Royal Navy partners with Anduril for Royal Marines’ modernisation

On the same subject

• 

  February 10, 2020 | International, Land

  Army wades back into effort to replace Bradley vehicle

  By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — The Army is wading back into an effort to replace the Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle with the release of a market survey on Feb. 7, tapping industry for ideas on what a future Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle (OMFV) might look like. After receiving only one bid in its previous attempt to develop and procure the OMFV and subsequently deciding to cancel the existing solicitation last month, the Army has a new plan to move forward that seeks to avoid some of the pitfalls encountered during its first try. The market survey itself asks companies to weigh in on what affected their decisions to participate, or not, in the previous OMFV competitive effort and how the Army might better engage with industry this time around. Instead of a laundry list of requirements that when paired together became unachievable — especially when delivered over an ambitious fielding goal of 2026 — the Army will be giving industry roughly nine characteristics, each of which will be laid out simply enough to take up just a page-and-a-half including a signature block, Army Futures Command Commander Gen. Mike Murray told a group of reporters at the Pentagon shortly before the release of the survey. The Army had previously laid out requirements such as the need to transport two vehicles in a C-17, for example, which turned out to be a difficult ask to industry within the timeline the Army was pushing. While the list of characteristics did not post with the market survey, Murray said the vehicle will have to protect soldiers, keep pace in a combined arms formation, be able to upgrade over time through open architecture, and be capable of growth without significant weight increases. It also must be lethal, and able to traverse bridges and main supply routes. Additionally, the vehicle should be transportable by rail, air or sea, and crew members have to fit in the back. An on-board training system would also be nice, Murray said, adding that the Army wants to take a look at different options for power and energy sources. Murray also stressed the document outlining the characteristics would change as the Army learned more down the road. Not required of industry will be physical bid samples as it previously requested. Only General Dynamics Land Systems was able to deliver a bid sample, but it did not meet all the requirements the service had laid out. Defense News first broke the news that a Raytheon-Rheinmetall team was unable to get its Lynx combat vehicle to the United States from Germany in time and was subsequently disqualified and that BAE Systems, the incumbent, wouldn't participate in the competition either. The ability to see what was possible from a technology and integration standpoint “was important to us and so I wouldn't say it was a mistake," Murray said of the decision to require a bid. “Did it lead to some problems we had? Maybe. But I would not characterize that as a mistake.” The Army, instead, will take a more measured approach, holding conversations with industry, requesting white papers and then choosing five prime contractor teams to design rough digital prototypes, according to the Army's acquisition chief, Dr. Bruce Jette. The Army plans to involve “soldier touch points” at every stage of the process and give soldiers a chance to heavily evaluate designs along the way, he said. Murray took pains to emphasize that soldiers would be involved in the design process, calling it “soldier-centered design,” which takes a page from other modernization efforts like the Integrated Visual Augmentation System (IVAS) program. And before ever bending any metal, the service will downselect to a group of three contractors that will provide more refined and detailed digital prototypes akin to a critical design review stage. Then the Army will choose two prime contractors to build prototypes that will be heavily tested and demonstrated in order to potentially choose a winner that would move into a manufacturing contract, Jette explained. While the timeline was ambitious in the previous effort and Army modernization goals dictated that it had to stick to schedule over all else, a schedule or even a benchmark for the first unit equipped isn't defined this time around. Murray said the Army will look to early conversations with industry to inform possible schedules based on what is feasible rather than setting an “arbitrary date” right up front. The Army is also planning to look at up to five vendors for major subsystems or components, Jette said. He also noted the service wants to “encourage companies to bring forth technology” that may not want to be a prime contractor, but have capabilities like automated loaders and fire control systems as well as in-cab wireless connectivity. “The barrier to entry is much lower for their investment,” he said. “By going to a digital design, as most do anyway, it makes it much easier for a company to participate as an [Original Equipment Manufacturer] OEM.” https://www.defensenews.com/land/2020/02/07/army-wades-back-into-effort-to-replace-bradley-vehicle/

• 

  January 13, 2021 | International, Aerospace

  Lawsuit threatens $23B weapons sale to UAE

  By: Joe Gould WASHINGTON ― A small, 2-year-old nonprofit think tank has taken a step that most advocacy organizations never dare try: It has sued the U.S. State Department to derail a $23 billion arms sale to the United Arab Emirates. In a legal claim announced last month, the New York Center For Foreign Policy Affairs asserted that the Trump administration failed to provide a reasonable explanation for its decision to sell F-35 fighter jets and other weapons to the UAE, which places it in breach of the Administrative Procedure Act. It has asked the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to find the sale invalid. The case is unusual, as is the theory of the case, but so is the Trump administration's approach to the sale, said Brittany Benowitz, a legal expert on human rights and arms trade. Such legal challenges rarely succeed, but if this one does, it could halt the deal even if Washington and Abu Dhabi follow through with plans to sign contracts in the waning days of the Trump administration. “If you can say this deal was executed improperly and the contractor was on notice of that, which they are, then I think you can say it's possible to stop the sale before delivery,” Benowitz said. The State Department declined to comment on the pending litigation, in line with its policy. The new lawsuit against the State Department came after a failed attempt in Congress to block the sale of 50 Lockheed Martin-made F-35 aircraft, 18 General Atomics-made MQ–9B Reaper drones and Raytheon Technologies-made munitions. The Senate narrowly rejected a challenge to the sale amid arguments from the administration that the sales would make the UAE more interoperable with partners and defend itself from “heightened threats from Iran.” Opponents said the fast-tracked process was incomplete, leaving questions about the security of U.S. weapons technology, the potential of sparking a Middle Eastern arms race, and the potential for the weapons to be used in Yemen and Libya; these arguments were echoed in the lawsuit. The State Department came under scrutiny for irregularities in a previous sale. Its inspector general, who was later fired, found that a separate “emergency” sale of $8 billion in precision-guided bombs to Saudi Arabia and the UAE failed to “fully assess” or mitigate the risk of civilian casualties in Yemen. To boot, Saudi Arabia and the UAE reportedly breached arms sale agreements with the U.S. by transferring American materiel to al-Qaida-linked fighters and other militant factions in Yemen. Lawmakers have also called for an an investigation into reporting that the UAE may have transferred American-made Javelin anti-armor missiles to the Libyan National Army in violation of a United Nations arms embargo. “What we're saying is that the State Department rushed this through without congressional oversight, they didn't follow their own rules and they didn't apply the same metrics that would guide approval to others,” said Justin Russell, the director of the New York Center For Foreign Policy Affairs. The organization conducts advocacy and research on the conflicts in Libya and Yemen. “Congress tried to block [the sale] on the same merits and when that legislation failed, we said, ‘Wait a minute, we've got to stand up and do something.'” The Administrative Procedure Act allows a court to “hold unlawful and set aside any agency action ... found to be in arbitrary, capricious, an abseils of discretion or otherwise not in accordance with the law.” Here, the lawsuit argues the State Department didn't find, as required under the Arms Export Control Act, that the sale “will strengthen the security of the United States and promote world peace” ― or present “a reasoned explanation” for its actions as required by the Administrative Procedure Act. In 2019, the Campaign Against the Arms Trade won a U.K. Court of Appeal ruling to ban new arms sales to Saudi Arabia. The government has since renewed sales, and CAAT applied for judicial review into the legality of the U.K. government's decision to renew arms sales to Saudi Arabia. In the U.S., there has not been a successful court case of targeting government-to-government sales in recent years, according to Benowitz. What's also unusual about the New York Center For Foreign Policy Affairs' approach is that it doesn't rely on a human rights argument but rather points to aberrations in the process ― particularly past end-use violations that ought to have have disqualified the UAE, she said. “There have been court challenges to arms sales in the past on human rights grounds, but this challenge on national security grounds under the Administrative Procedure Act is unprecedented,” she said. “It's rare because we have never had a record of irregularities like the one we have now.” By Benowitz's reckoning, if a finalized deal is invalidated in the courts and it is found that the deal never should have been entered in the first place, its unlikely the U.S. could be penalized financially by the UAE. “To get a remedy, or damages, under contract law, you have to have ‘clean hands,' so it would be difficult for the Emiratis to recoup,” she said. https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2021/01/12/lawsuit-threatens-23b-weapons-sale-to-uae

• 

  February 3, 2021 | International, Aerospace

  La NASA et le Pentagone unissent leurs forces

  Les responsables du gouvernement américain et de l'industrie aérospatiale sont en train de faire tomber les barrières vieilles de plusieurs décennies entre les projets spatiaux civils et militaires, en réponse à l'intensification des menaces étrangères au-dessus de l'atmosphère. Le Pentagone et la NASA unissent leurs forces pour se lancer dans des projets tels que l'exploration de la périphérie de la Lune et la prolongation de la durée de vie des satellites. Ce rapprochement est motivé par les activités menées par Moscou et Pékin visant à mettre à mal les intérêts américains dans l'espace, via leurs armes antisatellites, leurs dispositifs de brouillage et d'autres technologies potentiellement hostiles. Le général John Raymond, chef d'état-major de la Space Force (Force spatiale américaine), a récemment dévoilé un partenariat de recherche avec la NASA visant à protéger les satellites des lasers et des cyberattaques. A terme, selon des responsables gouvernementaux et des dirigeants du secteur, la coopération entre civils et militaires devrait s'étendre à la défense des bases que la NASA a prévu d'installer sur le sol lunaire, ainsi qu'à la protection des opérations commerciales américaines censées y extraire de l'eau ou des minerais. L'Opinion du 2 février 2021 - The Wall Street Journal du 1er février 2021