Lockheed’s Raider X enters construction in advance of US Army’s decision on way forward

On the same subject

• 

  August 6, 2019 | International, Aerospace

  F-35 talks to US Army’s missile command system, says Lockheed

  By: Jen Judson HUNTSVILLE, Alabama — The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter demonstrated its ability to send data to the U.S. Army's Integrated Air and Missile Defense Battle Command System during the Orange Flag Evaluation 19-2 at Palmdale, California, and Fort Bliss, Texas, in June. F-35 manufacturer Lockheed Martin announced in an Aug. 6 statement that the jet, in a live demonstration, sent track data to the IBCS through the F-35 ground station and “F-35-IBCS adaptation kit.” The Northrop Grumman-developed IBCS was able to “receive and develop fire control quality composite tracks during the exercise, leveraging the F-35 as an elevated sensor," the statement added. The capability is seen as important in multidomain operations because it would be able to detect threats that are tough for ground-based sensors alone to pick up. “This demonstration represents a significant growth in capability for the Army IAMD program and Army for multi-domain operations. The capability creates additional battlespace awareness, and the ability to track incoming targets and take action, if necessary,” Scott Arnold, Lockheed's deputy of integrated air and missile defense, said in the statement. “The F-35, with its advanced sensors and connectivity, is able to gather and seamlessly share critical information, enabling greater joint force protection and a higher level of lethality of Army IAMD forces.” But the demonstration isn't only about the F-35′s ability to contribute as a sensor in the air and missile defense architecture, but also about the IBCS' ability to bring in sensor data from a variety of platforms. The IBCS was originally developed as the brains of the Army's future air and missile defense system, but its potential mission continues to grow as the service works to tie other sensors to IBCS to create a layered defense. The service is also working to tie in radars and sensors for its Indirect Fire Protection Capability as well as its Maneuver Short-Range Air Defense system. The idea now is for the IBCS to tie into any sensor or shooter the Army brings into its framework. The F-35 ground station has been sent to White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico, to continue F-35 integration testing during IAMD developmental testing. The Army's IBCS program experienced delays as it added capabilities to its defensive framework to protect against everything from ballistic missiles and cruise missiles to unmanned aircraft to rockets, artillery and mortars. But it is now the top priority for the Army's cross-functional team dedicated to air and missile defense. The team is tasked with modernizing capabilities under Army Futures Command. IBCS will undergo a limited user test next spring ahead of a production decision in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2020. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2019/08/06/f-35-talks-to-army-missile-command-system/

• 

  April 21, 2020 | International, Aerospace

  Is the Air Force’s Advanced Battle Management System program gearing up to be the next major acquisition failure?

  Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — Since Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Dave Goldfein took over as the service's top general in 2016, the Air Force has made figuring out how to connect its weapons with those of the Army, Navy and Marine Corps its biggest priority. The Air Force is set to have spent $300 million on the Advanced Battle Management System through fiscal year 2021. However, the service is still struggling to define what ABMS needs to do and how much it will cost, the Government Accountability Office said in a report released April 16. "The Air Force has not established a plan or business case for ABMS that identifies its requirements, a plan to attain mature technologies when needed, a cost estimate, and an affordability analysis. ... To date, the Air Force has not identified a development schedule for ABMS, and it has not formally documented requirements,” it read. That could have significant consequences for the program down the road, GAO continued: “GAO's previous work has shown that weapon systems without a sound business case are at greater risk for schedule delays, cost growth, and integration issues.” The GAO made four recommendations: create a cost estimate and a plan laying out how to afford the program, formalize the decision-making authorities of those involved in ABMS, and develop a list of technologies that are expected to fit into the initial system. In a response to the report, Kevin Fahey, the assistant secretary of defense for acquisition, concurred with all four recommendations — a sign that, going forward, the Air Force may be required to solidify more of its ABMS plans. The Air Force has maintained that the program's unconventional structure and methodology is a feature, not a bug. It wants to use a series of experiments to help discover and mature new technologies that can be weaved in alongside legacy platforms. For instance, the first ABMS experiment connected SpaceX's Starlink constellation with an AC-130 gunship, and the next demo will employ a Kratos Valkyrie drone carrying communications gear that enables the F-22 and F-35 to securely share data while allowing them to maintain stealth. Air Force officials have said technologies that are proven to be successful and mature during the experiments could become programs of record inside the ABMS family of systems. However, the Air Force does not seem to have a firm plan for what technologies it needs and when to bring them online, the GAO said. The service has identified 28 development areas that includes a new cloud network, a new common radio, and apps that provide different ways of presenting and fusing data. However, none of those areas are linked to specific technical requirements, and the Air Force hasn't explained what organizations are responsible for the development of those products. In one damning section, GAO compared ABMS with several cancelled programs with similar aims, such as the Army's Future Combat Systems program that sought to field a family of manned and unmanned technologies and the Joint Tactical Radio System, which was intended to create a government-owned software defined radio. These programs publicly flamed out after millions of dollars were spent in development, in part because certain technologies were not mature enough and caused the schedule to unravel. The scope of ABMS will be far larger than those previous programs, the Pentagon's Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation told the GAO. But because the Air Force has not provided a detailed acquisition strategy, CAPE does not have confidence that the Air Force will be able succeed where those programs have failed. “Given the criticality of the battle management command and control mission and the planned retirement of legacy programs, the lack of an ABMS business case introduces uncertainty regarding whether the needed capabilities will be developed within required time frames,” the GAO said. Figuring out who has responsibility and decision-making authority for ABMS is also a messy proposition, the GAO said. The ABMS effort is led by a chief architect, Preston Dunlap, who is responsible for managing tradeoffs among the portfolio of technologies and guide experimentation efforts. However, existing programs that will be part of the ABMS family will retain their separate program office with their own independent management, and the Air Force has yet to clarify whether Dunlap will be able to redirect those program's funding to fall in line with ABMS objectives. For example, the Air Force's program office for space is currently working on a data integration project that could correspond with ABMS efforts to field a cloud network. But “although some ABMS funds have been obligated for this project, there is no documentation to support that the Chief Architect will be able to direct the PEO to change the project objectives or timeline to align with ABMS requirements once they are defined,” the GAO said. The role of the Air Force Warfighting Integration Capability or AFWIC, which was established in 2017 to help define how the service will fight wars in the future, is also unclear. An AFWIC senior official told the GAO that the organization began leading the service's multidomain command and control initiatives in 2019, but it is uncertain whether AFWIC also has the power to change the direction of the ABMS program. https://www.c4isrnet.com/c2-comms/2020/04/20/is-the-air-forces-advanced-battle-management-system-program-gearing-up-to-be-the-next-major-acquisition-failure/

• 

  November 7, 2018 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  Defence Minister hails UK-US transatlantic partnership

  From: Ministry of Defence and Stuart Andrew MP Defence Minister Stuart Andrew was in Washington today to discuss the enduring UK-US defence present and future relationship and met with some of the biggest players in the US defence industry. As part of the visit, the Minister met with the US Navy Under Secretary Thomas Modly and US Army Under Secretary Ryan McCarthy to discuss bilateral capability priorities and future areas of collaboration between the two armed forces. This came as the Minister addressed the Heritage Foundation think-tank, where he highlighted the threats that both nations face and emphasised the vital role of Nato and the need for long-term planning and the depth of UK-US collaboration. Addressing the Heritage Foundation, Defence Minister Stuart Andrew said: Over the years, the deep UK-US alliance has endured through two World conflicts, the chill of the Cold War, and the continuing struggle against extremist terror. Today our forces work highly effectively together across the globe – on land and sea, in the air, space and cyberspace. We are stronger together. Just as our Armed Forces' capabilities are effectively inter-twined, so too are our industries. We are now moving even nearer the goal of full interoperability, leveraging the talent, strength and innovation of both our Defence industries to meet the challenges of the future. In a move to reinforce stronger industrial partnerships, the Minister also met with the headliners in the American defence industry, meeting with likes of Lockheed Martin, Northrup Grumman, Boeing and General Dynamics. The UK and US are the biggest overseas suppliers to each other's militaries and have worked closely on numerous key projects. The most prominent of these is the F-35 fighter jet programme, with the aircraft now embarked for flight trials on HMS Queen Elizabeth as she sailed into New York just last month. Other recent examples of collaboration are the Unmanned Air Systems programme and a Common Missile Compartment for UK-US Ballistic Missile Submarines. Both nations also play leading roles in Nato, which is vital to the transatlantic partnership and have been calling for other nations to invest more in security and to increase the readiness of their forces. By the end of 2018, eight members will be meeting the commitment of spending 2% of their GDP on defence compared with just three in 2014. In further display of solidarity, Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson recently announced that the Red Arrows are set to carry out their largest ever tour of North America in 2019 as the UK looks to strengthen ties and sign trade deals outside of Europe. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/defence-minister-hails-uk-us-transatlantic-partnership