U.S. Army Opens 5-Year Search For Stinger Missile Replacement

On the same subject

• 

  November 15, 2021 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  Dubai Airshow Issue 1

  Welcome to this edition of the digital ShowNews, an interactive and immersive highlight of content from the Dubai Airshow.

• 

  November 13, 2019 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land

  A new future in global arms sales?

  By: Jill Aitoro The last few years have seen a subtle transition in how the U.S., as the world's dominant arms exporter, markets to the world. Consider what we already know. In Europe, there's an expectation to filter more to local firms, whether through co-development or direct buys. There's also demand for greater access into U.S. programs, and for that access to be on a level playing field. And then there's South Korea, now calling for foreign contractors to engage with domestic small and medium-sized enterprises. Financial support for its companies is important, according to the Defense Acquisition Program Administration, but so is guidance that helps identify technologies that will make those domestic companies more marketable. Call it a mentorship of sorts. Look to Middle Eastern countries and we've historically seen more financial offsets: expectations to create jobs at home to improve the economy, grow skilled labor and expand infrastructure. That's the same in northern Africa. But with oil no longer a reliable source of revenue for the region, the expectations are shifting. The Middle East wants to build a new industry, and with billions of dollars in arms sales at stake for the U.S. and Western allies, the region also knows full well that it holds some powerful cards to play. It's that question that drove the shift in Europe: “We're buying from you, so why can't you buy more from us? And by the way, politically speaking, we're pretty important.” All this to say that the emerging visions in the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia have some teeth. And it can, therefore, shape how the Pentagon, American defense giants and global allies for that matter handle arms sales. Consider a couple of the more recent developments. The UAE launched a government-owned company with a combined annual revenue of $5 billion known as Edge, established with a core mandate “to disrupt an antiquated military industry generally stifled by red tape,” according to its CEO. Falling under Edge are now 25 companies that before were quite small in revenue and global market share, but together hold significant buying power: NIMR, AMMROC and Abu Dhabi Ship Building to name a few. Not only do these companies become more formidable players on the global stage, but Edge suddenly carries with it significant negotiation power. Sales to the UAE could bring newfound expectations for partnerships, for stakes in programs. Then consider Saudi Arabia, which established the Saudi Arabian Military Industries, or SAMI, for essentially the same reason. It also modeled the structure off of other countries with established defense industries — Turkey, South Korea, South Africa and some Western countries, among others. SAMI's stated goal is to become one of the largest 25 defense companies in the world by 2030 and to have export account for 30 percent of its business. So what might this mean for how the U.S. works with the Middle East? Major primes have cheered the formation of these holding companies. But make no mistake: Those primes recognize that the holding companies also pose a threat to the status quo. A simple model of just selling systems into the region likely won't fly, nor will teaming on a particular competition necessarily be enough. Boeing formed a joint venture with SAMI, for example, recognizing the need to commit long term. Also consider what SAMI CEO Andreas Schwer stated to be his asks of the U.S. and allies when I interviewed him last year: “If there was a wish, we would love to get more access to top-class technologies from all the U.S. partners. There are obviously limitations, which we are suffering from. That's the one element. So be a little bit more open. And second, export in arms and weapons was driven by FMS [Foreign Military Sales] programs. In our new setup in Saudi Arabia, we will do more and more in direct commercial sales.” Let's be realistic — that could change things. https://www.defensenews.com/global/mideast-africa/2019/11/11/a-new-future-in-global-arms-sales/

• 

  February 3, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  The Pentagon is racing against inflation for military might

  By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — In 2017, the top two officials at the Pentagon — then-Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joe Dunford — testified to Congress that the defense budget needs to have 3-5 percent annual growth over inflation each year through 2023 to ensure America's military success. Dunford, speaking to the Senate Armed Services Committee in June 2017, went as far as to say: “We know now that continued growth in the base budget of at least 3 percent above inflation is the floor necessary to preserve just the competitive advantage we have today, and we can't assume our adversaries will remain still." Three years later, as the Trump administration prepares to unveil its fiscal 2021 budget request on Feb. 10, such growth appears impossible. The budget is expected to be largely flat, as a two-year budget deal reached last summer calls for $740 billion in defense spending in the next fiscal year, up just $2 billion from the enacted FY20 amount. “The 3-5 percent goal was reasonable enough and absolutely needed,” said Mackenzie Eaglen, a budget analyst with the American Enterprise Institute. “But it is not happening. The defense top line for 2021 is negative real growth, aka declining.” Susanna Blume, a defense analyst with the Center for a New American Security, said that certain parts of the defense budget, particularly maintenance and personnel costs, grow faster than the rate of inflation. “That's what's behind these comments about requiring a certain amount of real budget growth in order to sustain the joint force as it is today,” she said. But there is a wild card, according to Ellen Lord, the Defense Department's top acquisition official: a series of reform efforts led by now-Defense Secretary Mark Esper, which so far have accounted for $5 billion in savings. “We're getting more and more efficient. That is obviously what Secretary Esper is focused on with his defensewide review, that we are cutting out administrative tasks and a variety of portions of programs to make sure we return those savings to our critical modernization efforts such as [artificial intelligence], hypersonics and so forth,” Lord said during a Jan. 31 news conference at the Pentagon. “We are always having to look very carefully at our budgets and make sure we triage them to focus on the critical few. So we're always concerned, but we're always going to work it.” How much of that expected growth gap can be filled by Esper's efficiency drive is difficult to pin down. Blume said its “certainly possible that efficiencies could make up some of that gap,” but whether the work that has been done now and is planned in the near term will be enough “are questions we don't have answers to today.” Added Eaglen: “Efficiencies alone will not get the Pentagon its 3-5 percent growth in actual dollars to reinvest. The defensewide review only yielded $5 billion, and the way it works with these drills is that the money doesn't necessarily move from pot A to pot B as a result." “But that doesn't mean it is not worth doing. Any money amount is helpful. And the exercise is also about getting the bureaucracy to shift its time, tasks and attention to great power competition as much as it's about shifting funds into higher priorities that support the strategy,” Eaglen said. If one of the Pentagon's big bets work out, that could be a real game-changer, Blume said. Those bets include efforts to replace a Defense Logistics Agency warehouse using a 3D printer as well as attempts by the Air Force to rapidly develop, prototype and produce fleets of planes. If one of them goes well, Blume said, “you can potentially start to bend some of those cost curves.” https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2020/01/31/the-pentagon-is-racing-against-inflation-for-military-might/