Back to news

May 22, 2019 | International, Aerospace

Extension de durée de vie pour les Super Hornet de l'US Navy

Par Emmanuel Huberdeau

Boeing a entamé le chantier d'extension de la durée de vie des Super Hornet de l'US Navy. A partir de 2021, les appareils seront aussi portés au standard Block III.

Sept chasseurs F/A-18E/F Super Hornet de l'US Navy sont actuellement alignés dans le nouveau hall de l'usine de Boeing à Saint Louis consacré au chantier d'extension de durée de vie de ces appareils. Il s'agit des premiers avions à bénéficier de cette rénovation. L'ensemble de la flotte de Super Hornet de l'US Navy va voir sa durée de vie portée de 6 000 à 10 000 heures de vol. L'US Navy prévoit de réaliser en moyenne 200 heures de vol par appareil par an.

Le prolongement de la durée de vie du Super Hornet se fait en 18 mois pour les premiers appareils puis durera 12 mois à mesure que le processus sera mieux maitrisé. Boeing va inauguré une seconde chaine de modification du Super Hornet à San Antonio. Au total 40 avions pourront être modifiés chaque années. Au total près de 550 Super Hornet subiront ce chantier.

A partir de 2021 Boeing commencera à livrer les 76 Super Hornet Block III neufs commandés par l'US Navy. Les Super Hornet Block II seront aussi tous modernisés au standard Block III. La modernisation se déroulera en parallèle du chantier d'extension de durée de vie.

Les Super Hornet Block III seront équipés de réservoirs conformes, d'un système de communication par satellite, de la liaison de données TTNT, d'un écran tactile unique dans le cockpit (ACS) et du capteur optronique IRST.

http://www.air-cosmos.com/extension-de-duree-de-vie-pour-les-super-hornet-de-l-us-navy-123543

On the same subject

  • US Air Force delays full-rate production decision for KC-46 aircraft

    June 10, 2020 | International, Aerospace

    US Air Force delays full-rate production decision for KC-46 aircraft

    By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — The U.S. Air Force will delay a full-rate production milestone for the KC-46 aerial refueling tanker to the end of fiscal 2024 to correspond with a fix for one of the aircraft's key systems, the service announced late Monday. The Pentagon's independent weapons tester — Director of Operational Test and Evaluation Robert Behler — intends to conclude operational testing of the KC-46 only after prime contractor Boeing fixes the tanker's critical deficiencies and has finalized its production configuration. “Accordingly, the Air Force will defer the KC-46 full rate production decision until after the completion of [initial operational test and evaluation], and the receipt of the statutorily-required Beyond Low Rate Initial Production report from [Behler],” the Air Force said in a statement. The KC-46 program has several remaining category 1 deficiencies, the term used by the Pentagon to describe the most serious form of technical problems. Two of the deficiencies involve the aircraft's remote vision system, which is a series of cameras and sensors used by the boom operator to see outside the KC-46 and refuel other aircraft. The Air Force has contended that the RVS does not properly function in all weather and lighting conditions; the service has refused to deploy the KC-46 until the problem is fixed. Boeing in April agreed to completely redesign the system on its own dime, which will take until at least 2023. One other issue involves the KC-46 boom, which was developed to meet NATO-specific requirements but cannot refuel the A-10 aircraft. The Air Force is paying to redesign the boom actuator, as the service signed off on the original design and did not realize until afterward that it did not meet the specifications needed to refuel the A-10. In March, the Air Force announced an additional category 1 deficiency after maintainers found fuel leaking between the tanker's primary and secondary fuel protection barriers. It is unclear whether this is still a problem, as Boeing had already developed a fix and began retrofitting aircraft when the issue was revealed. “Given its confidence in deficiency resolution timelines for both the aerial refueling boom and Remote Vision System, the Air Force is rescheduling the KC-46's Full Rate Production Decision milestone to late Fiscal Year 2024,” the service stated. The Air Force notes that delaying the full-rate production decision will not affect the program's cost — which is locked into place courtesy of a firm, fixed-price deal with Boeing that holds the contractor financially responsible for cost overruns;nor will it cause the service to alter its current delivery schedule. Boeing is already producing KC-46s at “full rate,” which for the program is 15 tankers per year. It delivered the first KC-46 to McConnell Air Force Base, Kansas, in January 2019. Since then, Altus Air Force Base, Oklahoma, and Pease Air National Guard Base, New Hampshire, have also taken on new KC-46s. Boeing is set to produce 179 KC-46s over the program of record. The company has racked up cost overruns of about $4.6 billion in excess of the $4.9 billion contract it was awarded in 2011. https://www.defensenews.com/air/2020/06/09/the-air-force-delays-a-full-rate-production-decision-for-the-kc-46/

  • Trump admin officially makes it easier to export military drones

    July 27, 2020 | International, Aerospace

    Trump admin officially makes it easier to export military drones

    By: Aaron Mehta and Valerie Insinna   This is a developing story. Stay tuned for updates. WASHINGTON — The U.S. State Department has officially loosened restrictions on exporting military-grade unmanned aerial vehicles to foreign nations, a move long sought by the defense industry. Under a new policy announced Friday, unmanned aerial systems that fly at speeds below 800 kph will no longer be subject to the “presumption of denial” that, in effect, blocked most international sales of drones such as the MQ-9 Reaper and the RQ-4 Global Hawk. R. Clarke Cooper, the assistant secretary bureau of political-military affairs, announced a change to how the United States interprets the Missile Technology Control Regime, or MTCR, Friday. News that the change was imminent, and that it would focus on reinterpreting the regulations with a focus on speed, was first reported Thursday by Defense News. The U.S. government's interpretation of the export controls had led to a blanket denial of most countries' requests to buy “category-1” systems capable of carrying 500-kilogram payloads for more than 300 kilometers. Instead of having a “presumption of denial” for those drones, where export officials needed special circumstances to allow the sale of the drones, the new guidance would mean those officials would now consider proposed sales using the same criteria as they do for other military exports. Cooper stressed that the UAVs covere includes “no risk for weapons of mass destruction delivery. Higher-speed systems such as cruise missiles, hypersonic aerial vehicles, and advanced unmanned combat aerial vehicles are not affected by this revision.” The regulations were primarily introduced to regulate the sale of cruise missiles abroad, but the interpretation also covers certain unmanned vehicles. The United States has been exploring a change in how to interpret the MTCR for some time, with discussions centered around the “presumption of denial” clause for category-1 UAVs. Speaking at the Hudson Institute shortly after Cooper's remarks, Assistant Secretary for International Security and Nonproliferation Chris Ford stressed said the administration plans to keep pushing other nations in the agreement to come to a similar stance, but that “the United States is not willing to let U.S. interests be forever held hostage” by international decision makers. Ford also said that there is a specific member of the MTCR “seems to have prioritized reflexive opposition to anything the United States proposes,” and would block any potential changes. Although not listed by name, Ford later indicated he was talking about Russia. In a statement, Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, called the move a “reckless decision” that makes it “more likely that we will export some of our deadliest weaponry to human rights abusers across the world.” Menendez has been central in trying to block arms sales to Saudi Arabia over human rights concerns. Industry impact The decision primarily opens up sales opportunities for General Atomics and Northrop Grumman, which manufacture multiple slow-moving UAS impacted by the presumption of denial clause. Most medium-altitude, long-endurance systems like General Atomics' MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper fly at slow speeds, with the Reaper clocking in with a cruise speed of 230 mph, or 370 kph, according to an Air Force fact sheet. Northrop Grumman's RQ-4 Global Hawk, a high-altitude drone used for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, flies at a cruise speed of about 357 mph, or 575 kph. Immediately after the announcement, both companies issued statement heralding the change. “It is critical for our national security that our export policies continue to keep pace with the rapid evolution of technology and support collaboration with our allies,” said Northrop Grumman spokesman Tim Paynter. He pointed to the company's MQ-8 Fire Scout as another UAS that could be more widely exported as a result of the new interpretation. In addition, Niki Johnson, General Atomic's vice president for government affairs and strategic communications, said “We welcome the changes announced today that will alter the treatment of General Atomics' UAS under U.S. export policy. We look forward to this announcement leading to approvals for sales to a larger portion of the international market.” Ford declined to speculate about how much money may trade hands as a result of the change, aside from broadly saying he expects it will have a “ripple effect” for countries who may be on the market for unmanned systems. While broadly seen by the defense industry as a positive step forward, one industry source expressed concerns that the changes announced Friday could ultimately be toothless. In April 2018, the Trump administration announced a number of policy reforms aimed at speeding up the sales process, such as allowing certain UAS to be exported via the Direct Commercial Sales process as opposed to the more laborious Foreign Military Sales process. But those changes did not have the intended consequences, the industry official said. “Implementation of the 2018 policy was very slow. It did not actually lead to that many new approvals in terms of countries that we can export to. So while we think this change will help us overcome the MTCR question during the policy review process, we still think that there is a higher hurdle for UAS within the conventional arms transfer policy ordeal,” the source said. Companies could still hit “brick walls” within the normal State Department arms sale process if, for instance, the department finds that drone sales negatively alter the military balance among countries in a given region. “The question for us is: Does this lead to policy approvals that allow us to go sell?” the source said. This person added that if sales do not immediately begin to move forward, it's possible that — should former Vice President Joe Biden win the presidential election in November — the incoming Democratic administration could roll back the MTCR interpretation changes. During a phone call with reporters, Cooper stressed that the change in policy will not result in a blanket approval for all UAS sales. “It is case by case,” he said. “It's not just a matter of addressing the [MTCR] requirement, because while UAS systems vary widely in their sophistication and application, it's incumbent upon the United States that we ensure that the systems we sell are used responsibly and will not threaten our interest or those of our allies.” Rachel Stohl, vice president for defense issues at the Stimson Center, called the unilateral decision by the White House “yet another affront to international agreements and global arms controls.” “Let me be clear: A presumption of denial is not a ‘no,' ” Stohl said. “It just means you have to work a little harder to get to ‘yes' and ensure that a lethal system that can change the nature of conflict, has raised serious questions and concerns about the legitimacy, legality, and strategic efficacy of their use, and has demonstrably impacted civilian lives is in the best interest of the United States. “Once again, the Trump administration is focused on short-term economic gain rather than medium- to long-term security and foreign policy interests.” But Michael Horowitz, a professor and director of the Perry World House at the University of Pennsylvania, argues that the change is long overdue. “Treating uninhabited aircraft as missiles for export policy purposes doesn't work,” Horowitz said. “It has allowed China to capture a significant chunk of the drone export market, including with U.S. allies and partners.” However, Horowitz added that the decision to focus on speed may miss the big picture. “Rather than simply treating uninhabited aircraft as aircraft for export purposes, the new policy creates a speed test that addresses issues for current platforms,” he said. “Depending on implementation, this could be a policy improvement, but it could also lead to issues down the road as the uninhabited aircraft category evolves.” https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2020/07/24/us-state-department-officially-makes-it-easier-to-export-military-drones/

  • Two steps President Trump could take now to secure missile defense improvements

    September 25, 2020 | International, C4ISR, Security, Other Defence

    Two steps President Trump could take now to secure missile defense improvements

    Trey Obering and Rebeccah Heinrichs In his acceptance speech for the Republican presidential nomination, President Donald Trump said that in a second term, “We will win the race to 5G, and build the world's best cyber and missile defense.” On the last issue — missile defense — there are actions President Trump can and should take now, with only a few weeks left until election day, to make necessary improvements. First, reverse the Pentagon's decision to give more authority over the Missile Defense Agency to the office of cost assessment and program evaluation (CAPE) while creating more bureaucratic oversight. These moves will create more obstacles to thwart the President's agenda and will drastically slow MDA's ability to develop and field missile defense capabilities to meet rapidly emerging threats. We understand fully the intent to reduce risk in acquisitions, but the purpose of the MDA is to conduct research and development and deliver new and ever-evolving effective defensive systems for the protection of the American people. We must prioritize speed over risk-aversion. Secondly, the President can announce that the United States is moving forward with site preparation for at least one additional homeland interceptor site. The Trump Administration's 2019 Missile Defense Review stated that such a site would protect against future Iranian threats; since the Pentagon released this policy document Iran has only improved its missile program. Especially concerning was the successful satellite launch conducted by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) in April of this year. Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. John Hyten said the launch vehicle had traveled, “a very long way, which means it has the ability once again to threaten their neighbors, their allies, and we want to make sure they can never threaten the United States.” These developments put more pressure on the United States to make moves in the near term to bolster full coverage of the U.S. homeland. Environmental Impact Studies have already been concluded and military installations in New York, Ohio, and Michigan have been chosen as potential hosts for a third homeland missile defense site. Any of those sites would offer a “shoot-look-shoot” capability when considering the geometry of a potential missile attack from Iran. It might also make sense to pick two sites, perhaps putting a few interceptors in Ohio and in Michigan. If President Trump does decide to move forward with site preparation for an additional homeland interceptor site or sites, he would not need to decide immediately about the kind of interceptor to emplace, whether Next Generation Interceptors (NGIs) or Ground-Based Interceptors. Site preparation can take several years to complete and should not take away investments from development of the NGI, which promises to add significant capability to homeland defense. Either interceptor could be emplaced at the new site. If NGI matures and is ready for deployment by the Pentagon's stated goal of 2027, then the additional location could be home to a few of the interceptors. The threat from Iranian missiles are not the only ones putting pressure on the homeland defense systems. The Trump administration has used a combination of economic pressure, military threats, and talks to pressure North Korea into ending its missile program, but North Korea has not made the decision to forgo its nuclear missile program. Although Kim Jong-un has responded by holding off on further long-range missile tests, he has resumed shorter-range tests, and there is reason to believe Kim has not slowed down his efforts to improve his longer-range missile program. Moreover, North Korea remains a serious missile and illicit arms proliferator and a senior U.S. official recently expressed concern about cooperation between North Korea and Iran on long-range missile development. It would be a mistake to slow down homeland missile defense because the North Korean leader has promised to disarm while showing no real signs of doing so. The Pentagon is wrapping up its budget submission for the next fiscal year, and whoever wins in November will determine the budget's final form. Regardless, the United States must carefully ensure that even as we push ahead to evolve the system, we cannot neglect the defense of the American people against the threats that are here today. If the United States is going to have an effective, cutting edge missile defense architecture to balance near and evolving threats and to adapt as the threats dictate, the MDA must remain agile, and it must have the funding to improve and sustain current programs while investing in advanced technologies to stay ahead of the evolving threat. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/09/24/two-steps-president-trump-could-take-now-to-secure-missile-defense-improvements/

All news