Back to news

August 6, 2020 | International, Aerospace

MDA pauses defensive hypersonic missile design to refocus plan

By:

WASHINGTON — The Missile Defense Agency has paused its effort to design a defensive hypersonic missile and wants to refocus its plan of attack by concentrating on near-term options that could feed into a more “elegant” solution, according to Vice Adm. Jon Hill, the organization's director.

The agency tapped industry in January to design and build an interceptor capable of defending against regional hypersonic weapons threats, releasing a draft request for proposals to build prototypes.

The request directed industry to submit whitepapers by March 19 to build a Hypersonic Defense Regional Glide Phase Weapons System interceptor. The plan then was to select at least one prime contractor to build prototypes that would culminate in a flight test, according to the draft RFP.

But last month, the agency updated its posting on the federal government's contract opportunities website and said the final solicitation was under review. It also said the agency was assessing COVID-19 impacts, technology maturation efforts, threat analyses, and empirical data from the recent joint Defense Department hypersonic testing in March “to accurately establish the technical baseline and future end-state for hypersonic missile defense and the (RGPWS) effort.”

Agency leaders said they expect to complete the review by the end of the first quarter of fiscal 2021.

“One of the reasons we took the pause and said, ‘We'll get back to you later in the year,' is we want to see what we can do in the very near-term, and I'll define the near-term as the mid-20s, and then feed the science and technology investments going so you can get to that farther-term, more elegant solution,” Hill said at the virtual Space and Missile Defense Symposium Aug. 4.

“But we want to get that capability out there as soon as possible to defend against the hypersonic threat and we want to continue to build out that capability and we believe the glide phase, further back in that trajectory, is always better than the terminal systems that we got today,” Hill added. He noted that the capability to take out threats in the terminal phase of flight is still critical. But, “you will want to move back that trajectory as far as you can,” he said.

Achieving “glide phase” defensive capability could come through a variety of technologies, he said, including different warhead types, different effector types and what kind of propulsion is used to get there.

MDA is on a long-term path to achieving hypersonic defensive capability, but it is focused first on its Hypersonic and Ballistic Tracking Space Sensor (HBTSS), according to Hill. “That is number one, we have got to be able to sense, detect and get tracking and fire control information down to the shooter,” he said.

As the agency went through its analysis of alternatives for a defensive hypersonic interceptor, “we recognized there are two paths you can take to get to a weapon system,” Hill said.

MDA is going to build off its command-and-control battle management and the effectors it has in place, Hill said, adding the agency can take advantage of terrestrial-based and mobile sea-based sensing today to get tracking data and push it where it needs to go.

“The question is how long do you stay in the science and technology world? You should also take a look at a quick development path and that is what we are looking at now,” Hill said.

https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/smd/2020/08/04/mda-pauses-defensive-hypersonic-missile-design-effort-to-refocus-plan/

On the same subject

  • ‘You need two to tango’: Naval Group CEO Hervé Guillou on business in Europe and Down Under

    March 17, 2020 | International, Naval

    ‘You need two to tango’: Naval Group CEO Hervé Guillou on business in Europe and Down Under

    By: Sebastian Sprenger COLOGNE, Germany — Hervé Guillou, who took the helm at France's shipbuilder Naval Group in 2014, will retire from the company later this month due to an age limit that comes with the job. He made consolidation in Europe's naval sector a key tenet of his tenure, though there has been little movement so far other than Naval Group's cooperation with Italian shipyard Fincantieri and the resulting Naviris joint venture. With fears of demand drying up at home, Naval Group made an aggressive sales push across the world, perhaps most notably with the multibillion-dollar Australian Attack-class submarine program. The project received some criticism in Australia in recent months, though Guillou brushed it aside and said the Australian government remains committed to the program. Guillou spoke to Defense News' European editor, Sebastian Sprenger, by phone on March 10 about the international marketplace and industrial cooperation. With talk of a need for the European naval industry to consolidate, to what extent do you view Naval Group as a European company? We are the European leader of naval defense and as a strategic pillar we are willing to contribute to the building of the Europe of defense. We could not deliver the value to our shareholders if we didn't have a reasonable balance between our national programs like Barracuda or FDI frigates, coupled with a number of significant programs for export. Like Dassault Aviation, we need about 40-60 percent of value added for export if we want to maintain competences and competitiveness on the full scope of our offer. In our effort for internationalization, we have two streams. One is direct sales; we have established 10 new companies outside France. We have seven new customers in seven new countries such as Belgium, Netherlands, Argentina and Romania. That completely changed our international base. The second aspect is Europe, starting with the joint venture with Fincantieri. We have always said other companies can join. The process is slow, but we are absolutely clear that consolidation is needed if we want European sovereignty to be preserved. We are on the way. Naviris is one step. I hope there will be others. But it's a slow move, particularly in the naval industry because of the political visibility and because of the huge differences between the operational concepts of the European navies. Today, the closest to the French Navy would be the British Navy. But the British are on another agenda after Brexit [Britain's exit from the European Union]. On the submarine side, our closest partner in terms of worldwide, expeditionary capacity for oceanic operations are the Netherlands. On surface ships, because we have done Horizon and FREMMs together, it is Fincantieri. Today, Italy and the Netherlands are the likely first steps in our European road map, but others are welcome to join. In late 2018, you said you would make an overture to Germany's ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems for some kind of cooperation agreement once the Australian submarine deal is settled. Did that happen? No. You need two to tango. I don't know yet what is the consensus — or not — between the ThyssenKrupp leadership, government policies and parliament. It's not for me to interfere in that. I have been sending clear and open messages, and [Fincantieri CEO] Giuseppe Bono did the same, publicly. But today, we have no real answer. Germany and France have a land project together, the European battle tank, and two air projects, the Eurodrone and the Future Combat Air System. Do you think a naval project besides those is feasible? I think you cannot copy the aircraft or the land model to the naval sphere. Again, there are no likely bilateral or trilateral programs with Germany in the naval business because Germany has very different operational needs for their Navy than France or Italy. Their submarines are more coastal submarines, geared toward the Baltic Sea. Their surface ships — for example, when you look at the MKS 180 — are of a total different specification than the FREMM or the FDI, which are heavy, weaponized, combat-focused frigates. The Germans have no need for anything like an aircraft carrier, and they are not going to build SSNs [attack submarines]. So today, in my view, if we do something with Germany, it would be more of an industry agenda, as we did first with Italy, to be able to add and find synergies in our international presence, rather than relying on a bilateral program. And the way our industry consolidates is very different. But we have a survival issue in industry, to be able to find volumes, procurement synergies, export opportunities among ourselves and being mindful that the real competitor is more China and Russia and not Germany, Italy or the Netherlands. We continue to explain that, but we need to be patient. I understand well where the Germans come from. With three German yards — TKMS, Lürssen, and Blohm and Voss — it's more fragmented and difficult for them. What about the argument that it would be hard to mix a former state-owned company like Naval Group with shipyards who don't share that kind of heritage? That is totally wrong, and it's totally badmouthing. We are a company with a private status and an independent board even if we have a French government shareholder. Governance guidelines apply to Naval Group like they apply to all French industry in the market. The government does not interfere with the social interests of the company, and my board would not accept it. The same applies to the false charge that we get government subsidies. It is totally untrue. If it was the case, everybody could file claims against us in the European courts. Some of your competitors have argued that Naval Group is too diversified to be compatible with firms that do nothing but shipbuilding. Again, this is not true. Diversification has been put under control. During my time at Naval Group, I closed two big projects in the nuclear area, which were losing money. I have restricted hugely the area of marine energy production, concentrating on offshore wind and geothermal. We are 98 percent focused on naval business. This is not a good subject for our competitors to argue about. What are your expectations of the new French aircraft carrier and Naval Group's role in the program? Naval Group's role is very clear: We shall be the prime contractor for such program. We are the only one capable of designing and integrating such a warship, which includes the concurrent engineering of the combat system and of the platform, including aircraft, drones, the new electromagnetic catapult from the U.S. — more than 200 functions in all. The hull will be built in St. Nazaire, at Chantiers de l'Atlantique, where the big dock for cruise ships will be used. We expect a decision on the future aircraft carrier program sometime this year. I cannot predict the exact timing, but I am optimistic that the decision will be made this year. We have delivered to DGA [the French defense procurement agency] our preliminary studies, our cost-capability tradeoffs; we have given a lot of details as well on the timing of the possible entry into service of such a new aircraft carrier. The government now has all the information they asked to make their decision. Naval Group has been criticized in Australia about the Attack submarine program recently. Did that catch you by surprise? I must say I'm more disappointed than surprised. We have very, very strong support from our customer and from the Australian government. We know where these attacks come from, and we know how it is used in Europe to damage our reputation for ongoing and upcoming competitions. The first crisis was about postponing by five weeks a design review for a 30-year program. The attacks around that are unfair. The other controversy was about including local industry. What is the official plan on workshare for Australian companies? There is no contractual obligation. But we are in a strategic partnership, and there is a clear commitment from Naval Group to reach 60 percent of local content, which is more than the Collins class. And based on our experience in Brazil or in India, we truly believe that at the end of the day we will reach it. It will take time. It is a long, long way to train new industries, to train people, to transfer technology. But we are absolutely committed to Australia, to this partnership to deliver sovereignty, and to deliver this very, very significant percentage of Australian contracts. Do you think the EU is on a good trajectory to foster defense cooperation? I don't know yet. There are two sides of the coin. On the defense side, I would say the progress made in the last three years is absolutely huge. The European Defence Fund and the European Defence Industrial Development Programme, for example, are significant achievements of the previous commission. Is it due to U.S. new policies? Is it due to Brexit? I don't know. It's probably a mix of a lot of things. With the new commission, my understanding is that there is a clear intention to continue in this direction. Nevertheless, there is the budget discussion, which is not completely finished, and where the budgets dedicated to defense are still under threat. We need time to see what the results will be. I'm rather optimistic. The second issue is more in the civilian-economic area, where we still have a significant issue with the rules for anti-trust in European rules. Those are currently preventing European industry to consolidate at a time when we see the Chinese, Korean and U.S. industries are consolidating. In that context, in the shipbuilding sector, we're not hearing good things about the Fincantieri/Chantiers de l'Atlantique case. This is a big worry for us, as this would prevent European players to turn into world players. How will the European Patrol Corvette become a truly European program? Of course, it cannot be a 27-country project. So Europe has to start with two, three or four. This is a Franco-Italian initiative, which is supported by our two navies and our two governments. It was initiated by Fincanteri and Naval Group, and is carried out by Naviris, our joint venture. Greece has declared their interest formally to join the program. Spain is starting to study the case, though they have not declared officially. If we are three, four countries, it's good enough to start. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/03/16/you-need-two-to-tango-naval-group-ceo-herve-guillou-on-business-in-europe-and-down-under/

  • MDA group president notes opportunities for Canada in space

    September 28, 2018 | International, Aerospace

    MDA group president notes opportunities for Canada in space

    MDA Press Release Canada's role and potential involvement in the growing new space economy require a commitment from the Government of Canada for a new space strategy that would secure Canada's place as a leader in space, Mike Greenley, the group president of MDA, a Maxar company, said in a speech to the Canadian Club in Ottawa. “We need a long-term space plan for Canada that establishes the requisite funding to maintain and enhance our existing world-leading capabilities in space robotics, satellite communications, Earth observation and space science, while cultivating new areas of leadership. And we need it now, because there are pressing decisions that need to be made,” said Greenley. The most urgent question facing Canada is whether the country will participate in the international space community's next big exploration project. As governments wind down their investments in the International Space Station, the leading spacefaring nations, including the United States, Europe, Japan and Russia, are planning a return to the Moon in the 2020s. NASA is planning to build a small space station that orbits the Moon, which will serve as a base for lunar exploration, a platform for science experiments, and a gateway to explore deeper space. Canada's commitment would involve the development of a third-generation Canadarm, the iconic Canadian space robotics technology featured prominently on the five dollar bill. Canadian space robotics would provide highly visible, innovative and critical lunar gateway operations, including the assembly of the gateway itself (and its ongoing maintenance), the capture of visiting spacecraft, and the enabling of science conducted in the lunar vicinity. Given the distance to the Moon, these advanced space robotics would need to operate autonomously, powered by Canadian AI technology. Subsequent contributions could involve lunar rovers and space medicine technology. “The international community expects Canada to participate in this mission and to provide the advanced robotics systems for the Lunar Gateway, our area of expertise that no other country does better,” said Greenley. “It is Canada's role for the taking.” “Making a commitment to participate in the Lunar Gateway as part of the upcoming space strategy would maintain and enhance Canada's acknowledged world leadership in space robotics and signal to the world that Canada plans to claim its place in the new space economy,” said Greenley. “The value of the global space market reached US$380 billion in 2017, and analysts forecast it will grow to be a multi-trillion-dollar market in the coming decades.” Participation in space will not only accelerate innovation and fuel Canada's future competitiveness, but will also maintain our country's ability to influence the global discussion around space, said Greenley. “We know how important it is for Canada to be part of the conversation,” said Greenley. “A re-commitment to space would enhance our ability to participate in shaping developments in space and bolster emerging areas of Canadian expertise like space law.” Greenley said MDA and other partners in the Canadian space industry will spend this fall talking to Canadians and elected officials about the importance of space. https://www.skiesmag.com/press-releases/mda-group-president-notes-opportunities-for-canada-in-space

  • Boeing, ELG Carbon Fibre find new life for airplane structure material in groundbreaking partnership

    December 7, 2018 | International, Aerospace

    Boeing, ELG Carbon Fibre find new life for airplane structure material in groundbreaking partnership

    First-agreement of its kind will repurpose aerospace-grade composite material for making laptop cases, car parts and other products Partnership will reduce solid waste by more than one million pounds a year SEATTLE, Dec. 5, 2018 /PRNewswire/ -- Boeing [NYSE:BA] and ELG Carbon Fibre today announced a partnership to recycle excess aerospace-grade composite material, which will be used by other companies to make products such as electronic accessories and automotive equipment. The agreement – the first of its kind for the aerospace industry – covers excess carbon fiber from 11 Boeing airplane manufacturing sites and will reduce solid waste by more than one million pounds a year. Carbon-fiber reinforced material is extremely strong and lightweight, making it attractive for a variety of uses, including in building the super-efficient 787 Dreamliner and the all-new 777X airplane. As the largest user of aerospace-grade composites from its commercial and defense programs, Boeing has been working for several years to create an economically viable carbon fiber reuse industry. The company improved its production methods to minimize excess and developed a model for collecting scrap material. But technical barriers stood in the way of repurposing material that had already been "cured" or prepped for use in the airplane manufacturing process. UK-based ELG developed a proprietary method to recycle "cured" composites so they do not have to be thrown out. "Recycling cured carbon fiber was not possible just a few years ago," said Tia Benson Tolle, Boeing Materials & Fabrication director for Product Strategy & Future Airplane Development. "We are excited to collaborate with ELG and leverage innovative recycling methods to work toward a vision where no composite scrap will be sent to landfills." To prove that the recycling method can be applied on a grand scale, Boeing and ELG conducted a pilot project where they recycled excess material from Boeing's Composite Wing Center in Everett, Wash., where the massive wings for the 777X airplane are made. ELG put the excess materials through treatment in a furnace, which vaporizes the resin that holds the carbon fiber layers together and leaves behind clean material. Over the course of 18 months, the companies saved 380,000 pounds of carbon fiber, which was cleaned and sold to companies in the electronics and ground transportation industries. "Security of supply is extremely important when considering using these materials in long-term automotive and electronic projects," said Frazer Barnes, managing director of ELG Carbon Fibre. "This agreement gives us the ability to provide that assurance, which gives our customers the confidence to use recycled materials." Based on the success of the pilot project, Boeing says the new agreement should save a majority of the excess composite material from its 11 sites, which will support the company's goal to reduce solid waste going to landfills 20 percent by 2025. "This collaboration takes Boeing's commitment to protect the environment to a whole new level. Recycling composites will eventually be as commonplace as recycling aluminum and titanium," said Kevin Bartelson, 777 Wing Operations leader. Boeing and ELG are considering expanding the agreement to include excess material from three additional Boeing sites in Canada, China and Malaysia. As a result of the partnership, ELG estimates the number of its employees will nearly triple from 39 in 2016 to an expected 112 by the end of 2019 as the recycling market continues to expand. Contact: Todd Kelley 425-373-8388 todd.e.kelley@boeing.com SOURCE Boeing https://boeing.mediaroom.com/2018-12-05-Boeing-ELG-Carbon-Fibre-find-new-life-for-airplane-structure-material-in-groundbreaking-partnership

All news