US Navy facing early challenges in modernizing dry docks for submarine maintenance

On the same subject

• 

  September 3, 2019 | International, Land

  Here’s who will build and integrate the first hypersonic weapon system prototype

  By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — Dynetics Technical Solutions will be the first to manufacture a set of hypersonic glide body prototypes while Lockheed Martin will serve as the weapon system integrator, according to a U.S. Army announcement. The other transaction authority, or OTA, contract awards mark an important step forward in getting a prototype of the Army's Long Range Hypersonic Weapon, or LRHW — capable of flying at five times the speed of sound — that will launch from a mobile ground platform fielded by fiscal 2023. An OTA is a congressionally mandated contracting mechanism that makes it easier to prototype capabilities. The Army's No. 1 modernization priority is Long-Range Precision Fires, and hypersonic development falls into that category. “Delivering hypersonics to a unit of action will provide a critical combat capability for the Army in support of the National Defense Strategy,” Lt. Gen. L. Neil Thurgood, director of hypersonics, directed energy, space and rapid acquisition, said in an Aug. 30 statement. “With a collaborative effort by our partners in industry and the Department of Defense, we will advance this strategic weapon system and fulfill a critical mission for our nation.” Dynetics, based in Huntsville, Alabama, will get $351.6 million to produce the “first commercially manufactured set of prototype Common-Hypersonic Glide Body (C-HGB) systems,” according to the statement. This means the company will get the first crack at building the C-HGB, but it is likely others will subsequently receive awards to learn how to manufacture the C-HGB developed by the federally funded Sandia National Laboratories in an effort to build up the currently nonexistent hypersonic industrial base in the United States. Dynetics and future award winners will work with the lab to learn how to build the C-HGB. As hypersonic missiles become a reality, industry must relearn how to effectively, efficiently and economically produce them. While companies have developed warheads, glide bodies and other components, there is no industrial base equipped to manufacture hypersonic weapons. By giving multiple companies a chance to learn how to build the glide body, the hope is the process will build that vital industrial base. Lockheed Martin will integrate a launcher that can accommodate the C-HGB onto a mobile truck. That contract is worth $347 million. The OTA awards cover the design, integration and production work that will bring about a series of flight tests starting in 2020, which will lead to a fielding of a prototype LRHW battery, consisting of four trucks, launchers, hypersonic missile rounds and a command and control system. The Army is in charge of producing the LRHW C-HGB as part of a collaboration with the other services. "Dynetics has been developing enabling technologies for many years,” Steve Cook, the company's president, said in a statement. “Our team is pleased the Army saw that our highly-skilled engineers and technicians can bring this technology rapidly and affordably to the warfighter.” DTS will lead “a world-class team for the project, including established and proven defense industry contractors” like General Atomics Electromagnetic Systems, Lockheed Martin and Raytheon. “Each of these companies will bring decades of experience and will join science and technological capabilities to make a modern prototype and eventually become a program of record,” Cook said. General Atomics Electromagnetic Systems will provide cable, electrical and mechanical manufacturing. Lockheed will support the manufacturing, assembly, integration, testing, systems engineering and analysis. And as a principal subcontractor, Raytheon will provide its “extensive experience” in advanced hypersonic technology to build control, actuation and power-conditioning sub-assemblies that control flight, and it will help assemble and test the prototype. Lockheed Martin's integration team also includes Dynetics, which will develop launchers with hydraulics, outriggers, power generation and distribution for the ground platform. Other members of Lockheed's team are Integration Innovation Inc., Verity Integrated Systems, Martinez & Turek, and Penta Research. “We believe our relationships offer the Army unmatched expertise and puts us in the best position to deliver this critical capability to the nation," Eric Scherff, vice president for hypersonic strike programs for Lockheed Martin Space, said in a statement. Lockheed Martin's hypersonic strike contract awards already exceed $2.5 billion. The Army plans to deliver a hypersonic missile and launcher to a unit in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2021. The unit will train for an entire year without live rounds, Thurgood said earlier this month at the Space and Missile Defense Symposium in Huntsville, Alabama. He noted that the canisters the unit will use will be filled with cement to match the weight. The first live-round test will take place in FY22 and will be conducted by a battery led by a captain. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2019/08/30/heres-who-will-build-and-integrate-the-first-hypersonic-weapon-system-prototype

• 

  May 29, 2020 | International, C4ISR

  How Army Futures Command plans to grow soldiers’ artificial intelligence skills

  By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — With artificial intelligence expected to form the backbone of the U.S. military in the coming decades, the Army is launching a trio of new efforts to ensure it doesn't get left behind, according to the head of Army Futures Command. While speaking at an event Wednesday hosted by the Defense Writers Group, Gen. Mike Murray was asked about areas that need more attention as his command works to modernize the force. Murray pointed to a change in how the service does long-term planning, as well as two personnel efforts that could pay off in the long run. The first is something Murray has dubbed “Team Ignite,” which he described as “ad hoc, right now,” with a hope to formalize the process in the future. In essence, this means bringing in the teams that write the concept of operations for the military and having them work next to the technologists driving research and development efforts so that everything is incorporated early. “It has occurred to me for a long time that when we prepare concepts about how we will fight in the future, they are usually not informed by scientists and what is potentially out there in terms of technology,” Murray said. “And when we invest in technologies, rarely do we consult the concept writers to understand what type of technology will fundamentally change the way we fight in the future.” In Murray's vision, this means soon there will be “a concept writer saying, ‘If only I could [do something we can't do now], this would fundamentally change the way we would fight,' and a scientist or technologist saying, ‘Well, actually we can, you know, another 10-15 years,' and then vice versa,” he said. “Really using that to drive where we're investing our science and technology dollars, so that in 10 or 15 years we actually can fundamentally change the way we're going to fight.” The Futures Command chief also laid out two new efforts to seed understanding of AI throughout the force, saying that “a key component of the Army moving more and more into the area of artificial intelligence is the talent that we're going to need in the formation to do that.” Murray described a ”recently approved” masters program to be run through Carnegie Mellon University, focusing on bringing in “young officers, noncommissioned officers and warrant officers” to teach them about artificial intelligence. The course features four to five months of actual learning in the classroom, followed by five or six months working for the Army's AI Task Force. After that, the officers are sent back the force, bringing with them their AI experience. Additionally, Murray is in the early stages of standing up what he described as a “software factory” to try and identify individual service members who have some computer skills, pull them out of their normal rotations and give them training on “basic coding skills” before sending them back to the force. “We're going to need a lot of these types of people. This is just [the] beginning, to seed the Army with the types of talent we're going to need in the future if we're going to take advantage of data, if we're going to take advantage of artificial intelligence in the future,” he said. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2020/05/28/how-army-futures-command-plans-to-grow-ai-skills-in-the-service/

• 

  April 3, 2020 | International, Aerospace

  A la recherche de l'IA hybride

  Vice-président recherche, technologie, innovation du groupe Thales, David Sadek intervenait jeudi 24 octobre à Toulouse au Forum Innovation IA, un événement organisé par Sciences et Avenir pour le groupe Challenges. Explicabilité, validité, intégrité... " Pour une IA de confiance " : c'était l'intitulé de l'intervention de David Sadek, le vice-président recherche, technologie, innovation du groupe Thales. "Nous aimerions tous pouvoir toujours faire confiance à tous nos outils technologiques. Mais en réalité tout dépend du contexte. Dans le cas des outils reposant sur l'IA, si Netflix me recommande un film que je trouve détestable, ce n'est pas bien grave, on s'en remettra. Mais dans le cas des systèmes critiques tels que l'on en conçoit régulièrement chez Thales pour des applications défense, espace et aéronautique, la question de la confiance est primordiale". David Sadek énonce trois impératifs, qui sont autant d'axes stratégiques de la feuille de route IA chez Thales, pour aller vers cette " IA de confiance ". Pour qu'une application de l'IA soi digne de confiance, il faut d'abord qu'elle soit capable d'expliquer. Si elle se contente de proposer ou décider sans être capable de dire pourquoi et comment elle est arrivée à cette proposition ou décision, la défiance s'installera. Elle doit donc être capable de répondre à la question : " Pourquoi ? ". "Si par exemple un copilote IA recommande au pilote humain de virer à 45°, et que ce dernier demande " pourquoi ", le copilote doit pouvoir répondre par exemple : " parce qu'il y a un problème météo (ou une menace ...) droit devant ". Il ne s'agit pas de simplement tracer la décision, de pouvoir indiquer à ses concepteurs quels neurones, quelles couches de neurones, ont fait pencher la balance dans un sens ou un autre, mais bien d'expliquer dans une langue compréhensible immédiatement par le pilote". Ce qui indique qu'à l'aspect intelligence artificielle s'ajoute celui de " l'interaction homme-machine ". IA connexionniste et IA symbolique Cela implique, en restant sur cet exemple, une capacité de compréhension et de génération du langage naturel. Mieux, le pilote appréciera de pouvoir dialoguer dans un langage mixte, reposant sur l'oral et le geste (pour désigner un point sur une carte, etc.). Deuxième impératif selon David Sadek : il faut pouvoir démontrer la validité d'une application de l'IA. C'est-à-dire sa conformité aux spécifications. "Le système développé doit faire tout ce l'on attend de lui et rien que ce que l'on attend de lui. Ce qui suppose que l'on sache spécifier très proprement". On connait l'exemple d'un jeu de bataille navale, un " serious game " destiné à former des officiers de la marine, qui gagnait à tous les coups, parce qu'il sacrifiait systématiquement chaque vaisseau touché, pour ne pas ralentir la flotte. Aucune règle ne prévoyait, n'interdisait ce cas de figure, passablement inacceptable. Troisième impératif pour une " IA de confiance ", selon David Sadek, la responsabilité des systèmes reposant sur l'IA. C'est-à-dire leur conformité aux cadres légaux, réglementaires et moraux. On connait le tendon d'Achille des réseaux de neurones : ce sont des boîtes noires, on voit ce qui entre et ce qui sort, mais on ne sait pas (trop) ce qu'il se passe à l'intérieur. C'est pourquoi David Sadek insiste sur le fait qu'il faut s'intéresser aussi à " l'autre IA ", l'IA symbolique, celle qui repose sur des règles et des raisonnements et qui s'oppose à l'IA connexionniste des réseaux de neurones. Cette IA symbolique, qui fait moins les gros titres, qui n'a pas connu les progrès fulgurants de l'IA des réseaux de neurones, est plus à même de répondre à ces trois exigences : expliquer, valider, responsabilité. C'est pourquoi la réponse à cette triple exigence passe sans doute, entre autres, par " l'IA hybride ", une IA tirant parti de ces deux branches de l'intelligence artificielle. Par Pierre Vandeginste https://www.sciencesetavenir.fr/high-tech/intelligence-artificielle/ia-pvdg_138526