology that they've developed over the years in working very high temperatures internal to their turbine engines,” he continued. “So not only do they have, I would call it the heat management capabilities, but also the material science to go implement those.” Hayes identified two areas where shared R&D will have a near-term impact, and they underline the benefit of having a new company that will be roughly 50-50 defense and non-defense business. The first is on aircraft control systems, where each company has technologies that can be brought to bear for the FAA's next-generation air traffic control networks. The second comes in the form of cybersecurity. “I think Raytheon is second to none as it relates to cyber, and we view this as a core competency that can benefit the entire commercial aerospace ecosystem,” Hayes said. “Not just the connected aircraft, which is probably the first order of business, but the whole ecosystem. How do you protect passenger data, how do you protect the equipment that's on the ground? How do you protect the airplane while it's flying? “I think we'll see that shortly in the marketplace.” https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2019/06/10/why-the-new-raytheon-technologies-will-eschew-platforms-for-new-technology-development/

All news