Back to news

December 11, 2019 | International, Aerospace, C4ISR

This is who Congress wants in charge of new hypersonic-tracking sensors

By: Nathan Strout

Congress wants the Missile Defense Agency to take the lead on developing a space-based sensor layer capable of tracking hypersonic weapons, despite a number of objections made by the Trump administration earlier this year.

The administration claimed in a Sept. 4 letter that selecting a lead agency for the sensor layer this early “would limit DoD's ability to establish the most cost-effective missile defense architecture for the nation,” but the conference committee apparently brushed those concerns aside to place the project squarely in the hands of the MDA in their report on the annual National Defense Authorization Act, released Dec. 9.

The Hypersonic and Ballistic Tracking Space Sensor would be a new addition to the nation's missile defense architecture, supplementing the current Space-based Infrared System and the future Next Generation Overhead Persistent Infrared system in detecting and tracking ballistic weapons from space. Unlike those two systems, however, HBTSS is specifically designed to detect and track hypersonic weapons as well.

Compared to traditional ballistic missiles, hypersonic weapons are faster, maneuverable and dimmer when viewed from space. Both SBIRS and Next Gen OPIR were designed for ballistic missile threats and are ill suited for tracking the dimmer, faster targets presented by hypersonics. HBTSS meets that challenge in two main ways. First, unlike the two previous systems operating in geosynchronous orbit, HBTSS will be located in low-Earth orbit — far closer to the action. Being that much closer allows them to overcome the dimness of hypersonic threats in order to effectively track them. Secondly, the HBTSS sensors are meant to pass information from satellite to satellite, allowing uninterrupted tracking even as the hypersonic weapons move quickly out of view of any one satellite.

The fate of the sensor layer has been up in the air for much of the year. The MDA didn't include the effort in its fiscal year 2020 budget, but listed it among their unfunded priorities in a report to Congress, asking for $108 million for the project. Authorization for that funding was included in both the House and Senate versions of the legislation, and unsurprisingly has been included in the conference report.

To date, HBTSS has been a combined effort split between multiple organizations — primarily the MDA, the Space Development Agency and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. While the MDA is in charge of the actual payload, DARPA's Project Blackjack has served as a prototype effort for the design of the new sensor layer. Meanwhile, the SDA was established earlier this year to build a new multilayered space architecture in low-Earth orbit, of which HBTSS would comprise one layer.

The dividing issue between the two legislative bodies was whether to put the MDA firmly in charge of the operation or continue to let it develop between the MDA and the Space Development Agency, an organization stood up earlier this year to create a new space architecture comprised of hundreds of small satellites providing a variety of capabilities in low-Earth orbit. While the Senate wanted to have the MDA take the lead on development and deployment of HBTSS, the House supported a coordinated approach with responsibility shared between the MDA, the SDA and the Air Force.

“This is one of the interesting boundary cases that is going to keep coming up between what do you give to the space service and what do you keep in the other agencies and services,” said Todd Harrison, director of defense budget analysis at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “In this case, the MDA had already been working on the payload, and so I think there was a lot of angst in taking the MDA's work on that and giving it to another organization where it might lose some momentum.”

The conference report comes down on the Senate side of the equation, directing the secretary of defense to assign primary responsibility for the development and deployment of HBTSS with the MDA. The legislation would also require the secretary to submit a plan for how the agency will work with the SDA and the Air Force to develop and integrate the payload.

https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/space/2019/12/10/this-is-who-congress-wants-in-charge-of-new-hypersonic-tracking-sensors

On the same subject

  • British next-generation fighter program taps new suppliers

    July 21, 2020 | International, Aerospace

    British next-generation fighter program taps new suppliers

    By: Andrew Chuter LONDON – A raft of top systems suppliers have been recruited to join the team leading Britain's development of the Tempest next-generation fighter aircraft. Bombardier in Northern Ireland, GKN, Martin Baker and Qinetiq, alongside the UK arms of Collins Aerospace, GE Aviation and Thales, have signed up to collaborate with the BAE Systems-led team working on the future air combat system, it was announced July 20 on what should have been the opening day of the Farnborough air show before Covid-19 caused the event's cancellation. At the same time as the announcement, Sweden's Saab revealed it was setting up a UK hub to potentially participate in future combat air systems work between the two nations. It's been almost two years to the day when the wraps were taken off a plastic mock-up of a Tempest fighter at the Farnborough show. The British revealed a BAE-led partnership, also involving Leonardo, MBDA, Rolls-Royce, that would begin investigating the technologies required for a future combat air system. Some $2.5 billion has so far been committed to the program. Now, just months before an outline business case to develop the program further is due to be delivered to the UK government, Team Tempest, as the industrial team is known, has signed up its first seven systems suppliers. With the first phase of the new partnerships signed, the companies will seek opportunities to join forces on established projects and developments with the core Team Tempest partners. More than 60 technology demonstration activities are currently underway on future combat air systems in the UK employing 1800 people – a number expected to grow to 2500 by the end of the year. In a statement, Defence Secretary Ben Wallace said he was “delighted seven more companies have joined this mission to work in collaboration with the MoD, under the Team Tempest banner. They will bring the ambition, invention and expertise that will deliver the breakthroughs we will depend on for decades to come.” The rising employment levels and increasing industrial support comes at a crucial time for a program which will pretty much dictate Britain's future position in the defense industrial world, given the air sector's importance to jobs, skills and exports here. An integrated defense, security and foreign policy review is underway led by Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his advisors, who are said to be skeptical of local industry's ability to deliver major programs on time and on budget and would rather buy defense equipment off the shelf. With Covid-19 pretty much emptying government coffers, launching a multibillion-dollar program like Tempest is likely to be an issue unless the British can sign up some major international partners to share the cost. Last year Italy and Sweden both signed up to investigate partnering with the UK on a future combat air system, and those studies are ongoing with neither country yet committing to the program. Sweden may not have yet committed to a partnership with the British and others, but its biggest defense company, Saab, announced July 20 it was to invest an initial $63 million setting up a new future combat air center with other initiatives in the UK. Saab leads Sweden's future combat air system industrial participation in cooperation with the defense ministry. Details of where and when the company will invest in the UK are sparse, but Micael Johansson, the president and CEO of Saab, said the move demonstrated the company's commitment to combat air development and the UK. “Saab took the decision to create a new future combat air system center so that we can further develop the close working relationship with the other FCAS industrial partners and the UK MoD. This emphasizes the importance of both FCAS and the United Kingdom to Saab's future,” said Johansson. The British have cast their net beyond Europe in the search for partners, with India and Japan also having held discussions about a potential tie-up on a future combat air system. Across the English channel France and Germany are together developing a new combat jet to a similar time frame. Attempts to merge the two European programs have so far failed, but that's not to say that post Covid-19 financial reality may not cause a potential tie-up to be revisited. Howard Wheeldon, of consultants Wheeldon Strategic Advisory, said that the British government knew was at stake in the development of a future combat air system. “Team Tempest is a very significant program for the UK. ... A partnership between government, military, industry and international partners all of whom are determined to succeed,” he said. “Industry, along with the RAF Rapid Capabilities Office, have already achieved a vast amount in a very short period of time. I, for one, am in no doubt that the government fully understands the importance of what ‘Team Tempest' means to the UK, not only to jobs and maintaining necessary skills, but in the potential that the development has in terms of future prosperity,” said Wheeldon. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/07/20/british-next-generation-fighter-program-taps-new-suppliers

  • New small arms course launches to prepare Army Reserve for combat, increase survivability

    July 10, 2019 | International, Other Defence

    New small arms course launches to prepare Army Reserve for combat, increase survivability

    By: Kyle Rempfer A new Army Reserve small arms trainer course that teaches gunnery and range operations to soldiers has been launched at Fort McCoy, Wisconsin. Still in its pilot program phase, the course is intended to field weapons subject matter experts at the unit level and increase weapons proficiency among the Reserve force, according to the 88th Readiness Division. The new course lasts 12 days and prepares troops to train their fellow reservists as well as develop year-round training calendars for their home units. The Army Reserve Small Arms Trainer Course focuses on six common weapons: the M2 .50 caliber machine gun, MK19 grenade launcher, M240B machine gun, M249 Squad Automatic Weapon, M4 carbine/M16 rifle and the Beretta M9. The effort is also part of Army Reserve Chief Lt. Gen. Charles Luckey's larger push to make his component a more combat-ready force through efforts like Task Force Cold Steel — a series of mounted and ground crew-served weapons qualification events. “This is about building the most capable combat-ready and lethal federal reserve force in the history of the United States,” Luckey said at a Cold Steel training event in February. “This is about building the capacity, the capability, the bench strength of America's Army Reserve to train itself.” At the new course, instructors will teach preliminary marksmanship instruction on each weapon and their optics, as well as teach maintenance for each system. The course will also teach soldiers how to operate weapons ranges and how to procure ammunition through classroom instruction, simulations training and live-fire qualification. “This course is a true train-the-trainers program,” Master Sgt. Howard Griffith, course manager, said in an Army news article. “We take select soldiers from around the entire Army Reserve and provide them with the knowledge and skills to return to their units and educate their fellow soldiers.” An increase in weapons proficiency correlates with an increase in survivability in combat, which ultimately helps win battles, the news article states. The pilot program was designed by instructors from the Army Reserve Competitive Marksmanship Program and will be taught by instructors from Task Force Cold Steel. The Army National Guard and the active-duty force have had similar weapons proficiency courses for many years, and the Reserve component's own version was overdue. If successful, the long-term desire is to keep the new trainer course permanently at Fort McCoy. The installation has state-of-the-art ranges available for year-round training and is conveniently located in the center of the United States, making it easily accessed by vehicle, rail or air, according to the Army. To learn how your unit can take advantage of the Small Arms Trainer Course, contact Task Force Cold Steel at 608-388-4645 or email usarmy.usarc.84-tng-cmd.list.ocs-fy18-s3@mail.mil. https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2019/07/09/new-small-arms-course-launches-to-prepare-army-reserve-for-combat-increase-survivability/

  • 4 questions about innovation with the US Air Force’s vice chief of staff

    September 18, 2019 | International, Aerospace

    4 questions about innovation with the US Air Force’s vice chief of staff

    By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — Gen. Stephen “Seve” Wilson knows the enemy doesn't sleep. As the U.S. Air Force's vice chief of staff, he's aware of how innovation can be stifled. But that must change as the United States finds itself in an era of great power competition, he argues. Wilson spoke on a panel at the 2019 Defense News Conference on Sept. 4, where he discussed how the government can close the innovation gap, and how the military can improve its relationship with industry. What is the biggest challenge to moving innovative concepts into military operations? What I see arguably as the biggest challenge to innovation and moving it forward is urgency. And today I can't beat that drum hard enough and loud enough about the sense of urgency that the status quo simply isn't acceptable in the world that we live in. The good news is we know how to do this, we've done it before. And I'd go back to a time in our history in the early '60s when President [John F.] Kennedy said: “We're going to go to the moon and back.” In about eight years, we did 36 space launches. We built the biggest rockets ever known. And we did 36 launches in eight years. Today I look at the time frame it takes us to deliver capability, and we're nowhere on that timeline. I think we as a nation need to understand the competition and develop amongst all of us in all of our communities this sense of urgency that we're in this competition, and the status quo is just simply not good enough. So how do you enable that change? I was just at in San Antonio, Texas, visiting the 33rd Network Warfare Squadron. I met a young lieutenant with these bold ideas. He went to his boss and said: “Hey, I think we've got this really hard problem. I think I can solve it. Give me a handful of people in a couple of days and I'll be able to get after [it].” He came back and not once, not twice, but three times he failed. And along the way he asked for more people and time, until he didn't fail, and he solved a really wicked hard problem. There was a courageous lieutenant in this case and a leadership that empowered him to move forward. And then he briefed me — here's the vice chief coming to visit, [and he says]: “Hey vice chief, here's where I failed three times until we didn't.” And he brought the sense of urgency. It was about building a team, a common vision. It's really powerful, and I think it's indicative of what we need to see across all of our forces. We hear how advanced China is in areas of innovation. Just how advanced is it really? I tell people that we're the best in the world and our adversaries know it. But they're catching up. If we don't change, we could lose. We have to do business differently. We're trying. How? We hear government is not always easy to do business with. We're trying to lower those barriers and bring on people quicker and easier. We have some of the most impactful problems for our nation. And if we can get people in the door and expose them to the challenges and let them do what they can do, it's hugely rewarding. We have to make it easy. Can we make it easy where industry could come work with us, maybe even for only a few years, but [long enough] to really make a difference? How can we bring somebody in, let them work and then let them go back to industry? We both benefit from it. We have to find ways because this is about a competition for talent and good ideas. Then what do we do with it? Do we empower them and let them really work at these really hard problems? I think that's what people really want to get after. https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/air-force-association/2019/09/15/4-questions-about-innovation-with-the-us-air-forces-vice-chief-of-staff

All news