Greece Approves $14B 5Yr Modernization Plan, to Receive Rafales in Mid-2021

On the same subject

• 

  September 29, 2024 | International, C4ISR

  RTXs Raytheon completes first AN/TPY-2 radar for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

  This is the first AN/TPY-2 radar with a complete Gallium Nitride, or GaN, populated array in the system

• 

  September 29, 2020 | International, Aerospace

  KC-46 Progress Revives Next-Generation Tanker Talks

  Steve Trimble Proposals for a next-generation tanker that would come after the last Boeing KC-46 delivery in fiscal 2029 have popped up every few years since 2006, only to get sidetracked by yet another acquisition process misstep or technical problem afflicting the program's frustrating development phase. As a fresh sense of optimism gathers among senior U.S. Air Force leaders about the direction of the KC-46 program, a new discussion has started between Defense Department officials and the Air Mobility Command (AMC) about the future of the air-refueling mission. Some proposals in the discussions include revived versions of various older concepts for weaponized larger tankers and smaller stealth tankers. But this time, discussions involve taking a wider view of the overall need to defend and deliver fuel to aircraft in combat, with implications for base defenses, the size and range of future fighters and next-generation tanker designs. A perceived turnaround in the fortunes of the KC-46 program allows the Air Force to reopen the next-generation discussion. Since at least 2016, a heated dispute over Boeing's original design—and, later, proposed fixes—for the KC-46's remote vision system (RVS) sidetracked planning for a next-generation tanker. Air Force officials complained that Boeing's original RVS design fell short of operator requirements, especially when the receiver aircraft was backlit by the Sun. In addition, the canted layout of the belly-mounted, panoramic cameras created subtle distortions in the displayed video that proved bothersome to some RVS operators, Air Force officials say. The Air Force and Boeing finally agreed to a redesign plan in January 2019. The Air Force is finalizing a test report on an enhanced RVS, which was formerly known as RVS 1.5. AMC officials have committed to review the test data but offered no promises on whether they would approve the enhanced RVS to be installed in the KC-46. The installation would require parking a fleet of more than 36 delivered KC-46s to complete the retrofit, and the AMC remains unsure whether the improvement is worth the delay. The enhanced RVS offers only software updates to the current system, but the AMC clearly wants more. Boeing has committed to a more dramatic upgrade called RVS 2.0. Including hardware and software changes, this Boeing-funded, second-generation RVS system is expected to meet the image-resolution standards demanded by the Air Force and create a path to inserting the software algorithms necessary to give the KC-46 an optional autonomous-refueling mode. Boeing is scheduled to deliver the first 12 RVS 2.0 shipsets by the end of 2023 and begin the retrofit process on delivered KC-46s, says Gen. Jacqueline Van Ovost, the AMC commander. The AMC expects a production cutin for RVS 2.0 starting in 2024, although Boeing's KC-46 global sales and marketing director, Mike Hafer, says the first RVS 2.0-equipped aircraft could start rolling off the assembly line in late 2023. Will Roper, the Air Force's assistant secretary for acquisition, technology and logistics, says the progress toward fielding the RVS 2.0 makes him feel “excited” about the KC-46 program. “I think we've turned a new page,” he says. In mid-September, Roper and Van Ovost met to discuss what will follow the KC-46. The next-generation tanker discussion comes after a series of dramatic acquisition decisions surrounding Air Force aircraft. Most visibly, Roper led a push in 2018 to cancel the Joint Stars recapitalization program, which was replaced with the Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS). More quietly, Roper also drove the Air Force to rethink the acquisition strategy for the Next-Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) program. The ABMS and NGAD are now characterized by an architecture of multiple systems, with no single-aircraft silver bullet solution. Roper acknowledges that the nature of tanker operations does not immediately lend itself to a distributed multiplatform solution. “We can break up a J-Stars [replacement into multiple systems],” Roper says. “We may be able to break up an [E-3 Airborne Warning and Control System] in the future, but we can't break up fuel easily.” Still, Roper prefers to address the future air-refueling problem in an era of great power competition with a similar architectural approach as ABMS and NGAD. “When there's a solvable problem and you need to turn multiple knobs, the Pentagon likes to turn one and only one,” Roper says. “And [aerial refueling] sounds like a really good architectural question that you'd want to have an architected solution for—[rather than] design a one-solution candidate in the form of a platform.” Roper's turnable knobs for a future air-refueling system cover a wide range of options, including two with only indirect impacts on a tanker aircraft design. To Roper, the problem of air refueling includes defending the bases closest to an adversary where aircraft can be refueled on the ground. Likewise, another part of the solution is to move away from relatively small fighter aircraft that lack sufficient range for a Pacific theater scenario. “Maybe having small, currently sized fighters is not the way to go in the future,” Roper says. “Thinking about bigger fighters is a natural question to lay alongside the question, ‘How does your future tanker force look?'” Air-refueling capacity also is partly a function of the vulnerability of the tanker aircraft. Fewer and perhaps smaller tankers may be possible if existing tanker aircraft could operate closer to the battlefield. The Air Force now uses fighters on combat air patrols to defend high-value assets, such as tankers, surveillance and command-and-control aircraft. Those fighters conducting the patrols also add to the refueling burden. A possible solution is to weaponize tankers such as the KC-46 and KC-135. The Air Force is developing podded defensive lasers and miniature self-defense munitions. “We don't put weapons and sensors on tankers to shoot down aircraft, but the current KC-46 is a big airplane with the ability to mount sensors and weapons on the wings,” Roper says. “We're going to look at all those [options].” The Air Force also believes a new tanker aircraft is necessary. As far back as 2002, research began on stealthy mobility aircraft under the Air Force Research Laboratory's Speed Agile program. As the KC-X acquisition program kicked off, the Air Force released a tanker road map in 2006 that called for launching a KC-Y acquisition program in 2022 and a KC-Z program by 2035. By 2016, AMC leaders openly discussed proposals for leapfrogging the KC-Y requirement, which sought to buy a larger version of a commercial derivative. Instead, AMC officials began investigating concepts for an autonomous stealthy aircraft. By 2018, Lockheed Martin's Skunk Works had defined a concept for such an aircraft, which featured an undisclosed refueling technology that could dock with a receiver aircraft without compromising radar stealth. As discussions have reopened in September, the Air Force is again considering the acquisition of a mix of larger and smaller aircraft to fulfill the demand for in-flight refueling in the 2030s and 2040s. “One trade we can do is having bigger tankers that stand off a lot farther,” Roper says, “[and] having smaller, microtankers that do that last mile, the dangerous mile—and we expect to lose some of them.” The Air Force's budget justification documents suggest research on a next-generation tanker will continue at a low level: Nearly $8 million was requested in fiscal 2021 to “assess promising configurations in high- and low-speed wind tunnels.” The Air Force also is designing a small, pod-mounted tactical air-refueling boom, according to budget documents. The latter suggests that one option for increasing refueling capacity for aircraft equipped with boom receivers is to integrate a podded fuel-delivery system on tactical aircraft, such as a Lockheed Martin C-130. “I expect that as we really look at airpower in the truly contested environment, we'll be looking at fuel very strategically,” Roper says. “We may have a different solution for outside [a threat area] versus inside. And I think we will value, increasingly, aircraft that have range for the last mile.” https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/aircraft-propulsion/kc-46-progress-revives-next-generation-tanker-talks

• 

  May 8, 2020 | International, Aerospace

  COVID Can’t Stop A Busy Summer For Army FVL

  Despite disruptions worldwide, Future Vertical Lift flight tests, virtual industry days, and design reviews are all moving ahead on schedule or mere weeks behind. By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR.on May 07, 2020 at 5:07 PM WASHINGTON: As the Army urgently develops weapons to counter Russia and China, it's largely staying on its tight schedule despite both the COVID-19 pandemic and the service's own history of dysfunction and delay. A prime example is the Future Vertical Lift initiative to replace existing helicopters and drones, which is on track for all but two of more than 20 major events – from field tests to contract awards – happening this year. Half a dozen are scheduled for May and June alone. What's the biggest impact COVID has had on FVL so far? Of the five project managers who spoke to reporters this morning, just one said he's definitely delaying something, a Critical Design Review for the new Improved Turbine Engine. How big was that delay? Just two weeks. The engine system CDR will start June 15th instead of June 1st, said the turbine PM, Col. Roger Kuykendall. But the deadline to complete the review wasn't until October, he went on, “so we're actually still ahead of our schedule.” The other major impact has been on combat units field-testing potential Future Tactical Unmanned Aerial System drones, but that's still in flux, said the unmanned aircraft PM, Col. Scott Anderson. Masked soldiers began flying one contending design, the Arcturus JUMP-20, began at Fort Riley a month ago. The second test unit, at Fort Campbell, started flying a different contender last week, as planned, Col. Anderson said. The third unit, at Fort Lewis, was scheduled to start in June: “The had asked to move back to July,” he said, “but it looks like, as of this morning, they're going to maybe try to come back to June.” That the FTUAS field tests are happening mostly on schedule is particularly remarkable, because it takes a team of soldiers to operate and maintain the drones, and they can't maintain social distancing all the time. Most of the other FVL projects are in different stages of development where schedules, while packed, are full of activities that are a lot easier to do online, like planning sessions and digital design. But even where physical objects have to be built or flown, the project managers stay they're staying on schedule. For the Future Long-Range Assault Aircraft to replace the Reagan-era UH-60 Black Hawk, PM Col. David Phillips said, “our demonstrators are continuing to fly.” Those are the Bell V-280 Valor tiltrotor and the Sikorsky-Boeing SB>1 Defiant compound helicopter, which despite the term of art “demonstrator” are de facto prototypes. The companies are now refining their designs and, in 2022, the Army will choose one for mass production. While Phillips didn't provide details like flight hours – the Defiant has had a lot fewer so far – he said both aircraft are still providing test data to mature key technologies like flight controls. FLRAA's smaller sister is the Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft, a light scout to replace the retired OH-58 Kiowa. Once again it's Bell and Sikorsky competing, but for FARA they haven't built the prototypes yet. Those are set to fly in 2023. (That said, Sikorsky's existing S-97 Raider is very close to their FARA design). Most of the work this year is being spent on digital design, said the FARA PM, Col. Gregory Fortier, but that should finish by December, so preparations to build the physical prototypes do have to get underway now. “We have currently seen no impact, [but] there are certainly concerns within Bell and Sikorsky about long lead materials and shipping and the [subcontractors] at the second and third tier,” Col Fortier said. “They are okay with the summer timeframe and into the fall,” Fortier said. “If this thing stretches six months to a year, then that's a different conversation.” The FARA scout, FLRAA transport, and future drones will all have as many components in common as possible, especially electronics, and need to seamlessly share both tactical and maintenance data. To make this happen, they're being designed to a common set of technical standards known as the Modular Open System Architecture, allowing the Army to plug-and-play MOSA-compliant components from any company for both maintenance and upgrades. While existing Army aircraft can't be retrofitted with the complete open architecture, the Army plans to upgrade them with a mini-MOSA called the Aviation Mission Common Server. AMCS will both provide some of the benefits of open architecture to the current fleet and real-world experience to help build the future system. AMCS, too, remains on schedule, the project manager said. “We are currently on track to award an OTA [Other Transaction Authority contract] in June 2020 and negotiations are currently ongoing,” Col. Johnathan Frasier said. The Schedule To Stay On Future Vertical Lift is doing a lot this year. Here's a list of most – not all – of the things they've accomplished so far and what they aim to do. A startling amount of it is due in June. Modular Open Systems Architecture (involves multiple project managers) April: Over 300 government and industry participants joined in a virtual meeting of the Architecture Collaboration Working Group fleshing out MOSA. June: A follow-on ACWG meeting is scheduled. The Army will award an Other Transaction Authority (OTA) contract for the Aviation Mission Common Server (AMCS). Engine & Electrical (PM: Col. Roger Kuykendal) May-June: Tentative date for an industry day on electrical systems, including batteries, generators, Auxiliary Power Units (APUs), and thermal management (i.e. cooling). June 15-19: Critical Design Review for the integrated engine system. October: Power management systems demonstration, conducted with the Army C5ISR center. Fall: Improved Turbine Engine testing begins. Future Long-Range Assault Aircraft (PM: Col. David Phillips) March 17: The Army awarded Bell and the Sikorsky-Boeing team contracts for Competitive Demonstration & Risk Reduction (CDRR) of their rival FLRAA designs. June: FLRAA and FARA will hold a joint industry day – virtually, of course – on their shared mission systems. And the FLRAA competitors will deliver conceptual designs to help shape the program's final requirements. Fall: Those FLRAA requirements will come up for review by the Army Requirements Oversight Council (AROC), a high-level body usually chaired by either the four-star boss of Army Futures Command or even the Army Chief of Staff himself. Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft (PM: Col. Gregory Fortier) March 25: The Army picked Bell and Sikorsky to build competing prototypes. May 15: Industry responses are due for a formal Request For Information (RFI) on FARA mission systems. June: FLRAA and FARA hold their joint industry day on shared mission systems. Boston Consulting Group will deliver the first of two studies on FARA-specific mission systems. Summer (month not specified): Deloitte will deliver the second FARA mission systems study. Sikorsky and Bell will both go through Preliminary Design Review. December: Sikorsky and Bell will submit their final designs. With those approved, they'll begin building the actual prototypes. Unmanned Aircraft Systems (PM: Col. Scott Anderson) April: The first FTUAS contender began field testing (formally “demonstrations”) at Fort Riley, Kan. May: The second FTUAS contender began field testing at Fort Campbell, Ken. May-June: This is the likely window for the Army to award three Other Transaction Authority contracts for the mini-drones known as Air-Launched Effects (ALE). June-July: Third FTUAS contender begins testing at Fort Lewis, Wash. July: Fourth contender begins testing at Fort Bliss, Tex. August-September: A fifth unit begins testing at Fort Bragg, NC. There are only four different designs being studied, so this brigade will double up on of the designs already in testing. Fall: The Army Requirements Oversight Council will review the final requirement for FTUAS – which will be based on how the contenders actually performed – as well as requirements for a highly automated Scalable Control Interface (SCI) for all future drones. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/05/covid-cant-stop-a-busy-summer-for-army-fvl