USAF Announces New Major Deficiency On KC-46

On the same subject

• 

  March 23, 2022 | International, Aerospace

  Signature du nouveau contrat d’objectifs et de performance 2022-2026 entre le ministère des Armées et l’Onera

  DÉFENSE Signature du nouveau contrat d'objectifs et de performance 2022-2026 entre le ministère des Armées et l'Onera Florence Parly, ministre des Armées, et Bruno Sainjon, PDG de l'Onera, ont signé, le 3 mars dernier, le contrat d'objectifs et de performance (COP) de l'Onera, pour la période 2022-2026. Ce document, qui « reconnaît le succès de la transformation de l'Onera et la consolidation de son statut de partenaire clé du ministère des Armées et de l'industrie aéronautique et spatiale », est l'aboutissement d'un travail entamé dès 2020 entre l'Onera, l'Agence de l'innovation de défense (AID) et l'ensemble de ses partenaires institutionnels, académiques ou privés. Il en résulte neuf objectifs opérationnels, dont, notamment, « l'exploitation de la complémentarité de l'Onera et du CNES au bénéfice du secteur spatial ». Bruno Sainjon souligne que « le ministère des Armées confirme une nouvelle fois son soutien au développement de l'Onera, par le renouvellement de sa subvention précédemment réévaluée, complétée par le financement d'investissements tels que la modernisation des moyens de télédétection aéroportée ou de calcul intensif, ou encore la croissance de l'activité contractuelle du secteur Défense de l'Office ». Florence Parly a déclaré : « Ce contrat d'objectifs et de performance pour la période 2022-2026 illustre pleinement le soutien de l'État à l'Onera, en prévoyant une augmentation des moyens financiers qui lui seront alloués. Il conforte le rôle central de l'Office dans la recherche et le développement de la filière aérospatiale française, en pleine synergie avec l'industrie dont il contribue à l'excellence au niveau mondial. L'Onera contribue directement à notre souveraineté sur le long terme, non seulement pour la France mais également pour l'Europe. Avec ce contrat d'objectifs et de performance, l'Office se voit confirmé dans sa mission d'être au cœur des grands projets aérospatiaux ». Le Journal de l'Aviation du 21 mars

• 

  July 10, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  House panel isn’t giving defense industry all the COVID aid it wants

  By: Joe Gould WASHINGTON ― The Pentagon would have $758 million to help mid-tier defense firms weather the financial effects of the coronavirus pandemic as part of the annual defense spending bill approved by the House Appropriations Committee on Wednesday. But the aid, which was part of the panel's proposed $694.6 billion bill, falls short of the “lower double-digit billions” Pentagon officials say defense firms will claim under the stimulus bill Congress passed in March. As Congress debates the next stimulus, the defense industry has been urging lawmakers to appropriate enough to reimburse the Pentagon's suppliers for pandemic-related disruptions. Under Section 3610 of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, contractors can seek to recover such costs, but Congress has yet to appropriate money for it. “While helpful and our industry appreciates the recognition of the need in the HAC mark and all the support we have received from the Pentagon and Congress to date, this level is insufficient to provide the support indicated previously by [the Office of the Secretary of Defense] and also by company leaders who have been communicating with the Pentagon, the Congress and the White House, including [the Office of Management and Budget],” said National Defense Industrial Association Vice Chairman Arnold Punaro. “We are urging that the next stimulus bill provide the needed funds particularly to support section 3610, the reasonable adjustments due to disruptions, and the added costs of protecting the workforces and doing business in a COVID-19 environment,” he added. Not all of the details of the defense bill were available Wednesday, but a committee summary says it provides “$758 million to mitigate the impacts of COVID on second, third, and fourth tier suppliers in the Defense Industrial Base.” Such support would supplement $688 million for the defense-industrial base that the Department of Defense previously set aside as part of the $10.5 billion it got from the coronavirus relief fund created under the CARES Act. Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment Ellen Lord warned Congress last month that the DoD's pandemic-related costs, which include 3,610 claims, may nonetheless force it to dip into modernization and readiness accounts if Congress doesn't backfill the money. “The department does not have the funding to cover these costs,” she said. The House Appropriations Committee's bill is not the last word, and Republicans, who control the Senate and the White House, will negotiate over the final numbers. “FY21 appropriations bills must be changed before they have any chance of becoming law,” the panel's top Republican, Rep. Kay Granger of Texas, said Tuesday. This week, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., began to outline a forthcoming GOP-drafted coronavirus relief package, but it was not immediately revealed what the Pentagon's share might be. House Democrats are reportedly seeking $250 billion in emergency spending for an array of issues, to include rural broadband and transportation infrastructure to health care and global coronavirus relief. As lawmakers reconcile these many priorities, at least one one influential lawmaker on defense ― House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith, D-Wash. ― has said repeatedly that the Defense Department should draw from its existing budget. The Project on Government Oversight's Mandy Smithberger said the Pentagon has yet to make the case that payments to the defense industry will be the best means to stimulate the economy. “Even though they often don't act like it, resources are still limited to a degree and Congress has to consider fairness as part of that distribution, including who needs the government's help most, and which sectors are going to do the most to help the country,” Smithberger said. “These companies have much better access to capital than a number of other industries and individuals. Even from a reviving-the-economy perspective, this sector has always been one of the poorer performers per dollar for job creation.” The health care and education sectors create more than twice as many jobs per $1 million than the military, and the energy and infrastructure sectors create 40 percent more, according a 2019 analysis by the Costs of War project at Brown University. https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/07/08/house-panel-isnt-giving-defense-industry-all-the-covid-aid-it-wants/

• 

  December 7, 2020 | International, Naval

  Norfolk Naval Shipyard can go ahead with power and steam plant, state air quality regulators say

  By DAVE RESS DAILY PRESS | DEC 04, 2020 AT 5:14 PM Norfolk Naval Shipyard can proceed with plans to build a plant to supply the steam and most of the electricity it uses, the State Air Pollution Control Board ruled. The board found that the new facility would not boost pollutants — including sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide and nitrogen oxide — above air-quality standards. Its staff analyses also found increased emissions of those chemicals would not be significant, although the board staff did note that increases in very small particulate matter would be significant. The shipyard wants to install two natural gas-powered turbines, each capable of generating 7 megawatts of electricity, as well as a boilers, heat-recovery generators and one 2.4 megwatt steam turbine. The $30 million project would allow the yard to generate its own steam, instead of purchasing it from the nearby Wheelabrator plant. The plant also would supply most of the electricity the yard now receives from Dominion Energy. James Boyd, president of the Portsmouth branch of the NAACP, said the project would add pollutants to the already bad air, raising serious environmental justice concerns. In a letter to the board, he also said forecasts of emissions miscalculated totals, by reporting pollutant totals from one gas turbine and one burner from the steam generator, instead of calculating the total of all the turbines were operating. University of Richmond geography professor Mary Finley-Brook noted that the shipyard is a Superfund site, which means its neighbors are more vulnerable to harm from emissions. Finley-Brook said the assessment of impact on community health was inadequate. A study for the board by two Massachusetts-based PhD toxicologists said air currently is safe and new plant would not change that, while board staff said air quality in the area had improved over the past 20 years. Chesapeake Bay Foundation executive director Peggy Sanner said she is disappointed that the board did not require monitoring and reporting of actual emissions from the plant, once it is operating, in 2022. “There are serious environmental justice concerns around building a new fossil fuel plant in this predominantly African-American community, which is overwhelmed by health risks from industrial pollution, she said, adding " Portsmouth residents already live near high concentrations of toxic waste at the nine Superfund sites within a 15-mile radius.” https://www.pilotonline.com/business/shipyards/dp-nw-naval-shipyard-plan-20201204-6pb3dpzdxvgo5b5yr3z4ygptem-story.html