January 11, 2021 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security
By: Jackson Schneider
While I'm writing this article, the world is facing the greatest global crisis of our generation. It is worth asking what a globalized world means after the COVID-19 pandemic, and mainly in the context of the defense industry.
Will it feature, as it did until recently, dynamic international trade and financial flows, globally integrated production chains, and an unprecedented flow of people and goods? Or, as many have speculated, will we see more protectionism, with countries protecting their markets and jobs, being more self-absorbed and less integrated? And how will the effects of geopolitical trends, accelerated by the current crisis, unfold in the decision-making of the military segment in a review of strategic plans?
Nonstate actors, unconventional wars, terrorism, nationalism, the connection of organized crime with paramilitary movements, radicalism and rogue states are some of the topics with which we are commonly presented. Entirely unpredictable in nature, these trends have the capacity to cause even more damage, marked by new space and cyber weapons.
Perhaps we will move from open partnerships, shared defense solutions and industrial integration to a more suspicious environment, where countries will develop individual defense responses, only using partnerships that supplement their ability to succeed.
New technologies, communications formats, relationships, economic flows, environmental concerns and geopolitical trends will have significant consequences in our lives. And the repercussions are uncertain.
In this environment, the defense sector will face new threats, such as the even more intensive use of cyber and space technology, autonomous applications, and artificial intelligence to attack, threaten, influence, or defend countries, companies and citizens.
The prospect of cyber conflicts is worrisome. Software overtakes hardware, and the product is an internet of solutions that we can't truly understand.
This is the new world that the defense industry must understand and ultimately act upon. Industry must seek solutions far beyond the conventional, sometimes even distant from our natural comfort zones, either by doctrine or generational conflict.
This challenge also sparks opportunity, as it enables countries to form programs to protect their critical infrastructure and sensitive data by encouraging unique solutions, using complementary and controlled partnerships when necessary. This can foster the digital economy and technology of the future.
To make it happen, however, a fundamental change to the definition of “defense” is necessary. If we consider the defense realm to be exclusive to the military, these advancements will be limited. The most obvious vector of the defense environment is certainly the military, but the requirements of the post-pandemic world are larger.
The public and private sectors must be coordinated. The integrated efforts of various companies are necessary for supporting the implementation of a cyber protection program. Universities and research centers will also be necessary for fostering knowledge and developing critical thinking throughout countries.
Nations usually define their defense investment priorities based on military policies and geopolitical strategies — considering eventual threats or interests. They should defend their convictions, territory and population.
The defense industry must interact with the world in general, either regionally or globally. Even if we imagine a less globalized world following the pandemic, defense challenges are increasingly global.
Outlining regional defense visions and coordinating scientific and technological efforts — involving public and private agents — around the same strategic purpose can ensure the sustainability of our defense industry.
Jackson Schneider is the president and CEO of Embraer's Defense and Security division. This essay was first published for Forte de Copacabana 2020.
September 20, 2021 | International, Land
If an assault rifle augmentation system from Elbit Systems works as advertised, special operations troops or dismounted infantry could gain the ability to shoot around corners or fire from the hip with no loss of accuracy.
April 8, 2020 | International, Land
By: Sebastian Sprenger COLOGNE, Germany — Estonia, Latvia and Finland have signed a technical agreement for a jointly developed armored vehicle, with Estonia touting the plans as a means to jump-start the defense industry and maintain its security posture following the global coronavirus crisis. The new pact enables Estonia to continue its participation in the tri-national effort to scope out requirements for the “potential” procurement of a fleet of armored vehicles featuring common components, the Estonian Defence Ministry wrote in a statement. "We have to keep in mind that our primary goal here is to develop a platform that meets the requirements of Estonian Defence Forces with a favorable price,” Kristikan Prikk, permanent secretary at the ministry, was quoted as saying in the statement. “We see big potential in this project, especially as we are involved already in the development phase, which is the best way to secure that eventually we will have equipment that meets our needs.” The technical arrangement, inked on Monday, follows a letter of intent signed in December that laid out the broader parameters for the joint project. Estonia aims to replace its 140 Pasi armored vehicles, made by Finland's Patria and first fielded in the 1980s. The fleet is expected to reach the end of its useful life in 2024, according to the Defence Ministry. Initial results toward developing a prototype for a new vehicle are planned for this year, according to officials. “It is important for us that international defense cooperation, which has a very clear economic dimension, continues,” Prikk said. “In the current crisis, it is also crucial that we continue to strengthen our defense capability and, if possible, lay the foundation for creating new jobs or maintaining existing ones in the Estonian defense industry sector.” Estonia shares a border with Russia, as do the other two program members Finland and Latvia. Those countries have been nervous about the possibility of Russian military adventurism along its borders with the West. And with the COVID-19 pandemic wreaking havoc on national economies and testing international alliances, some issue experts believe there could be more reason to worry when the dust settles. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/04/07/three-of-russias-european-neighbors-push-for-joint-armored-vehicle/
June 30, 2020 | International, Aerospace
By Jon Harper Market opportunities for the Army's helicopter fleet will average about $10 billion per year over the next decade as the service modernizes its rotary-wing assets, according to analysts. The current inventory includes UH-60 Black Hawk utility helicopters, AH-46 Apache attack helicopters, CH-47 Chinook heavy-lift helicopters and UH-72 Lakota light utility helicopters. All but the Lakota are still in production today. Meanwhile, future vertical lift is one of the Army's top three modernization priorities, and it is pursuing two new aircraft: an armed scout platform known as the future attack reconnaissance aircraft, or FARA, and the future long-range assault aircraft, or FLRAA. “The Army's effort to develop and field the next generation of vertical lift aircraft ... will have significant implications for the industrial base,” defense analysts Andrew Hunter and Rhys McCormick wrote in a recent report for the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “Projections show that although there will be a drop-off in the procurement of legacy aircraft in the mid-2020s as FARA and FLRAA full-rate production starts to ramp up, there is still a roughly $8 billion to $10 billion annual addressable Army vertical lift market over the next decade,” they said in the report titled, “Assessing the Industrial Base Implications of the Army's Future Vertical Lift Plans.” FLRAA has an estimated program value of $40 billion, while FARA could be worth about $20 billion. In March, the Army announced it had selected Bell and a Sikorsky-Boeing team for the FLRAA competitive demonstration and risk reduction effort. The winner of that phase is expected to be selected in fiscal year 2022. The service also picked Bell and Sikorsky to continue on in the competition for the future attack reconnaissance aircraft. A “flyoff” for the FARA competition is scheduled for fiscal year 2023, with a production decision expected in fiscal year 2024. Both the FARA and FLRAA platforms are slated to enter production later this decade. Meanwhile, operation and sustainment costs will remain the largest source of Army vertical lift spending over the next 10 years, according to the CSIS report. “There's going to be opportunity [for industry] in kind of the aftermarket side because even as you start to produce the new aircraft, there will still be the enduring platforms that are out” operating as next-generation helicopters come online, said Patrick Mason, head of Army program executive office aviation. “We will still need spares and certain things done within the aftermarket side as this transition would occur,” he added during a recent press briefing. “That drives so much of the supply chain.” Some observers have questioned whether the Army will have enough money to buy high-ticket FARA and FLRAA platforms at the same time given future budget projections. There is also the risk that the programs might go off the rails. “FVL isn't the only game in town, but it is by far the biggest,” Loren Thompson, a defense industry consultant and chief operating officer of the Lexington Institute think tank, wrote in a recent op-ed for Forbes. “If production of legacy rotorcraft ceases to make room for new ones and then FVL fails to deliver, industry might not have enough cash flow to sustain essential skills and suppliers.” Hunter said problems with the future vertical lift initiatives would upend the CSIS market projections. “If you were to take one of those programs out of the equation, that changes the addressable market in two significant ways,” he said. “One is, it shrinks it obviously by pulling out ... multiple billion dollars of investment throughout the 10-year window that we looked at. The other effect that it has is it reduces the competitive opportunity for industry. Right now, you know you've got multiple companies gunning for two aircraft. And even if you went down to one [program] and you were still competing, that's much less opportunity for industry to win in that scenario.” https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2020/6/29/army-helo-market-pegged-at-$10-billion