News

Joe Gould and Andrew Eversden The White House is reportedly pressuring the Pentagon to lease some of its prized spectrum for the lucrative 5G market to a single politically connected company, Rivada, using a non-competitive process. The White House's push to fast track a contract for mid-band spectrum to Rivada Networks has alarmed senior administration officials, according to CNN. Rivada and the Pentagon have both rejected those reports, but the denials haven't squelched concerns on Capitol Hill that the administration is using the Defense Department to make an end-run around regulators in pursuit of an expensive boondoggle. The concern on Capitol Hill and elsewhere stems from a September RFI from the Department of Defense that seeks industry input on dynamic spectrum sharing, or ways the Defense Department and commercial entities can safely operate on the same spectrum bands. The RFI asks “how could DoD own and operate 5G networks for its domestic operations?” and “what are the potential issues with DoD owning and operating independent networks for its 5G operations?,” which has fueled fears and pushback in industry about DoD nationalizing a 5G network. In a statement to C4ISRNET on Wednesday, Pentagon spokesperson Russ Goemaere said “No, DOD does not intend to own and operate a national 5G network.” Rather, he said, the DoD needs to better understand how dynamic spectrum sharing can support training, readiness and lethality in the contiguous United States. "This RFI will help DOD understand best methods and approaches for owning and operating independent DoD 5G networks supporting ‘spectrum for training, readiness, and lethality,' " Goemaere said. Rivada has also denied allegations that it's in favor of a nationalized 5G network. “We want to add our voice to those condemning, in the strongest terms, anyone planning to nationalize 5G in America. Whoever they may be. Assuming they exist,” the company said in a statement Oct. 8. The company also released part of its response to the RFI earlier in the week that listed several reasons the DoD shouldn't operate a national 5G network, including costs of operations and maintenance, as well as limited coverage and capacity. Frustration on the Hill The plan has been met with opposition from the wireless industry, Republican and Democratic lawmakers, and reportedly senior officials within the Trump administration. On Wednesday, Smith told reporters he too is opposed to what he has heard so far. “I don't initially support the idea of DoD controlling the 5G network and building it. Someone's going to have to do a lot of convincing to show me that's a good idea,” Smith said. Smith said he agrees with U.S. efforts to counter Chinese dominance in 5G and build a western alternative, and he supports spectrum sharing between the Pentagon and private sector as a way there. But the prospect of a nationalized, DoD-led 5G network has “a lot of folks a little bit nervous” about its feasibility and effectiveness, Smith said, adding the administration's true plans remained unclear. “There is concern if DoD comes in and says, ‘we're just going to build and control the network' — and it's a little murky right now exactly where the Trump administration's at or whether or not they're going to try to go forward with that plan,” Smith said. “That's what we're trying to get some answers to right now.” The direct nature of the White House's push, and emphasis on a fast result, has frustrated and confused congressional committees and agencies covering commercial spectrum allocation — such as the National Telecommunications and Information Administration and Federal Communications Commission — that are traditionally involved in forming telecommunications policy, according to one congressional staffer. Leading the effort on Capitol Hill are Fox News commentator and GOP strategist Karl Rove, who is also a lobbyist for Rivada, and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, a close ally of the president. “When you have somebody going directly to members, that's usually a sign they're trying to pull one over because they're not interested in doing an evidenced-based approach, talking to experts for that member of Congress. Using people like Karl Rove and Newt Gingrich was an indicator early on that Rivada was not interested in engaging in good faith, but was interested in corporate welfare,” the staffer said. Two lawmakers with jurisdiction over the issue — Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone, Jr., D-N.J., and Communications and Technology Subcommittee Chairman Mike Doyle, D-Pa. — said they are probing reports the White House had “instructed DoD to proceed immediately to a Request for Proposal (‘RFP') in order to move forward toward a national 5G network.” “According to press accounts, several political operatives or lobbyists with close ties to President Trump or his staff – including Karl Rove, Peter Thiel, Newt Gingrich and Brad Parscale – are pushing for the seismic shift in spectrum policy contemplated by the RFI,” they said in a statement this month, referring to the DoD RFI on dynamic spectrum sharing. “These reports also suggest these Republican operatives are working for the benefit of a specific company, Rivada, Inc., which has long championed a national network that Rivada would construct and operate using its sharing technology.” They argued that DoD has “limited or no legal authority ... to construct, operate, or maintain a commercial communications network or lease its assigned electromagnetic spectrum (‘spectrum') to private entities to provide commercial communications service,” and asked that the Government Accountability Office conduct a legal analysis to confirm it. On the other side of the aisle, a Republican aide to the committee warned that Congress would have to be consulted before DoD proceeds beyond the initial RFI. “DOD is collecting information to build a public record, which is never a bad thing, but if the DOD takes additional steps forward we would have to evaluate whatever those proposals may be," the aide said. "[Energy and Commerce Committee ranking member Greg Walden, R-Ore.] has publicly stated that he opposes a nationalized 5G network, as do all five FCC commissioners.” Eighteen Senate Republicans led by Communications, Technology, Innovation, and the Internet Subcommittee Chairman John Thune, R-S.D., wrote to President Donald Trump, to argue against, “nationalizing 5G and experimenting with untested models for 5G deployment,” and in favor of previous White House efforts, which emphasized the private sector building multiple 5G networks. They did not mention Rivada. “While we recognize the need for secure communications networks for our military, we are concerned that such a proposal threatens our national security,” their letter said. “When bad actors only need to penetrate one network, they have a greater likelihood of disrupting the United States' communications services.” The spectrum sharing RFI Dynamic spectrum sharing is a technology the Defense Department is working to develop. The Pentagon recently announced six vendors would take part in a test bed at Hill Air Force Base in Utah, part of $600 million investment into 5G experimentation. The new RFI for spectrum sharing, developed in part by the office of DoD chief information officer, is another step forward in developing ways to share spectrum so the DoD systems that will rely on 5G, like many radar systems, can continue operating unencumbered. A major problem, according to former FCC commissioner Harold Furchtgott-Roth, is that the RFI is “vaguely worded and at times not very accurately worded.” “A benign interpretation of the RFI is that they're really focused on the technology and not on non-federal networks,” said Furchtgott-Roth, now a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute. “But the less benign is that ‘5G' is really a codeword for civilian networks.” Though the RFI has caused outcry, Furchtgott-Roth told C4ISRNET that the RFI did raise “good questions” about spectrum sharing with commercial companies. One of the routes the Pentagon explores in the RFI is leasing the spectrum it owns instead of reallocating. “The Department believes that more spectrum sharing must be the norm and that technology is a way to achieve greater sharing,” said Goemaere, the DoD spokesman. “As a result, DOD is looking for new approaches to spectrum policy, access, and use, and for innovative spectrum sharing technologies. This RFI seeks to expand DOD's knowledge base, understand the state-of-the-art, and inform future DoD research, development and acquisition activities.” Asked if the source selection process would be competitive, Goemaere told C4ISRNET that the DoD will “follow Federal Acquisition Regulations if any further acquisition is sought on this effort.” Furchtgott-Roth said that the leasing aspect raises questions about the DoD's authority to rent out federal assets — a piece that the DoD is also looking for answers to in its RFI. Any RFP would likely need to be a multi-award contract. Given the DoD's challenges with sole-source contracts in the past, particularly its Joint Enterprise Infrastructure Cloud, multiple vendors are likely needed. “It's hard to imagine that the Pentagon would want to repeat that disaster,” Furchtgott-Roth said. https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/it-networks/5g/2020/10/22/talk-of-national-5g-plan-from-dod-causes-confusion-concern-among-lawmakers/

By: Sebastian Sprenger COLOGNE, Germany — European NATO nations without the fifth-generation F-35 combat jet should mold their fleets to complement the U.S.-developed aircraft in future operations, according to a new report commissioned by U.S. European Command. The analysis, done by the think tank Rand and published Oct. 22, ascribes such a vital advantage to the F-35′s stealth and sensor-fusion features that the jet would be the only aircraft suitable for an initial contact with Russian forces in the event of a conflict. Following that logic, European nations that have already signed up for the Lockheed Martin-made jet should hone their tactics toward that initial engagement, and countries with less advanced aircraft should strive to maximize their ability to complement such an operation, the authors argued. The United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Belgium and Italy are European NATO members in various stages of getting F-35 aircraft. One tier below that, in the eyes of Rand analysts, are countries like Germany or France whose Eurofighter and Rafale fleets, respectively, have sensors advanced enough to be considered “fourth-generation-plus” aircraft. The report's recommendations are based on the hypothetical premise of a Russian land grab on the alliance's eastern flank. “One common scenario considers a calculation by the Russian government that Russia could leverage a regional imbalance in ground forces to occupy some slice of NATO territory, employ air defenses to stave off allied air forces, present a fait accompli similar to that seen in Crimea, and politically divide NATO by calling for negotiations,” the document stated. “The ability of European fifth-generation fighters to penetrate Russian air defenses and make significant combat contributions from the opening hours of a response — at the vanguard — would most likely challenge the logic behind this scenario, improving deterrence by increasing the Russian risks associated with this approach.” The observation follows the belief, which the authors propose is shared by Russia, that NATO forces have the upper hand in air-combat capability, whereas Moscow has the lead in ground forces. To be sure, the Rand analysis covers only one dimension in a potential confrontation with Russia. Air and naval assets as well as cyber weapons for information warfare would also shape the battlefield in potentially unpredictable ways, not to mention any surprise capabilities that either side could throw into the mix to nullify the opponent's technological advantage. The problem for European nations' fourth-generation and “fourth-generation-plus” aircraft, which lack stealth capabilities, is the inability to get close enough to targets without getting shot down by sophisticated air defense weapons, according to Rand. The key to making the best of the continent's aircraft mix is developing the fleets with greater interoperability in mind, the analysts argued. In that sense, non-stealthy combat planes, which typically can carry more weapons than the F-35, still have an important role to play after more advanced fighters clear any ground-based threats. European nations are studying two versions of a sixth-generation weapon for air combat, namely the Tempest project (led by the U.K.) and the Future Combat Air System (led by France and Germany). Those aircraft ideas are slated to come online around 2040, which puts them outside of the scope of the Rand analysis. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/10/22/european-nations-should-shape-their-air-combat-fleets-to-support-the-f-35-us-analysts-say/

By: Timothy A. Walton and Bryan Clark U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper is sprinting. With less than four months left in the administration's term, he unveiled a new vision for the Navy that would grow the fleet to more than 500 manned and unmanned vessels from today's 296 ships. Although some dismiss Esper's Battle Force 2045 concept as a political ploy shortly before an election, it could lead to a more effective and affordable future fleet — as long as Navy and Department of Defense leaders can avoid loading it down with expensive options. The Navy clearly needs to change its force design and operational approach. Even though naval forces are increasingly important to deter and defeat Chinese aggression, the Navy's previous plan to build a force of 355 ships lacked resilience and firepower, fell short on logistics, and was projected to cost 50 percent more than the current fleet. The Navy tried to adjust that plan with an integrated naval force structure assessment, but Esper rejected it, as it failed to implement new concepts for distributed multidomain operations and would be too expensive to realistically field. Instead, over the course of nine months, he and Deputy Secretary of Defense David Norquist led a study taking a fresh look at the Navy's force structure. The Hudson Institute contributed to the project by developing one of three fleet designs that informed the new plan. Hudson's proposed fleet is affordable to acquire and operate. Even though it consists of 581 vessels, more than 200 are unmanned or have small crews. The Hudson study's conservative estimates suggest it can be acquired for the ship construction funding in the Navy's President's Budget for fiscal 2021, adjusted for inflation, and would only cost moderately more than the current one to operate. The Hudson proposal becomes more affordable than the Navy's plan by gradually rebalancing the fleet to incorporate more smaller, less-expensive ships and fewer large multimission combatants. The proposed fleet would also constrain the size and cost of some large new ships, such as the future large surface combatant and next-generation attack submarine. Employing new operational concepts, the proposed fleet would outperform the current Navy in important metrics for future operations. First, the proposed fleet's groups of manned and unmanned vessels would generate more numerous and diverse effects chains compared to today's Navy, improving the force's adaptability and imposing greater complexity on enemy decision-making. Second, the fleet would deliver more offensive munitions from vessels and aircraft over a protracted period, and defend itself more effectively using distribution, shorter-range interceptors and electric weapons. Lastly, it enhances the fleet's amphibious, logistics and strategic sealift capacity. Overall, this results in a Navy that can help the joint force prevail across a range of potential scenarios, including the most challenging ones such as an attempted Chinese attack on Taiwan. The Hudson fleet is also achievable. Its shipbuilding plan relies on mature technologies or allows sufficient time to complete needed engineering and operational concept development before moving ships into serial production. The plan sustains the industrial base through stable ship-construction rates that avoid gaps in production and smoothly transition between ship classes. Even with this measured approach, however, the fleet can rapidly evolve, reaching more than 355 manned and unmanned vessels by 2030, and 581 by 2045. Although Battle Force 2045 focuses on ships, the Navy needs to spend more on improving repair yard infrastructure, growing munitions stocks, and providing command-and-control capabilities to the force. As the Hudson study shows, ship construction savings could help fund these and other enablers, but only if the Navy and the DoD have the discipline to avoid expensive new investments, such as building a third attack submarine every year, installing boost-glide hypersonic missiles on old destroyers or pursuing a significantly larger combatant to follow the Arleigh Burke class. Even if the procurement cost of these programs was funded through budget shifts within the DoD, each will incur a sustainment bill that is not factored into Navy plans and could accelerate the descent toward a hollow force. The Navy is now developing a new shipbuilding plan as part of its FY22 budget submission. Congress should carefully assess that plan and, in collaboration with the DoD, refine the budget. Esper may depart, but the results of this study can serve as a starting point for an operationally effective and fiscally sustainable fleet for the next administration. Timothy A. Walton is a fellow at the Hudson Institute's Center for Defense Concepts and Technology, where Bryan Clark is a senior fellow. Along with Seth Cropsey, they recently completed a study of future naval force structure. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/10/22/battle-force-2045-could-work-if-defense-leaders-show-some-discipline/

NAVY Leidos Inc., Reston, Virginia, is awarded a $149,238,311 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract containing cost-plus-fixed-fee, cost reimbursement and firm-fixed-price provisions. This contract provides services and supplies for the operation of the Naval Array Technical Support Center facility. Work will be performed in Newport, Rhode Island (99%); and Reston, Virginia; and Virginia Beach, Virginia (each location less than 1%), and is expected to be completed in November 2025. Service Cost Center funding (a type of overhead funding that is not authorized/appropriated in a particular fiscal year) in the amount of $13,837,718 will be obligated on the first task order and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured using full and open competition via the Federal Business Opportunities website with four offers received in response to solicitation no. N66604-19-R-0182. The Naval Undersea Warfare Center Division, Newport, Rhode Island, is the contracting activity (N66604-21-D-A000). Raytheon Co., Tewksbury, Massachusetts, is awarded a $12,699,161 ceiling increase and a 21-day period of performance extension modification to previously awarded, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract N65236-18-C-8009 for Cross Domain Maritime Surveillance and Targeting. Work will be performed in Tewksbury, Massachusetts (53%); Cambridge, Massachusetts (24%); San Diego, California (10%); Woburn, Massachusetts (7%); Portsmouth, Rhode Island (5%); and Arlington, Virginia (1%), and is expected to be completed by November 2021. This modification brings the total cumulative value of the contract to $53,456,317. Fiscal 2020 research, development, testing, and evaluation (Navy) funds in the amount of $2,527,793 will be obligated at time of award. Funds will not expire at the end of the fiscal year. The Naval Information Warfare Center, Atlantic, Charleston, South Carolina, is the contracting activity. DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY WGL Energy Services Inc., Vienna, Virginia (SPE604-21-D-7500, $35,243,557); Direct Energy Business Marketing LLC, Iselin, New Jersey (SPE604-21-D-7505, $22,671,935); Enspire Energy LLC, Chesapeake, Virginia (SPE604-21-D-7504, $16,476,727); and UGI Energy Services Inc., Wyomissing, Pennsylvania (SPE604-21-D-7502, $12,570,456), have each been awarded a fixed‐price with economic‐price-adjustment contract under solicitation SPE604-20-R-0407 for natural gas. These were competitive acquisitions with seven offers received. These are two-year contracts with no option periods. Locations of performance are Delaware; Maryland; Washington, D.C.; Virginia; Massachusetts; New York; New Jersey; Pennsylvania; and Maryland, with a March 31, 2023, performance completion date. Using customers are Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, National Guard, Coast Guard and federal civilian agencies. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2021 through 2023 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency, Energy, Fort Belvoir, Virginia. Honeywell International Inc. Aerospace, Tucson, Arizona, has been awarded a maximum $15,851,900 firm-fixed-price delivery order (SPRPA1-21-F-Q800) against five-year basic ordering agreement SPE4A1-17-G-0016 for V-22 spare parts. This was a sole-source acquisition using justification 10 U.S. Code 2304 (c)(1), as stated in Federal Acquisition Regulation 6.302-1. This is a one-year contract with no option periods. Location of performance is Arizona, with an Oct. 31, 2021, performance completion date. Using military service is Navy. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2021 through 2022 Navy aircraft procurement funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency, Aviation, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. National Industries for the Blind,* Alexandria, Virginia, has been awarded a maximum $13,676,269 modification (P00014) exercising the fourth one-year option period of a one-year base contract (SPE1C1-17-D-B003) with four one-year option periods for advanced combat helmet pad suspension systems. This is a firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract. Locations of performance are Virginia, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina, with an Oct. 26, 2021, ordering period end date. Using military service is Army. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2021 through 2022 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. CORRECTION: The contract announced on Sept. 30, 2020, for Boeing Co., Mesa, Arizona, for $30,322,385, was announced with an incorrect award date and incorrect contract number. The correct award date is Oct. 22, 2020, and the correct contract number is SPRRA1-21-C-0002. AIR FORCE L3 Technologies Inc., Salt Lake City, Utah, has been awarded a $23,836,458 cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to perform survivable super high frequency (SSHF) upgrades to the E-4B platform. The SSHF upgrade seeks to build new capabilities that form the foundation for maintaining the E-4B as an effective nuclear command, control and communications platform. Work will be performed in Salt Lake City, Utah; and Offutt Air Force Base, Nebraska, and is expected to be completed by April 18, 2022. This award is the result of a competitive acquisition and 67 offers were received. Fiscal 2020 research, development, test and evaluation funds in the amount of $20,000,000 will be obligated at the time of award. The Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, is the contracting activity (FA8612-21-C-5007). Palantir USG Inc., Palo Alto, California, has been awarded a $9,000,000 firm-fixed-price contract for the Palantir Gotham platform for the COVID-19 response at Los Angeles Air Force Base, California. The contract modification is for the procurement and utilization of the Palantir Gotham Platform, which is a commercial software that will be accessed by the Air Force to facilitate the critical efforts necessary to coordinate decisions in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Work will be performed in Palo Alto, California, and is expected to be completed April 30, 2021. Fiscal 2020 research, development, test and evaluation funds in the full amount are being obligated at the time of award. U. S. Space Force Space and Missile Systems Center, Los Angeles Air Force Base, California, is the contracting activity (FA8806-21-C-0002). SPACE DEVELOPMENT AGENCY Perspecta Engineering Inc., Chantilly, Virginia, is awarded a $17,890,322 task order on an indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract to provide mission system engineering and integration support for the Space Development Agency's Tranche 0 capabilities. The awardee will provide overall technical leadership for integrating Tranche 0 elements and executing on-orbit tests and experiments, culminating in a Capstone event which demonstrates potential capabilities to the warfighter. Work will be performed in Chantilly, Virginia; Valley Forge, Pennsylvania; Blossom Point, Maryland; Colorado Springs, Colorado; El Segundo, California; Huntsville, Alabama; Melbourne, Florida; and Space Development Agency, Washington, D.C. This award was made based on specifications in the Tranche 0 Mission Systems Engineering and Integration request for proposal HQ0850-20-R-0004. Funds obligated at the time of award are defense-wide fiscal 2021 research, development, test and evaluation funds. Space Development Agency, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity (HQ0850-21-F-0001). DEFENSE ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY General Dynamics Mission Systems Inc., San Antonio, Texas, has been awarded a $7,869,884 modification (P00053) to previously awarded contract HR0011-16-C-0001 for classified information technology services. The modification brings the total cumulative face value of the contract to $167,187,910 from $159,318,026. Work will be performed in Arlington, Virginia, with an expected completion date of February 2021. Fiscal 2020 research and development funds in the amount of $7,428,876 are being obligated at time of award. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Arlington, Virginia, is the contracting activity. *Mandatory source https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contracts/Contract/Article/2391498/source/GovDelivery/

U.S. Approves Possible Missile, ISR Pod Sale to Taiwan The U.S. government on Oct. 22 approved and notified Congress of a possible sale to Taiwan of 135 Boeing AGM-84H Standoff Land-Attack Missiles... More details on : https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/missile-defense-weapons/week-defense-oct-23-30-2020

We are not going to “efficiency” our way out of the hard choices which the next administration will face fitting an already straining defense posture under a flatlined budget. Previously in the Up... More details on https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/budget-policy-operations/opinion-efficiencies-alone-cannot-solve-us-defense-budget

By EurAsian Times Global Desk Under the F-35 Joint Strike Program, Pratt and Whitney announced that it has been awarded a $1.5 million contract for the study of F135 modernisation study and operational assessment. Pratt & Whitney, a division of Raytheon Technologies Corporation, will assess F135 engine enhancements required to support future F-35 weapon system capability requirements across all F-35 variants beginning with Block 4.2 aircraft. “Designed with the knowledge that operational environments will evolve and threats will advance, the F135 is postured to meet future F-35 capability requirements,” said Pratt and Whitney in a statement. The study would concentrate on enhancements addressing improvements to up and away thrust, powered lift thrust, power and thermal management capacity, and fuel burn reduction. Reportedly, the study will be completed in March 2021. “This award is a significant milestone for the programme and the warfighter, as we look to ensure the F135 propulsion system continues to provide the foundation for all air vehicle capability requirements over the full lifecycle of the F-35,” Pratt & Whitney Military Engines President Matthew Bromberg said. Lockheed Martin's F-35 Lightning II fighter aircraft is single-seat, single-engine, all-weather stealth multirole combat aircraft. The F135 engine is used in all three variants – the F-35A CTOL (Conventional Takeoff and Landing), F-35B STOVL (Short Takeoff and Vertical Landing) and F-35C CV (Carrier Variant). The F135 engine is capable of delivering more than 40,000 lbs. of thrust. The F135 has evolved from the proven F119 engine, which exclusively powers the U.S. Air Force's F-22 Raptor, and features best-in-class single-engine reliability, fifth-generation stealth capabilities as well as advanced prognostics and health management systems. “As we look to the future, growth in aircraft capability must be met with matched propulsion modernization. Fortunately, the F135 has ample design margin to support agile and affordable upgrades that will enable all F-35 operators to keep pace with evolving threat environments,” Bromberg said. https://eurasiantimes.com/f-35-fighter-jets-need-an-engine-upgrade-pentagon-awards-contract-to-pratt-whitney/

by Ashley Roque BAE Systems is remaining tight-lipped over whether it will compete in the US Army's revamped M2 Bradley Fighting Vehicle replacement competition, but told Janes a newly forged partnership with Elbit Systems could help it outfit such proposals with added capabilities. On 21 October, the two companies announced that they were teaming up to develop and integrate “advanced operational capabilities” for ground combat vehicles. This partnership could lead to Elbit Systems' crew automation, vehicle protection, and other defensive and offensive systems being included on BAE Systems existing and future combat vehicles. “BAE Systems customers, both domestic and international, are looking to modernise their vehicles and enhance their capabilities,” company spokeswoman Amanda Niswonger wrote in a subsequent email. “Forming this partnership will provide more agility in developing solutions that will meet our customers' requirements and timelines.” Niswonger did not directly address which legacy and future programmes this partnership is geared towards, but said “we are discussing the OMFV [Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle] draft RFP [request for proposal] internally and have yet to determine if it is the right programme for BAE Systems to compete for”. BAE Systems dropped out of the army's previous OMFV prototyping competition in 2019 citing programme “requirements” and the “acquisition schedule”. Since then, the army has scrapped the effort and relaunched a new one with seemingly less stringent requirements, though the service has not yet released the final RFP. https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/elbit-bae-systems-combining-forces-in-us-combat-vehicle-arena

Dans une réponse au député François Cornut-Gentille, le 22 octobre, le ministère des Armées estime que « les répercussions de la crise Covid-19 sur l'entrée en vigueur en 2020 de certains contrats ou la réalisation de certains prospects sont à craindre ». S'il était signé avant la fin de l'année, le contrat Rafale en Grèce pourrait toutefois limiter l'impact. La Grèce a également mis en vigueur plusieurs autres contrats avec les industriels français : un système de défense anti-aérienne et des contrats-cadre pour la maintenance et la mise à niveau de l'électronique de 24 Mirage 2000-5 (Dassault Aviation, Thales et Safran) pour plus de 260 millions d'euros. Enfin, le Qatar reste très intéressé par deux satellites d'observation de fabrication française et discute depuis de très longs mois avec la France et Airbus Defence and Space sur leur fourniture. La France est par ailleurs engagée dans des compétitions majeures. Dassault Aviation propose le Rafale en Finlande et en Suisse et Thales est en compétition pour le renouvellement de la défense sol-air dans ce dernier pays, dont le choix aura lieu simultanément avec celui de l'avion de combat. Pour l'article complet : https://www.latribune.fr/entreprises-finance/industrie/aeronautique-defense/crise-du-covid-19-vers-un-impact-sur-les-exportations-d-armements-francaises-en-2020-860366.html