September 12, 2019 | International, Aerospace
By: Valerie Insinna
WASHINGTON — In a move that could have major impacts on the already-delayed tanker program, the U.S. Air Force has indefinitely barred the KC-46 from carrying cargo and passengers, Defense News has learned.
The decision was made after an incident occurred where the cargo locks on the bottom of the floor of the aircraft became unlocked during a recent flight, creating concerns that airmen could potentially be hurt or even killed by heavy equipment that suddenly bursts free during a flight.
“As a result of this discovery, the Air Force has submitted a Category 1 deficiency report and is working with Boeing to identify a solution,” Air Force Mobility Command spokesman Col. Damien Pickart said in a statement. The service uses the term Category 1 to describe serious technical issues that could endanger the aircrew and aircraft or have other major effects.
“Until we find a viable solution with Boeing to remedy this problem, we can't jeopardize the safety of our aircrew and this aircraft,” he said.
The problem was discovered during a recent overseas operational test and evaluation flight, when KC-46 aircrew noticed that numerous cargo restraint devices had come unlocked over the course of the multiple legs of the trip.
“Prior to departing for each of these missions, aircrew fully installed, locked and thoroughly inspected each restraint, and performed routine inspections of the restraints in flight,” Pickart said. “Despite these safety measures, the unlocking of cargo floor restraints occurred during flight, although no cargo or equipment moved and there was no specific risk to the aircraft or crew.”
A source with knowledge of the issue told Defense News that if all restraints on a particular pallet had become unlocked, it would be able to roll freely throughout the cabin. If all cargo became unlatched, it could pose a safety risk to aircrew or even unbalance the aircraft — making the plane “difficult, if not impossible” to control.
While this problem has only been observed on one KC-46, the Air Force does not have enough information to rule out other aircraft having a similar defect.
The problem also poses a danger to the tanker's operational test schedule, Pickart said. The program was set to start initial operational test and evaluation this fall, with pre-IOT&E activities already initiated.
“This is a multi-mission aircraft, it's for carrying cargo and passengers, it's for refueling and also the aeromedical evacuation mission,” he said. “If you can't carry cargo pallets and patient litters, a significant amount of your core missions cannot be properly tested.”
In a statement, KC-46 manufacturer Boeing acknowledged that it had been notified of the new issue.
“The company and the Air Force are cooperatively analyzing the locks to determine a root cause,” Boeing stated. “The safety of KC-46 aircraft and crew is our top priority. Once a cause has been identified, the tanker team will implement any required actions as quickly as possible.”
But the problem could be bad news for Boeing's bottom line. The company is locked into a fixed-price contract for where it is responsible for paying for any expenses beyond the initial $4.9 billion award for development of the aircraft. So far, the company has paid more than $3.5 billion of its own money to fund corrections to ongoing technical issues.
The latest Cat-1 deficiency brings the total up to four:
While the KC-46 program has clocked several key milestones this year, it has also hit some publicly embarrassing stumbles.
After several years of delays, the Air Force finally signed off on the acceptance of the first tanker. However, due to the list of technical problems, Boeing was forced to accept an agreement where the service could withhold up to $28 million per aircraft upon delivery. About $360 million has been withheld so far, Defense One reported in July.
The Air Force plans to buy 179 KC-46s over the life of the program, and 52 are currently on contract. So far, Boeing has delivered 18 tankers to McConnell Air Force Base, Kan.; Altus Air Force Base, Okla; and Pease Air National Guard Base, N.H.
But deliveries were interrupted earlier this year by the discovery of foreign object debris in multiple planes. The Air Force suspended KC-46 flights at Boeing's production line in Everett, Wash., this February after finding debris. Then it paused all tanker deliveries in March as the service investigated the extent of the problem. The service began accepting tankers again later that month, only for deliveries to stop — and restart — in April due to similar problems.
Will Roper, the service's acquisition executive, told reporters at the Paris Air Show this July that the service expects to find foreign object debris in KC-46s moving through the line, and it may be months before planes are reliably clean.
“As those airplanes flow forward down the line, we think it's going to take some time for the new quality assurance inspection processes to start early enough so that airplanes will flow that are FOD-free,” he said, according to Defense One. “It's not the way we want to get airplanes into the Air Force, but it's what we're going to have to do in the meantime.”
September 7, 2023 | International, Aerospace
Spirit AeroSystems' growth landed it back on the Defense News Top 100 list this year — and the company has more ambitious plans in store.
April 20, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR
Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — The U.S. and Japan need to expand their collaboration on defense technologies in the future, with a specific focus on four technologies that can help counter the rise of China, according to a new report released Friday by the Atlantic Council. The report also highlights the ongoing discussions about U.S. involvement in Japan's next domestic fighter program as a high-stakes situation that could dictate industrial cooperation between the two nations for years. “The most important component of cooperation on defense capabilities is direct coordination and collaboration on emerging technologies and capabilities,” write authors Tate Nurkin and Ryo Hinata-Yamaguchi, identifying unmanned systems, hypersonic/hyper-velocity missiles, and the defense applications of AI as three key areas where the U.S. and Japan need to start working together on. “These three areas are at the center of the intensifying U.S.-China military-technological competition. They are key to challenging or upholding military balances and stabilizing imbalances in and across key domain-area competitions — strike versus air and missile defense or undersea — on which regional and, over time, global security is at least partly based,” the authors note. Specifically, the authors identify four project areas that both fit into U.S. strategy and Japan's regional interests, while also matching industrial capabilities: Swarming technology and the loyal wingman: For several years the Pentagon has been investing R&D funding into the development of drones that can be slaved to a fighter jet, providing a “loyal wingman” controlled by the one pilot. Drone swarms are another area of heavy investment. Both concepts fit for Japan, whose Ministry of Defense expressed interest in both concepts going back as far as 2016. Unmanned underwater vehicles and anti-submarine warfare capabilities: China has invested heavily in submarines over the last decade, both manned and unmanned. The U.S. has also begun investing in UUV capabilities, but while Japan's IHI has developed a domestic UUV, the MoD has yet to go all in on the capability. The authors note it is a logical area of collaboration. AI-enabled synthetic training environments: The U.S. and Japan ran a joint synthetic training exercise in 2016, but the authors would like to see development expanded in the future. “Given both countries' need to accelerate training, their shared competency in machine learning and virtual and augmented reality, and a highly fractured simulation and training market, there is potential for a collaborative program to develop a synthetic simulation and training capability, to stress the specific operational contingencies to which US and Japanese forces will have to respond,” they write. Counter-unmanned systems: The entire world seems to be investing in weapons to counter unmanned systems, but the authors see a solid spot for the two nations to find workable technologies together. Japan's acquisition group is currently testing a “high-power microwave generation system” for this mission. That all sounds good on paper, the authors acknowledge, but there are very real challenges to increasing technology development between the two countries. Japan's modernization priorities are best viewed through a defensive lens, designed to protect the island nation. That's a contrast to America's posture in the region, which tends more towards force projection. In addition, Japan lags in military space and cyber operations compared to the U.S., making cross-domain collaboration challenging in several areas. Those negotiations have also been impacted by “different perceptions of the nature of joint technology research,” the authors write. “U.S. defense officials have ‘emphasized operational concepts and capability requirements as the basis for collaboration,' while Japanese officials have ‘continued to focus on technology development and industrial base interests.'” Other challenges include Japan's 1 percent-of-GDP cap on defense spending, as well as the state of Japan's defense industry, which until 2014 was focused entirely on serving the Japanese government's needs. Hence, the industry, while technically very competent, is also relatively small, with limited export experiences – and Tokyo has an interest in protecting that industry with favorable contracts. Meanwhile, U.S. firms have concerns about “potentially losing revenue, transfer of sensitive technologies, and the potential replacement of US companies with Japanese ones in critical supply chains,” the authors write. Some of those issues have come to the forefront in the ongoing discussions about what role American firms can play in Japan's ongoing fighter development program. Japan recently rejected an offer by Lockheed Martin of a hybrid F-22/F-35 design, stating that “developing derivatives of existing fighters cannot be a candidate from the perspective of a Japan-led development.” Getting the F-3 deal right will have long term implications for how the two nations develop capabilities together, the authors warn, quoting defense analyst Gregg Rubinstein in saying “Successfully defining a path to U.S.-Japanese collaboration on this program could make the F-3 an alliance-building centerpiece of cooperative defense acquisition” while failure to do so could “undermine prospects for future collaboration in defense capabilities development.” Putting aside the internal issues, any collaboration between the U.S. and Japan has to be considered through the lens it will be see in Beijing and, to a lesser extent, Seoul. “Even marginal differences in perception produce limits to the parameters of U.S.-Japan joint development of, and coordination on, military capabilities. Especially provocative programs like joint hypersonic-missile development will be viewed as escalatory, and will likely generate a response from China,Russia, and/or North Korea that could complicate other trade or geopolitical interests that go beyond Northeast Asia,” the authors warn, noting that China could attempt to exert more pressure on the ASEAN nations as a counterweight. Additionally, South Korea would likely “see substantial U.S.-Japan collaboration not through an adversarial lens, but certainly through the lens of strained relations stemming from both historical and contextual issues, further complicating U.S.-Japan-Republic of Korea trilateral cooperation.” https://www.c4isrnet.com/global/asia-pacific/2020/04/16/four-technologies-japan-and-the-us-should-team-on-to-counter-china/
November 20, 2020 | International, Land
JARED KELLER The Army is searching for defense contractors to furnish the service with an off-the-shelf squad reconnaissance vehicle to complement its growing fleet of next-generation ground combat vehicles. The service on Wednesday published a market survey in search of a fully electric or hybrid-electric tactical vehicle to "inform" the acquisition strategy of its electric Light Reconnaissance Vehicle (eLRV) program. The eLRV will provide "enhanced mobility, lethality, protection, mission load capacity, and onboard power" for six soldiers to conduct both mounted and dismounted reconnaissance and surveillance missions for Infantry Brigade Combat Teams, according to the market survey. The ideal vehicle will be transportable via CH-47 or C-130, have a range of more than 300 miles, and come with a medium-caliber weapon system to provide "precision 'stand-off' lethality" against both small arms and other light armored vehicles, according to a 2019 Congressional Research Service report. As Breaking Defense notes, the movement in the long-delayed eLRV program also comes amid a service-wide push to convert gas-powered ground vehicles to electric platforms for both tactical and logistical reasons. Electric vehicles "accelerate quicker, run cooler, and move quieter than internal combustion ones – advantages that are all especially valuable for stealthy scouts like LRV," as Breaking Defense put it in October. In addition, electric power "could reduce dependence on long supply lines and vulnerable convoys of tanker trucks, which are prime targets for adversaries ranging from Taliban irregulars to Russian missiles." The eLRV will also "operate in conjunction" with the service's next-generation Mobile Protected Firepower (MPF) light tank and Infantry Squad Vehicle (ISV) to "enhance the lethality, mobility, reconnaissance, and security" of IBCTS, according to the market survey. Those new formations are still a ways off: the Army only accepted its first batch of ISVs in October and won't conduct its assessment of its two MPF prototypes until January 2021. And that's depending on if the Army formally sets aside any funding for the new scout vehicle in the first place. As the 2019 CRS report noted, the service did not actually request any money to fund the eLRV effort in both fiscal years 2020 and 2021 In the meantime, Army officials "were planning to use the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) to serve as the LRV on an interim basis," according to the CRS report. "From a programmatic perspective, the Army referred to its interim LRV solution as the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle-Reconnaissance Vehicle (JLTV-RV)." If the Army gets its funding together, the service aims to potentially choose an off-the-shelf tactical vehicle for full production as soon as fiscal year 2025. https://taskandpurpose.com/military-tech/army-electric-light-reconnaissance-vehicle-markey-survey