December 17, 2020 | International, Land
By: Jen Judson
WASHINGTON — Hanwha, South Korea's largest defense company, and the U.S. Army have signed an agreement to research and develop defense systems and technologies together, according to a statement from the Asian firm.
The Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) was signed Dec. 10 by Hanwha Corporation and Hanwha Defense and the U.S. Army Combat Capabilities Development Command Armaments Center (DEVCOM AC).
Hanwha is the first Korean company to enter into a CRADA with the U.S. Army, according to the statement.
“This is a historic and exciting opportunity,” Ret. U.S. Army Lt. Gen. Bernard Champoux, head of Hanwha's US defense operations and former 8th Army commander, said in the statement. “It not only acknowledges the quality of the Republic of Korea's growing defense sector, but also further strengthens the bilateral US-ROK relationship and the Alliance.”
A senior delegation from DEVCOM AC visited South Korea in November 2019 to discuss possible collaboration with Hanwha. “Both parties shared their interest in jointly developing capabilities for the U.S. and other international military markets, with potential commercial spin-off applications,” the statement notes.
The agreement will allow the company and DEVCOM AC to exchange resources, technical expertise and intellectual property.
Efforts may include extensive simulation, modeling and prototyping throughout the design, development and testing of a wide range of defense solutions such as fire armaments systems, ammunition, vehicle and armaments system interfaces, protection systems, propulsion and robotics.
“For Hanwha, this agreement is yet another step in demonstrating its commitment to US defense stakeholders and the US economy by facilitating transfer of technologies that can be incorporated into the American industrial base,” the company states.
Hanwha is hoping to build off the momentum from recent international success including competitive participation in Australia's LAND 400 and LAND 8116 programs.
Hanwha's Redback Next-Generation Infantry Fighting Vehicle is a top contender for the LAND 400 competition while its K9 Huntsman Self-Propelled Howitzer has been chosen for Australia's LAND 8116 program set up to build 30 new howitzers with upgrade plans in the 2030s. Hanwha is teaming up with Kongsberg Defence Australia on the effort.
Australia's LAND 400 program is an effort to procure a new combat reconnaissance vehicle. Hanwha's Redback is going head-to-head in trials with Rheinmetall's KF41 Lynx Infantry Fighting Vehicle. Australia will evaluate the offerings in trials over the next year.
In the U.S., many close to or directly involved in the Army's Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle competition to replace its Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle are keeping an eye on Hanwha as a possible competitor. The Army is expected to release its request for proposals for the competition Dec. 18.
The Army is embarking on its second attempt to hold a competition for the OMFV program after receiving just one bid sample by its deadline. A physical bid sample is not a requirement in the new competitive effort. Sources confirmed to Defense News at the time that Hanwha had seriously considered a bid, but decided against it. BAE Systems also chose not to compete.
Rheinmetall, Hanwha's LAND 400 direct competitor, is expected to submit a proposal to participate in the OMFV competition with a team of Raytheon and Textron. General Dynamics Land Systems and BAE Systems are also expected to submit proposals.
The Army is also gearing up for a future mobile howitzer shoot-off in 2021. It is unknown whether Hanwha plans to enter the competition, which is expected to have a deep pool of competitors.
The company also demonstrated its BIHO “Flying Tiger” air defense system as a possible Short-Range Air Defense System as the U.S. Army scrambled to develop an interim SHORAD capability in response to an urgent operational need from the European theater just a few years ago.
Hanwha “has its foundation in the development and production of energetics with 68 years of accumulated expertise,” the statement says. “The company is recognized for its modernized production of explosives propellants, and advanced precision guided munitions for the Republic of Korea and numerous allied nations.”
The company is also a “leading combat ground vehicle and weapons systems developer” in South Korea with almost 50 years of technology development and production, according to the statement.
Norway, Finland, Estonia, Poland, India and Turkey have all been customers of Hanwha's self-propelled howitzer solutions, the statement notes.
October 21, 2024 | International, Land
The nose of this autonomous variant of the UH-72 Lakota will open up, allowing weapons or larger pieces of cargo to be front-loaded into the helicopter.
September 24, 2020 | International, Aerospace, C4ISR
Steve Trimble Developing larger and longer-ranged fighters, weaponizing the Boeing KC-46 fleet, and possibly fielding a new type of unmanned, small and stealthy tanker are all now in discussion by U.S. Air Force leaders, assistant secretary of the Air Force Will Roper said on Sept. 23. As the head of acquisition, technology and logistics, Roper said he and the new chief of Air Mobility Command, Gen. Jacqueline Van Ovost, are “excited” now about the direction of the long-troubled KC-46 program, as the Air Force and Boeing continue to finalize the Remote Vision System 2.0 upgrade. The KC-46's turnaround, Roper said, is allowing acquisition and mobility officials to turn their attention to addressing another Air Force refueling problem: How to solve a yawning gap between refueling capacity and operational need for inflight refueling, especially at the forward edge of a ring of contested airspace, where large and, for now, relatively defenseless aircraft such as the KC-46 are most vulnerable. Building a more survivable and responsive air refueling capability that can be used in a contested war zone was the focus of a meeting this week between Roper and Van Ovost, he said. “One of those next strategic questions for the Air Force is going to be can you defend a tanker against an onslaught of fighters who know that every tanker you kill, it's like killing a lot of fighters or bombers or drones that it supports,” Roper said. Roper prefers not to take a one-size-fits-all solution, such as a single major new acquisition program that buys only one type of aircraft. Instead, the Air Force should evaluate the solution to the contested aerial refueling problem as an architecture, with multiple options that can be dialed back and forth. One option for reducing demand on tankers is a new fighter aircraft that is designed to carry more fuel. “Maybe having [the] small, currently sized fighters is not the way to go in [the] future,” Roper said. “And since we're all abuzz with digital engineering and thinking about what the future fighter force could look like, thinking about bigger fighters is a natural question.” Another way to make the KC-46 fleet more survivable, and thus operate closer to the forward edge of contested airspace, is to weaponize the aircraft, he said. “We don't put weapons and sensors on tankers to shoot down aircraft, but the current KC-46 is a big airplane with the ability to mount sensors and weapons under the wings,” Roper said. “We just don't do it because we can use a fighter combat air patrol to defend high-value assets.” The Air Force also may need a different kind of tanker in the future, he said. Two options are possible: A larger aircraft than the KC-46 that could carry more fuel, but needs to stay farther away from potential threats, or much smaller, unmanned and stealthy “micro-tankers” that could operate much closer or even inside defended airspace, Roper said. “I expect that as we really look at airpower in the truly contested environment that we'll be looking at fuel very strategically,” Roper said. https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/aircraft-propulsion/usaf-discussing-larger-fighters-weaponized-kc-46-roper-says
July 26, 2019 | International, Aerospace
By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — Boeing has announced its withdrawal from the $85 billion Ground Based Strategic Deterrent competition, potentially leaving Northrop Grumman as the only contender vying to replace the Air Force's Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missiles. “After numerous attempts to resolve concerns within the procurement process, Boeing has informed the Air Force that it will not bid Ground Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD) Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) under the current acquisition approach,” reads a Boeing statement. “We've evaluated these issues extensively, and determined that the current acquisition approach does not provide a level playing field for fair competition.” Boeing Defense CEO Leanne Caret detailed the company's issues in a July 23 letter to Air Force acquisition executive Will Roper, which was obtained by Defense News and other outlets. “Throughout the procurement process, Boeing has been transparent with the Air Force about its concerns with the competition,” she wrote. “The final RFP released on July 16 made only modest changes to the draft RFPs that had been previously released. As relevant to the concerns Boeing had raised, the final RFP extended the proposal submission deadline by 60 days, from 90 days after the RFP's issuance to 150 days, and allowed offerors to submit ‘an alternative proposal in addition to their principal proposal,' that could include ‘a single, combined proposal' from both competitors." But Caret said that those changes did not address Boeing's primary concern: that Northrop Grumman would have an unfair advantage in the competition due to its recent acquisition of solid rocket motor manufacturer Orbital ATK, now known as Northrop Grumman Innovation Systems. NGIS is one of two U.S. manufacturers of solid rocket motors, alongside Aerojet Rocketdyne, but both Boeing and Northrop had chosen Orbital as its supplier for GBSD prior to the merger. According to Caret, Northrop only recently — as of July 3 — signed off on an agreement that would firewall Boeing's proprietary information from Northrop's own GBSD team as Boeing negotiates with NGIS for solid rocket motors. Even though an agreement has now been reached, Caret contends that Boeing does not have enough time to negotiate a competitive price for the motors. Caret said the current acquisition approach gives Northrop “inherently unfair cost, resource and integration advantages related to SRMs,” adding: “As I said in my July 8 letter, we lack confidence in the fairness of any procurement that does not correct this basic imbalance between competitors.” Even the Air Force's accommodation that would allow Northrop and Boeing to submit a joint bid “is not a workable solution to these issues,” she said. “Because the final RFP does not address Northrop's inherent advantage as a result of its control of SRMs, Northrop retains the ability to compete on unequal terms against either a Boeing or a joint ‘alternative' proposal — and as a result, would not be incentivized to devote the significant resources required to develop such a proposal,” Caret said. Additionally, Caret said it is “not realistic” to expect that Boeing and Northrop could develop a competitive joint bid in the five months before proposals are due, given that both companies have been working on their separate proposals for more than two years. An Air Force spokeswoman declined to comment on the news, as the competition is currently in source selection. Inside Defense broke the news of Boeing's departure from the competition. Boeing's decision comes a week after the Air Force released its final request for proposals on July 16. A contract for the engineering, manufacturing and development phase is expected to be awarded by the end of 2020. Lockheed Martin had previously competed for the contract, but was ousted in August 2017, when the service awarded technology maturation and risk reduction contacts to Boeing and Northrop. It's unclear how Boeing's departure will affect the ultimate price of the GBSD program. In April, Gen. Timothy Ray, head of Air Force Global Strike Command, said he was counting on competition between Northrop and Boeing to help offset a near-term bump in cost expected as the Air Force makes investments in current infrastructure that will be reused for the GBSD system. Ultimately, that competition would help drive “billions” of dollars in savings over the lifespan of he weapon, he said. “Between the acquisition and the deal that we have from a competitive environment, from our ability to drive sustainment, the value proposition that I'm looking at is a two-thirds reduction in the number of times we have to go and open the site. There's a two-thirds reduction in the number of times we have to go and put convoys on the road.” It would be unusual for the Air Force to move forward with this program with only one competitor, Byron Callan, an analyst with Capital Alpha Partners, noted in an email. “One option would be for the Air Force to re-write the RFP to address some of Boeing's concerns, which could delay the program,” he wrote. “The RFP had been seen by some analysts as favoring Northrop Grumman because the initial portion was cost-plus, but Boeing's concerns suggest it's worried about a strategic bid by Northrop Grumman.” During an earnings call on Wednesday, Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg referred to the GBSD program a single time — to say that the company would leverage its development work on GBSD for future programs such as NASA Commercial Crew effort and next-generation space launch. https://www.defensenews.com/space/2019/07/25/boeing-drops-from-next-generation-icbm-competition/