Podcast: Sizing Up Russia’s New Light Fighter | Aviation Week Network

On the same subject

• 

  June 27, 2018 | International, Aerospace

  Excluded from cooperative plans in Europe, UK sets groundwork for future fighters

  By: Andrew Chuter LONDON ― Expectations are growing among industry executives and analysts that the British government will use a huge gathering of international air force chiefs in the U.K. in mid-July to outline a strategy leading to development of a new generation of fighter jets for the post-2040 era. Left out in the cold by a joint Franco-German plan to develop a new fighter, Ministry of Defence officials ― supported by industry ― have been working for months on a combat air strategy to sustain Britain's capabilities beyond the Eurofighter Typhoon, and they are determined to figure out a way forward this summer. With more than 50 air force chiefs from around the world expected to attend the Royal International Air Tattoo at Fairford, southern England, as part of the Royal Air Force's centenary celebrations, it is likely the British will use the event to kick-start plans to develop an eventual replacement for the Typhoons, which form the backbone of the country's fighter fleet. “We are definitely hoping that between the NATO summit, the Royal International Air Tattoo and the Farnborough air show in mid-July, something gets announced to get the combat air strategy underway,” said Paul Everitt, the CEO at ADS, a U.K. defense and aerospace trade organization. Consultant Howard Wheeldon, of Wheeldon Strategic, who is very much plugged into MoD and industry circles, said nothing was set in stone yet, but he expects some kind of announcement, possibly at the Royal International Air Tattoo , which starts July 13. “I do get the impression they will go for something big in the way of an announcement. It could be something along the lines of ‘this is what we would like to do, and we want to do it with partners.' In part it's meant to be a bit of a shock to France and Germany,” Wheeldon said. An MoD spokesman told Defense News that the U.K.'s air combat strategy “will aim to set the policy goals that will maximize the national strategic value in combat air, including operational capability; technological advantage; economic benefits; industrial capability, capacity and skills; prosperity; and export outcomes, and will set clear parameters for industry to drive long-term, sustainable improvements in productivity and efficiency to ensure the U.K. combat air sector remains world-leading and internationally competitive.” “It will signal to international partners the U.K.'s approach to combat air capability development, encouraging a wider dialogue with partners and allies over future cooperation,” the MoD spokesman added. Everitt said any announcement would fall short of a program go-ahead, but expects a significant step forward by the British. “I think it will be a commitment to a strategy rather than a strategy itself. It will cover some of the key elements they will need to address rather than a commitment to build. Nevertheless, in terms of making progress I see it as a big step forward,” he said. Everitt said the jointly funded government-industry UK Defence Solutions Centre has already been tasked with looking at potential international partners and future customers for a sixth-generation jet. The ADS boss said the “politics of the situation are if we want to interest potential partners or even customers, we are going to have to demonstrate we have something that's real.” “If we want to be taken seriously, we have to put something on the table. Time pressures mean while we would not necessarily like to do it in this environment, we have to put something out there to say we have the capability and political intent to do this,” Everitt said. What the British don't have, however, is the money to go it alone in developing a new fighter. So a partner, or two, is essential if the country's air combat-dominated defense industry is to remain a leading player. “We will still have sufficient time over the course of the next five years that if we begin to make progress with this we will be able to combine with other players, be it France and Germany, or others around the world. But to meet any kind of timetable we have to start doing something now,” Everitt said. Jon Louth, the director of defense, industries and society at the Royal United Services Institute think tank in London, said it's a big ask to see the U.K. joining the nascent program now being touted by France and Germany. “The Germans and the French want to go it alone on this and almost have it as a European Union exemplar,” Louth said. “Politics aside, I think U.K. will likely want to move quicker than Franco-German partners, even if we were let in.” France has suggested Britain could be brought into the program at a later date, but Everitt questioned the value of any deal that didn't give the defense sector in Britain a leading role. “As we look beyond Europe, it's a bit tricky who we might establish a partnership with. With us having difficult conversations with colleagues in the European Union, we need the strategic vision and political preparedness to make some quite challenging decisions about who might be a potential partner in this project,” he added. Wheeldon reckons a combat air strategy will emphasize partnerships at the international and domestic levels. “I think the signals put out from the strategy will be very positive, particularly in terms of looking for a partnership with another country. It could be Italy, Turkey, Sweden, Japan or whoever. It will also likely [emphasize] Britain's defense-industrial base and its importance, so any government partnership will be with them as well,” Wheeldon said. Louth said the U.S. might provide another partnering option, although there looks to be a gap between the likely requirements of the two countries. “The U.S. seems to be talking about a larger platform than we want, so there could be some interesting options around new partners that would fit the British Brexit narrative of global markets,” he said, referring to Britain's exit from the European Union. “I sense that we will start to hear about an emerging combat air replacement program in July, and there might even be some early money from the government to start thinking about capabilities and, longer term, a demonstrator,” he added. BAE Systems already has a deal with Turkey to help develop the TF-X fighter program being pursued by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's government, while the British and Japanese governments announced last year they were looking at options for collaborating on a new generation of fighters. However, The Financial Times has reported the British deal with Turkey is running into trouble over issues surrounding the passing of intellectual property related to sensitive aircraft and engine technology to Ankara. BAE continues to lead in the development of technologies for the Typhoon and is Lockheed Martin's main international partner in the F-35 program. It is also part of a stalled Anglo-French partnership to investigate unmanned combat vehicle technologies. In a statement, the company said it is working closely with the Royal Air Force and industry partners to further develop “Britain's work-leading combat air capability” and envisions a future combat air system developed with international partners that is flexible, affordable and customizable for export. But for such a vision to move forward, Everett said, the role of Britain must be clear. “The industrial question is would we have sufficient lead in any joint program to make it worthwhile. That perhaps is a more serious question in any U.K.-French-German mix.” https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/farnborough/2018/06/25/excluded-from-cooperative-plans-in-europe-uk-sets-groundwork-for-future-fighters/

• 

  October 30, 2020 | International, Naval

  Naval Group keeps its head down during the pandemic

  By: Sebastian Sprenger COLOGNE, Germany — French shipbuilder Naval Group is counting its blessings of full order books during the worldwide coronavirus pandemic, conscious that defense companies will be scrutinized as national economies contract, according to CEO Eric Pommellet. The company so far has seen no impact on its activities, including big-ticket shipbuilding programs in Europe, Australia and South America, Pommellet told reporters during a conference call last week. “We have not lost any projects, we have not lost any customers. All of the defense programs have been kept intact in terms of government budgets for all of our customers,” he said. Pommellet's comments fall in line with a trend throughout Europe of governments trying to preserve, if not boost, their defense budgets in the midst of an economic crisis whose contours are still taking shape amid drastic new measures aimed at curbing the spread of COVID-19. France and Germany announced new lockdown measures this week, with offers by the governments to ease the blow to companies. In France — which represents 70 percent of Naval Group's business, according to Pommellet — officials consider defense spending a national stimulus. Still, the situation remains fluid, as the company has worked to adapt its operations to keep the workforce healthy. “When I look at the overall situation for now, I would say: ‘No impact,' ” Pommellet said. “The question will be tomorrow, of course. And here, I'm unable to look into the crystal ball.” The uncertainty has driven the company to keep its head down and plug away on the work at hand. “This is a moment where we must stick to our projects and stay in touch with our customers,” Pommellet said. “Delivering and serving our customers at absolutely perfect performance in this period sends a key message. Because tomorrow, they will remember that we were there.” It also may not be the time for bold moves when it comes to pursuing further consolidation in Europe's naval shipbuilding sector in the face of competition from China and Russia. The perennial vision of consolidation has yet to gain traction across the continent. For now, Pommellet said, he wants to ensure cooperation with Italy's Fincantieri, under the banner of the Naviris joint venture, can bear fruit. “Let's stick to what we do. Let's deliver, let's satisfy our customer, let's demonstrate that what we're doing is good and see tomorrow where the wind is blowing,” he said. https://www.defensenews.com/smr/euronaval/2020/10/29/naval-group-keeps-its-head-down-during-the-pandemic/

• 

  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/