Back to news

January 30, 2019 | International, Naval

More Missile Defense Ships, New Ground Deployments

By

WASHINGTON: A top Pentagon official on Tuesday said major upgrades being made to dozens of Navy destroyers to give them new missile defense capabilities will continue, even as Navy leadership bristles at having so many ships tied up hunting for missile launches.

The comments by James Anderson, assistant Defense secretary for strategy, plans and capabilities, came on the same day that Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats testified before Congress that US intelligence agencies assess North Korea is unlikely to completely give up its nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs in any potential deal with Washington.

“The Navy does have this mission of ballistic missile defense,” Anderson said during a talk at the Brookings Institution. “It is one of their core missions and it will remain so.” The Navy currently has 38 Arleigh Burke-class Aegis destroyers in the fleet with missile defense capabilities, he noted, and has plans to convert “all Aegis destroyers to fully missile defense capable” status, meaning 60 ships will be able to perform the missile defense mission by 2023.

Just the day before Anderson's remarks, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. John Richardson complained again that he has ships sailing in “small boxes” protecting assets on land, when they should be out performing other missions.

“We've got exquisite capability, but we've had ships protecting some pretty static assets on land for a decade,” Richardson said. “If that [stationary] asset is going to be a long-term protected asset, then let's build something on land and protect that and liberate these ships from this mission.”

Full article: https://breakingdefense.com/2019/01/more-missile-defense-ships-new-ground-deployments

On the same subject

  • Contracts for April 19, 2021

    April 20, 2021 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

    Contracts for April 19, 2021

    Today

  • SOCOM seeking technologies for war in a post-cyberpunk era

    August 28, 2018 | International, C4ISR

    SOCOM seeking technologies for war in a post-cyberpunk era

    By: Kelsey Atherton The great trick of computers is that they enable people to be more than human. In a new request for information, the United States Special Operations Command is looking for a range of computer and computer-enabled technologies, all designed to make Special Operators function in some way more than human. These technologies range from sensors to nano-drones to biomedical performance enhancements. Taken together, the list of desired capabilities is a preview of what may be possible in the near-future to shape the intimate fights on the edges of wars. Miniature robot scouts, hyper-aware data collection and monitoring riding along low-bandwidth nodes, tailorable hyperspectral imaging sensors, biometric tracking resistance, and go-pills without adverse effects are all on asking, and that's just a handful of the dozens of capabilities sought. The full request for information is available online. To parse through it, here are some of the standout categories. Robots, blood-transporting robots How many pounds of blood is a reasonable amount of blood for a robot to carry? Ten pounds, answers the SOCOM request. Specifically, SOCOM is looking for an unmanned aerial blood delivery system that can do vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL), or at least operate without a runway. The 10 pound requirement is a minimum, and roughly approximate to the amount of blood in a person weighing 150 pounds. In order for the blood to be useful, it has to be kept between 35-46 degrees Fahrenheit, ideally through passive means, all the way from loading through transit, delivery, and unloading. That unloading should “minimize shock to the payload for any proposed delivery concept,” because again, this is about making a robot that can deliver blood in a useful and life-saving state. Blood transport drones already exist, and have safely demonstrated blood transport in small amounts and over modest distances. SOCOM wants a blood drone that can transport its cargo over 100 miles and back, while staying in contact and control of human operators. That's an ambitious ask, and it's one of just five named categories of drone technology sought by SOCOM. Another is a platform-agnostic desire for an expeditionary ISR platform, which can operate as individuals, in pairs, or in meshed swarms. These drones will have modular payloads, carry at least two sensors, and require minimum logistics support. One asked-for way to sustain these drones is by “alternative power through environment,” like directly sipping power from power lines or incorporating a way to charge off renewable energy. The other three categories of drone are ambitious, though in more familiar terms. There's a listing for a Nano VTOL drone, with a takeoff weight of 2.6 ounces that can fly autonomously inside and avoid collisions, with a human monitoring but not directly piloting the drone. Ten times the size is the Micro VTOL drone, at about 1.6 pounds, capability of all-weather an autonomous flight, and able to operate both without GPS and in caves. The biggest non-blood-carrying drone SOCOM is looking for is a hand-launched or fixed-wing VTOL vehicle that can be recovered without special equipment, will weigh no more than 7.8 pounds, and can fly for at least 90 minutes at sea level. These drones are familiar machines, mostly, even if some of the payloads are a little unusual. Sensors in a robot are common enough. SOCOM is also looking for a way to increase the sensors carried and used by a person on foot. Hyper-sensors Collecting information is nothing without processing it into a useful form, and this SOCOM RFI seeks information on both. While the specific means are not detailed, there's a desire for “edge computing” to “derive useful information at the point of collection through sensor fusion and forwards processing without reliance on high bandwidth, long haul communications.” That likely means computers and AI already in the field and embedded in equipment carried by the special operations forces. Making that information intelligible is one task a Heads Up Display (HUD), but SOCOM is also open to audio cues and haptic feedback, among other means, for relaying processed information in a useful and immediate form. Collecting that information will be a new suite of Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) sensors, designed with the limitations and hard conditions of present and future special operations missions in mind. That means working without “owning the air domain,” a break from decades of assumptions for conventional and counter-insurgent warfare, but a break that acknowledges the likely presence of cheap drones on all sides of future battles. These sensors will include visual spectrum, infrared, hyper-spectral imaging, LIDAR, electronic warfare, can operate autonomously and be mounted on drones or scattered on the ground to work and transmit data remotely. For good measure, SOCOM is also asking for technologies that would allow drones to work as something like a universal translator even in denied connectivity environments. With linguistic expertise, regional dialects, demographic information and cultural sensitivities programmed in, the drones will do the fraught social massaging around war. If there is anything that will convince a local population about the right intentions of the people presently fighting nearby, it's a robot that's hip to the local slang. More than human All this collecting and transmitting information is likely to produce a host of signals, so SOCOM is also looking for technologies that “help avoid physical detection by acoustic, thermal, radar, visual, optical, electromagnetic, virtual, and near infrared means.” Finding a way to remain discreet in an information rich environment is a challenge for everyone in society today, one tacitly acknowledged by an ask for a technology to “help manage digital presence within the realm of social media.” (Step 1 for that is probably not using a jogging app with geolocation turned on.) Biometric technologies (think: facial recognition, etc) are often seen as a tool of the powerful, wielded by governments against vulnerable populations. While they certainly can be that, they can also pose a challenge to individuals in the employ of one military trying to evade the sensors used by another. To that end, SOCOM is looking for technologies that provide resistance to biometric tracking. (While it's not specified, Juggalo-style face paint might work for this exact purpose). Finally, once a special operator has evaded detection, used the sensors on hand, and has an adequate amount of robot-delivered blood to keep going, there is an interest in human performance and biomedical enhancements. These include drugs and biologics that can enhance cognitive performance, increase “peak performance sustainability, including increased endurance, strength, energy, agility, and enhanced senses” and a whole other wish list of capabilities that officers from time immemorial have demanded of the people under their command. Most promising, perhaps, is the ask for “medical sensors and devices that provide vital sign awareness and send alerts,” and “austere trauma treatment,” both of which don't require transformative properties in the people using them. Science fan-fiction It's too early to say how many of the asks in this RFI are realistic, though some are already delivered technologies and others certainly seem near-future plausible. More importantly, the request as a gestalt whole suggests a desire for people that are more than human, and capable of performing everything asked of them in remote battlefields, far from home. As the United States approaches its 17th continuous year of war abroad, asking that science deliver what science fiction promised feels at least as plausible as imagining a future where deployments abroad are scaled back. https://www.c4isrnet.com/unmanned/2018/08/28/socom-seeking-technologies-for-war-in-a-post-cyberpunk-era

  • La Belgique joue la montre avec le F-35

    October 9, 2018 | International, Aerospace

    La Belgique joue la montre avec le F-35

    Non, la Belgique ne demande pas aux Américains de prolonger leur offre, dans le cadre de la procédure de remplacement de ses avions de combat. Simplement, elle leur demande jusqu'à quand les conditions remises pour le F-35 resteront valables. Autrement dit, s'ils tiennent tant que cela à l'échéance du 14 octobre. Nuance. Difficile de savoir si la partie qui se joue actuellement est à classer au rayon "diplomatie de haut vol", ou mérite plutôt l'étiquette "négociation de marchands de tapis". L'acte I s'est joué le mois dernier: l'ambassadeur américain en Belgique a fait mine de mettre un petit coup de pression sur le gouvernement fédéral. En septembre, donc, Ronald Gidwitz rappelait que l'offre déposée par le groupe américain Lockheed Martin pour le remplacement des chasseurs-bombardiers belges F-16 expirait le 14 octobre, soit précisément le jour du scrutin communal. Pareille offre ne pourrait être indéfiniment prolongée, avertissait l'ambassadeur, empruntant les manières d'un représentant de commerce. Ou du moins pas en l'état; en cas de prolongation, il ne faudrait pas s'étonner de voir les conditions – prix, délais ou termes en matière d'entraînement – être modifiées. Pas dans le bon sens, fallait-il comprendre. Une sortie pour la galerie, en quelque sorte. Puisqu'elle ne semble avoir infléchi en rien la ligne de Michel. À qui l'on doit la composition de cet acte II: Un comité ministériel restreint avait déjà t'té le terrain, et un autre, réuni ce jeudi matin, a validé l'option. La Belgique va, en quelque sorte, demander la prorogation de l'offre déposée par le constructeur du F-35, postposant dans la foulée sa décision dans cet épineux dossier.Une fois de plus, puisque, outre ce 14 octobre, le sommet de l'Otan de juillet dernier avait déjà été présenté comme date limite pour trancher. Enfin, c'est un tantinet plus subtil que cela. Alors précisons. Non, la Belgique ne demande pas officiellement d'allongement du délai. Michel a mandaté son ministre de la Défense, le N-VA Steven Vandeput, qui est chargé de demander aux Américains la date de péremption de leur dossier. Autrement dit, à quel point tiennent-ils à l'échéance du 14 octobre, jusqu'ici brandie? Nuance, nuance. Le "chouchou" F-35 La Belgique joue donc la montre dans ce dossier complexe. Qui mérite une piqûre de rappel. Les 54 F-16 dont dispose la Belgique approchent tout doucement de l''ge de la retraite. Les premiers ont été livrés en 1982 et la limite des 8.000 heures de vol mène à un déclassement débutant en 2023. Voilà pourquoi le Fédéral a lancé en mars 2017 un appel d'offres portant sur l'acquisition de 34 nouveaux avions de combat, qui devraient être livrés à partir de 2023 et être tous opérationnels pour 2030. L'affaire est délicate. Parce que, assez rapidement, le F-35 américain a été désigné par l'amicale des bruits de couloir comme étant le "chouchou" – autrement dit, les jeux seraient déjà faits. Est venue s'ajouter en avril dernier une vraie-fausse polémique sur la possibilité d'allonger la durée de vie de nos vaillants, quoique vieillissants, F-16. Bref, pourquoi aller dépenser la modique somme de 3,6 milliards d'euros – et encore, il ne s'agit ici que de la mise initiale, les estimations de la facture totale tournant autour des 15 ou 18 milliards répartis sur une quarantaine d'années – alors que l'on pourrait "doper" la flotte existante pour un coût nettement plus doux? Ajoutez à cela la France et son Rafale, qui ont décidé de jouer les trouble-fêtes, en proposant, en septembre 2017, à la Belgique un "partenariat approfondi et structurant", et ce en dehors du cadre du marché lancé par Michel. La rumeur voudrait d'ailleurs que la Belgique n'ait jamais réellement inspecté en détail la proposition française. Résultat, le 14 février dernier, seuls deux avions étaient officiellement encore en lice: le F-35 Lightning II de l'américain Lockheed Martin – le plusonéreux des programmes d'armement de l'histoire militaire américaine – et l'Eurofighter Typhoon, porté par un consortium mêlant Royaume-Uni, Allemagne, Espagne et Italie. Et, faisant bande à part, le Rafale de Dassault. Comme si le remplacement des F-16 n'était pas suffisamment compliqué comme cela, d'autres marchés relatifs à la Défense sont ouverts – et non des moindres. De quoi créer des interférences ou pousser la Belgique à établir une sorte de balance générale, par le miracle d'une diplomatie de haut vol? Drones, navires et véhicules de combat Il est question de drones, puisque la Défense a prévu l'acquisition, pour 226 millions d'euros, de quatre drones susceptibles d'être armés. Alors que les militaires s'intéressaient à un engin "made in USA", le géant européen de l'aéronautique Airbus s'est invité et a proposé ses services. Il est question de navires, puisque la Belgique et les Pays-Bas ont entamé ensemble une procédure d'achat de seize navires militaires – deux frégates et six bateaux de lutte contre les mines chacun – pour une facture dépassant les 4 milliards. Aux Néerlandais de superviser le programme des frégates, aux Belges de présider celui des navires anti-mines. Mentionnons encore l'achat de 477 véhicules de combat pour les forces terrestres belges, pour lequel un préaccord à 1,1 milliard est établi avec la France. Benoît Mathieu, Journaliste Source: L'Echo https://www.lecho.be/economie-politique/belgique/flandre/la-belgique-joue-la-montre-avec-le-f-35/10056153.html

All news