March 5, 2021 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security
April 13, 2023 | International, Naval
The sea services want to be able to practice complex scenarios in a training and simulation environment that pulls together all-domain sailors and Marines.
May 21, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security
By: Joe Gould WASHINGTON ― More than two dozen Democrats are demanding that House Armed Services Committee leaders cut defense spending in the 2021 defense policy bill, saying the money would be better spent combating the coronavirus pandemic. A May 19 letter, mostly from Congressional Progressive Caucus members, marked a prelude to what could be complicated efforts to pass the National Defense Authorization Act in the Democrat-led House. The panel is expected in the coming weeks to introduce and mark up a draft, in line with the $740 billion top line set by the 2019 budget deal. But 29 Democrats ― led by House Progressive Caucus Co-Chair Mark Pocan of Wisconsin and Rep. Barbara Lee, a senior appropriator and California progressive ― said the defense spending should be lower than last year's $738 billion top line. With Americans dying from COVID-19 by the thousands, tax dollars would be better spent on an expansion of testing, contact tracing, treatment and vaccine development, they said. “Congress must remain focused on responding to the coronavirus pandemic and distributing needed aid domestically,” the lawmakers wrote. “In order to do so, appropriators must have access to increased levels of non-defense spending which could be constrained by any increase to defense spending.” “Right now, the coronavirus is our greatest adversary. It has killed more than 90,000 Americans, far surpassing the number of casualties during the Vietnam War,” the letter read. “America needs a coronavirus cure, not more war. We need more testing, not more bombs." How the loss of support from 29 House Democrats will factor into passage of the NDAA remains to be seen. In a note accompanying the letter, the organizers noted that if Republicans held back support ― which they did last year ― only 19 Democrats would need to vote “no” this year for the bill to fail. Last year, House Republicans resisted an early version of the 2020 bill written by House Democrats, but even after many of their priorities were stripped out in negotiations with the Republican-controlled Senate, the compromise bill still passed the House without them, 377-48. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi found common ground with the White House on an eleventh hour paid parental leave provision that attracted most Democrats. This year, House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith, D-Wash., has spoken in favor of working to protect the defense-industrial base through stimulus funding. But with a stimulus bill caught in a partisan deadlock, it's unclear whether lawmakers will see the NDAA as a potential vehicle for defense industry aid. If so, that could be a sticking point. Last month, Smith told reporters that public health needs were more pressing and that within the Pentagon's existing $738 billion budget, defense officials "have a lot of money and ought to spend that money to meet those needs” before Congress considers more. HASC ranking member Mac Thornberry, who led early Republican opposition to last year's bill, has said he is hopeful this year's bill will be more bipartisan. Thornberry, R-Texas, also opposed the idea of cutting defense to fund health care needs. “I bristle a bit at the notion, ‘well, of course [the Department of Defense has] got to get their budget cut,' " he said, “because the world's not going to be safer on the other side of COVID.” https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/05/19/house-progressives-demand-pentagon-cuts-citing-pandemic/
August 4, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land
By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — American firm Raytheon Technologies and Israeli-based Rafael Advanced Defense Systems have formed a joint venture to build the Iron Dome missile defense system in the United States, the companies announced Aug. 3. Under the name Raytheon Rafael Area Protection Systems, the partnership is being set up to build a first-ever Iron Dome “all-up-round” facility stateside. The facility will build Iron Dome systems, the Tamir interceptor and launcher, and the SkyHunter missile (the U.S. version of Tamir), according to a Rafael-issued statement. Tamir and SkyHunter are capable of intercepting cruise missiles, unmanned aircraft, rockets, artillery, mortars and other threats. The partnership expects to finalize a site location before the end of the year, the statement said. “This will be the first Iron Dome all-up-round facility outside of Israel, and it will help the U.S. Department of Defense and allies across the globe obtain the system for defense of their service members and critical infrastructure,” Sam Deneke, vice president of Raytheon Missiles & Defense's land warfare and air defense business. Rafael and Raytheon have had a long partnership developing and manufacturing Iron Dome. The system is widely fielded in Israel and, according to Rafael, is “the world's most-used system with more than 2,500 operational intercepts and a success rate exceeding 90 percent.” The U.S. Army has chosen Iron Dome as an interim capability to counter cruise missiles while it continues to develop a future Indirect Fires Protection Capability, or IFPC, to counter those threats as well as enemy drones, rockets, artillery and mortars. Congress mandated the service buy two batteries to cover urgent cruise missile defense gaps, and another set of two if the Army didn't come up with a way forward for its enduring IFPC. While the Army has said it will not buy all-up Iron Dome systems as part of the IFPC program, officials developing the capability are looking at the possibility of incorporating parts of Iron Dome in the final solution. The Army plans to field Iron Dome by the end of the year, but it will still take time to train troops on the system before deployment. Some lawmakers are urging the Army to rapidly deploy the systems to the Middle East, arguing U.S. and coalition forces there need the protection from Iran and its proxies. In and analysis conducted by the Army, it was concluded the Iron Dome launcher and the Tamir interceptor's performances are “highly reliant” on their own battle management systems and multimission radars. The analysis also determined that the launcher and interceptor would be a viable option for an enduring IFPC solution as long as it worked on the Army's future Integrated Air-and-Missile Defense Battle Command System, or IBCS, which is under development, according to a report sent to Congress earlier this year. But Gen. Mike Murray, the head of Army Futures Command, which is in charge of the service's modernization efforts, testified before the House Armed Services Committee earlier this year that the Army has struggled to integrate Iron Dome into its IBCS system, mostly because the Israeli government has refused to provide critical source code needed for the integration. The Tamir interceptor's performance data proves its effectiveness when used within the Iron Dome system, but since data is lacking, it's uncertain how well it would perform when linked through IBCS to the Sentinel radar, which is used to alert air defense weapons of threats, the report noted. The service will conduct a shoot-off of best available options for integration into an enduring IFPC solution in the third quarter of fiscal 2021. The U.S. Marine Corps is also evaluating the system. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2020/08/03/raytheon-and-rafael-to-build-iron-dome-in-us/