Back to news

October 26, 2023 | International, Aerospace

Northrop Grumman lifts 2023 revenue outlook on weapons demand | Reuters

U.S. defense company Northrop Grumman on Thursday raised its annual revenue target for the second time this year after its third-quarter earnings beat analysts' estimates helped by strong weapons demand.

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/northrop-grumman-lifts-2023-revenue-outlook-weapons-demand-2023-10-26/

On the same subject

  • Ventes d’armes à l’Arabie saoudite : le timide embarras des pays européens

    October 2, 2018 | International, Aerospace, Land

    Ventes d’armes à l’Arabie saoudite : le timide embarras des pays européens

    A travers l'Europe, un sentiment de gêne se développe quant à la valeur morale et légale de ventes d'armes à l'Arabie saoudite et aux Emirats arabes unis, alors que l'intervention militaire de ces deux Etats au Yémen – lancée en mars 2015 – s'éternise, et que des accusations de crimes de guerre s'étayent contre eux. Les firmes européennes avaient exporté, entre 2001 et 2015, pour 57 milliards d'euros d'armements vers Riyad, deuxième plus gros importateur mondial, selon l'Institut international de recherche sur la paix de Stockholm (Sipri). De fait, près de 60 % de l'armement saoudien provenait alors d'Europe. Depuis, certains Etats ont poursuivi ces ventes, comme le Royaume-Uni, soutien indéfectible de Riyad. D'autres ont adopté une posture de prudence, discrètement pour la France, de façon plus velléitaire pour l'Allemagne et l'Espagne. Quitte à faire marche arrière, pour des raisons économiques. En Allemagne, la coalition prise en défaut L'hebdomadaire Der Spiegel a révélé, le 19 septembre, que le gouvernement allemand avait autorisé l'exportation de systèmes de navigation pour chars à l'Arabie saoudite, et de 48 ogives et 91 missiles destinés à des navires de guerre des Emirats arabes unis (EAU). L'opposition a vivement protesté, particulièrement les Verts et le parti de gauche Die Linke : ils font noter que de telles exportations contreviennent au « contrat de coalition » scellé, en février, entre les conservateurs (CDU-CSU) et les sociaux-démocrates (SPD). « A partir de maintenant, nous n'approuverons plus les exportations [de matériel militaire] vers les pays impliqués dans la guerre au Yémen », indique cet accord. Cet épisode s'intègre dans un rapprochement diplomatique entre Berlin et Riyad. Les relations s'étaient fortement dégradées, fin 2017, après que Sigmar Gabriel (SPD), alors ministre des affaires étrangères, eut mis en cause la politique régionale « aventurière »... Article complet: https://www.lemonde.fr/yemen/article/2018/10/01/ventes-d-armes-a-l-arabie-saoudite-le-timide-embarras-des-pays-europeens_5362768_1667193.html

  • Astra Transformation Could Enable Nonpilots To Command RAF

    February 25, 2020 | International, Aerospace

    Astra Transformation Could Enable Nonpilots To Command RAF

    Tony Osborne LONDON—For decades, the top role as Chief of Air Staff in Britain's Royal Air Force (RAF) has been the preserve of either pilots or aircrewmen. But that tradition could be turned on its head. Senior officers are undertaking a transformation plan called Astra that aims to better harness the RAF's personnel and prepare the air arm for new technologies and multidomain warfare. This includes those in space and cyberspace as the service strives to be ready for the 2040s. And one of the most tangible changes could be a move away from pilots taking up the most senior command posts. Since 1950, only one Chief of the Air Staff has not had a background flying either fighters or bombers, said Air Chief Marshal Sir Andrew Pulford, who served in the role from 2013 to 2016 with a background as a helicopter pilot. The current air chief, Air Marshal Michael Wigston, previously flew the Panavia Tornado. Before 1950, some of the most famous chiefs, including Sir Hugh Trenchard—often described as the father of the RAF—and Sir Arthur Tedder served in the infantry. “In the old days, predominantly it was what the pilots said that mattered. That's because we operated in a domain that was an exclusive preserve of pilots,” said Air Vice Marshall Ian Gale, assistant chief of the air staff for strategy. He spoke to journalists here on Feb. 24 as the air arm gears up for its annual Air and Space Power conference in July. “We have quite significant amounts of untapped cognitive diversity that we are trying to break into and give a voice to.” Always selecting pilots for the top job is seen by those in other air force posts as a career-limiting glass ceiling. But Gale argues the role should in the future should go to the “best person for the job,” and that could be a “battlespace manager, a cyber specialist or a space specialist.” Selection of a nonpilot for the role of Chief of Air Staff would, Gale said, “send a zero-message outside the air force, but a huge message inside it ... knowing that they may have a role in directing the future of the organization.” Other benefits of Astra will be the introduction of greater automation into tasks, with Gale hinting at new approaches to air traffic control. This is an issue of particular relevance as the RAF is suffering personnel shortages in this area, which is impacting training operations at some bases. This may suggest the RAF is looking at remote tower operations for some of its quieter airfields. https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/astra-transformation-could-enable-nonpilots-command-raf

  • General Atomics’ New Compact, High-Powered Lasers

    December 10, 2020 | International, Land

    General Atomics’ New Compact, High-Powered Lasers

    GA is building a prototype 300-kW missile defense laser for the Pentagon and a 250-kW airborne version with Boeing. By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR.on December 09, 2020 at 3:04 PM WASHINGTON: General Atomics is so confident in a unique technology they say solves the heat and weight problems found in rival laser designs that they're making it the core of two distinctly different projects. The Office of the Secretary of Defense is funding General Atomics and two competitors to build experimental lasers able to blast out some 300 kilowatts of power – enough to burn cruise missiles out of the sky. This project is about scaling up laser power output and testing alternative technologies for the services to pick up for separate follow-on programs. Meanwhile, Boeing and General Atomics are jointly developing a smaller laser weapon – starting at about 100 kilowatts but capable of growing to 250 kW. Unlike OSD's, this 250 kW weapon is being built at the companies' own expense, essentially on spec. (The technical term is IRAD, Independent Research And Development). Like OSD, Boeing and GA are hoping to demonstrate technology that'll be picked up by the services for a wide range of ground- and ship-based applications: The company says they're targeting the Army's Stryker-mounted M-SHORAD and its larger truck-borne IFPC, as well as Navy shipborne models. But for the pilot project, they've set themselves a very specific and demanding technical challenge: make their laser fit aboard an airplane – and make it fire accurately from that plane in flight. (Breaking D readers will remember the Airborne Laser, a huge chemical laser on a modified 747, as well as plans to arm the Next Generation Air Dominance planes with lasers.) Call in the “New York, New York” school of engineering: If you can make your laser work on a plane, you can make it work anywhere. “The idea is, if we can do it for an aircraft, then it truly could be able to go on any ground or sea platform,” said GA's VP for lasers, Michael Perry. “An aircraft...has the largest constraints on size, weight, and power.” Now, that doesn't mean getting lasers to work on ships or Army vehicles is easy. In some ways, surface platforms have a harder time: Their lasers have to penetrate the thickest, most moisture-laden layers of the atmosphere. And, Perry told me, while an aircraft in flight is constantly vibrating, you can account for that with sophisticated beam control software and high-quality aiming mirrors: That tech is tricky to build, but not bulky to install once you've built it. By contrast, a laser installed on a surface platform has to handle sudden, massive jolts as the warship crashes over a wave or the truck drives over a ditch, and that requires shock absorption systems, which are bulky and heavy. (While General Atomics and Boeing haven't said what aircraft they're planning to test the laser aboard, given the fact that Perry thinks extensive shock-absorption will be unnecessary, that suggests it isn't going to be a fighter jet or anything that makes violent high-gee maneuvers. That's in line with Air Force Special Operations Command's longstanding interest in putting a laser cannon aboard their AC-130 turboprop gunship). So GA's major focus in this project seems to be proving how compact their technology can be. Smaller size is a big advantage of the GA approach, Perry said, which they refer to as scalable distributed gain. Fibers, Slabs, & Distributed Gain What is a “distributed gain” laser, anyway? In the Wild West days of Reagan's Star Wars program, the Pentagon looked into lots of ways of powering lasers, from literal nuclear explosions – an idea called Project Excalibur – to massive vats of toxic chemicals, like the ones that filled the converted Boeing 747 that became the Airborne Laser. The real progress, however, has come with so-called solid state lasers: They pump light into a crystalline “gain medium,” which then amplifies the power of that light (hence “gain”), until it's released as a laser beam. But there are two main ways of building a solid-state laser: A slab laser, as its name implies, uses a single big chunk of crystal as the gain medium. This gives you a single coherent beam of laser light. The problem with slab lasers is heat buildup. The bigger you make the slab, the further the distance from its core to the edges, which means it takes longer to disperse waste heat, which can build up and damage the system. (You may recognize this from high school physics as a manifestation of the square-cube law). So slab lasers tend to require cooling systems, which are bulky and heavy. A fiber laser, by contrast, uses lots and lots of fiber-optic cables as gain media. Each individual fiber is very thin, and you can leave space between them, so it's easy for them to disperse waste heat. The problem with fiber lasers is the act of combining the beams. The bigger you make the laser, the more fibers you need – a 250-kW weapon might take 100 fibers, Perry said – and each fiber produces its own, weak laser beam, which you then have to combine into a single, powerful beam. Beam combination systems tend to be expensive and complex, not to mention (surprise!) bulky and heavy. General Atomics' distributed gain laser tries to strike a balance. Instead of a single big slab, you have several smaller slabs, each of them thin enough to disperse heat quickly. But instead of each of these slabs producing its own beam in parallel, which you then have to combine, you connect them in serial. The initial light source goes into the first slab, which magnifies it and shoots it into the second slab, which magnifies it still more. In theory you could have a third slab as well, even a fourth and fifth, though that's not what GA is building here. (They don't have to be lined up end to end, because you can use high-quality mirrors to bounce the light around a corner). “It is a series of slabs,” Perry told me. “The single beam passes through them all, as opposed to being separate lasers.” The advantage of distributed gain for high-power lasers is that you need neither the extensive cooling systems of a slab laser, nor the exquisite beam-combination systems of a fiber laser. “It's pretty compact,” Perry told me. “If you came out to see if you would be surprised at how short it is.” That said, there is a minimum length for a given amount of power output. That's why General Atomics couldn't fit the same 300-kW weapon they're building for OSD onto Boeing's aircraft (again, they're not saying what that aircraft is), which is why that version had to be scaled down to 250 inches. “The problem we have is, the 300-kw architecture is about 18 inches longer then the 250,” Perry said ruefully. “Believe it or not, as painful as it is and as frustrated as I am, I cannot eke out another 18 inches of length... The platform can't even give us another 12 inches.” It may be frustrating for Perry and his team to build two different versions of their lasers, rather than build two identical copies of the same thing – but the exercise could help prove to potential customers just how adaptable the basic design can be. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/12/general-atomics-new-compact-high-powered-lasers/

All news