News

By: Hans Binnendijk and Jim Townsend The incoming European Commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, will need to work with Washington to defuse a quietly simmering trans-Atlantic defense cooperation issue that, if left unsettled, could do more long-term damage to the NATO alliance than U.S. President Donald Trump's divisive tweets. The United States for years has sought to stimulate increased European defense spending while minimizing wasteful duplication caused by Europe's fragmented defense industry. Europe has finally begun to deliver: Defense spending is up significantly, and the European Union has created several programs to strengthen its defense industries. But in the process, the EU has created a trans-Atlantic problem. These advances in Europe could come at the expense of non-EU defense industries, especially in the U.S. The European Defence Fund, or EDF, established in 2017, is designed to support the cooperative research and development efforts of European defense industries, especially small and mid-sized firms. Three eligible companies from at least three EU countries need to apply in a coordinated fashion to receive project research and development funding, which can be up to a 100 percent grant for the research phase. Plans call for spending about $15 billion between 2021 and 2027 to strengthen Europe's defense R&D and stimulate innovation. Model projects include the Eurodrone and ground-based precision strike weapons. A second related EU program, Permanent Structured Cooperation, or PESCO, also inaugurated in 2017, focuses more on efforts to foster defense cooperation among subsets of European states. Initially envisioned in the 2009 Lisbon Treaty, PESCO is an effort to develop a more comprehensive European defense consistent with EU's common foreign and security policy needs. Thus far, 25 of 28 EU nations have signed up, with 34 modest cooperative projects agreed to by the European Council. The EU estimates that the inefficiency caused by the lack of adequate defense cooperation costs its members between $25 billion and $100 billion annually. These new EU programs, designed to pool and share scarce defense resources, are intended to help address that problem. But the exclusivity of these approaches favor the defense industries of EU members, and the hostile Trump administration rhetoric toward the EU is only supercharging this controversy. President Trump's negative attitude toward NATO and European leaders has undercut European confidence in American trans-Atlantic leadership and strengthened a call in some European capitals for European “strategic autonomy.” Part of this autonomy is developing a more capable and independent European military supported by a stronger European defense industry. A stronger European military capability is a goal shared on both sides of the Atlantic, but not at the expense of defense cooperation. While European leaders understand that they are probably decades away from real, strategic autonomy and military independence, they are shaping the EDF and PESCO approaches to protect European defense industry by being fairly exclusive of U.S. or other non-EU defense industries. This has U.S. defense officials worried. A May 2020 letter to the EU from two senior U.S. officials stated their “deep concern” about the programs' regulations. While current EDF and PESCO programs are small, U.S. officials are worried they will set precedents and will be a model for more ambitious European defense cooperation in the future. They fear not only that U.S. industry will be cut out, but that two separate defense industry tracks will be established that will undercut NATO interoperability and promote further duplication. Some U.S. officials have threatened U.S. retaliation unless changes are made. EU officials respond that these criticisms are excessive. They note that some American defense firms established in European countries will be eligible, that there is nothing comparable to the “Buy American Act” in Europe, that plenty of trans-Atlantic cooperative projects can take place outside of these two EU programs, that the PESCO projects will be guided by both EU and NATO requirements, and that over 80 percent of European international defense contracts go to U.S. firms anyway. They also note that a deterrent to U.S.-EU defense cooperation is that U.S. arms transfer control regulations create potential American restrictions on the sale to third countries of any U.S.-EU cooperative weapons systems that contain U.S. technology. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, who seems caught in the middle, has supported both EDF and PESCO, so long as the results fill NATO capability gaps and do not lead to further duplication. Flexibility will be needed on both sides of the Atlantic to defuse this issue before it becomes too difficult to manage. Some opportunities for third-country participation will be needed. Possible approaches to level the playing field include focusing on modifying PESCO, which is still under development in the EU. One suggestion is to create a “white list” of NATO nations not in the EU (such as the U.S., Canada, Norway, post-Brexit United Kingdom and Turkey) that might be invited to participate in selected PESCO projects on a case-by-case basis. This would at least set a precedent that PESCO does not completely exclude third countries. And it would strengthen EU-NATO defense links. Additionally, formal procedures might be established for closer cooperation between the PESCO project selection process and NATO's defense planning process. This will help avoid duplication and identify at NATO those areas where NATO nations outside the EU could cooperate on PESCO projects, The U.S. might also consider amending its arms export control legislation to waive the third-country transfer review requirement for the export of U.S.-PESCO joint projects if the sale would be made to a country to which the U.S. would have made a similar sale. EU internal negotiations on EDF are finished, and changes will be hard to make. Plus, EDF provides R&D funding grants that use European financial resources. While some $118 million in U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency funds go to European firms, that is about 3 percent of DARPA's budget. So the U.S. might ask for some modest reciprocity from the EDF. But more constructively, DARPA and the EDF might co-fund R&D for joint U.S.-EU projects. The United States has much to gain from a strong European defense industry. Europe has much to gain from cooperation with the U.S. defense industry. All NATO allies need to stimulate defense innovation to compete effectively with Russia and China. Both sides of the Atlantic have much to lose if this issue further disrupts NATO's already shaky political equilibrium. Hopefully von der Leyen's experience as a former German defense minister will help her to understand the urgency and to find a solution to this problem. Hans Binnendijk is a distinguished fellow at the Atlantic Council and formerly served as the senior director for defense policy on the U.S. National Security Council. Jim Townsend is a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security and formerly served as deputy assistant secretary of defense for European and NATO policy. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2019/10/16/a-compromise-is-needed-on-trans-atlantic-defense-cooperation/

By: Andrew Chuter LONDON — The British Army is rethinking how it conducts a key element of its training, tapping industry to help deliver the first phase of what the military says will be a “surrogate for warfare” by the time the upgrade is complete. Requests for information (RFI) are scheduled to be released by the Ministry of Defence Nov. 1, formally launching an industry competition to secure the first phase of a major training overhaul: the Collective Training Transformation Programme (CTTP). “Collective training will become a surrogate for warfare; driving adaptation, generating combat ethos, empowering commanders, and delivering tactical innovation,” said the British Army in response to questions from Defense News. “From now to 2025, collective training will be transformed to prepare the Army. Critically, that will be through delivering trained force elements at readiness, but also through contributing to maintenance for the dynamic and complex future operating environments faced in an era of constant confrontation,” said the Army. The Phase 1 RFI is expected to attract responses from at least three of the top British and U.S. defense contractors interested in the sector here. Spokespeople for Babcock International, Lockheed Martin UK and Raytheon UK all confirmed their interest in the program. Its the second time in a few months the three companies have found themselves head-to-head in a competition for a significant military training deal in the U.K. They are also vying for a potentially major deal to train Royal Navy recruits. Babcock and Lockheed Martin already have significant land forces training businesses here, while Raytheon's main training activity in the U.K. is in the commercial sector. A spokeswomen for the U.S.-based SAIC said the company was “not actively pursuing a bid at this time,“ despite murmurings to the contrary. CTTP involves training groups or units up to divisional level. The program is part of the British Army's new Future Collective Training System. The transformation program has been sparked by the need to adapt to the rapid change in the nature of warfare and the re-emergence of state-on-state threats from potential adversaries like Russia and China. For much of the last two decades the British have been engaged in counter insurgency campaigns against terrorist forces in Afghanistan and Iraq operating with comparatively low technology. The need to ramp up the effort to counter complex peer or near peer threats has left some British training facilities and processes short of today's requirements. The British believe collective training needs to be more challenging and conducted in more complex environments, if its formations and units are to maintain battle readiness. Urban operations and information maneuver are among the key skills the British want to improve, said an industry executive who asked not to be named. The benefits of the program go beyond training. The Army said it is also looking to generate more strategic effect and deterrence in the future by conducting collective training in key parts of the world. “The British Army will train in regions of the world that cement our joint and international partnerships and reassure our friends and deter potential adversaries,” said the Army. The British already train in Europe, Canada, Oman, Kenya and Belize. It's possible that list could be expanded. The Phase 1 RFI was supposed to be released at the start of October, but was marginally slowed by various issues. Responses are due Nov. 29.The intention is to follow up Phase 1 with the release of the Phase 2 RFI on Jan. 20, with industry responding no later than Feb. 14. The Army declined to give expected industry contract dates for either phase of the transformation, but the Future Collective Training System is planned to achieve full operating capability in 2025. Upgraded urban training facilities, additional virtual training at Army bases and potential use of innovative synthetic training capabilities are among the potential improvements, said the industry executive. The second phase is expected to build on the work conducted in the first phase, involving a number of services and capabilities that together deliver the full Future Collective Training System. Together the two phases could be worth in excess of £600 million ($770 million), although more precise figures depend upon final requirements, which be driven in part by affordability. The British currently spends about £1 billion annually on collective training. Most, if not all, the companies involved will likely be leading industry teams in some form of partnership with the Army. The commercial model the MoD wants to adopt for the industry alliance with the Army is as yet unclear. CTTP officials are known to have looked at five or six possible options including appointing a strategic delivery partner, a contractural alliance and even private finance. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2019/10/16/the-uk-is-ready-to-kick-off-an-effort-to-revamp-military-training/

By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — America sold more than $55 billion in weapons abroad in fiscal 2019, but the man in charge of those efforts hopes to increase sales as he continues to tinker with the security cooperation system. Security cooperation has long been a foreign policy tool in America's pocket, but under the Trump administration, it “has been elevated to a tool of first resort for U.S. foreign policy,” Lt. Gen. Charles Hooper, the head of the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, said during a panel at the Association of the U.S. Army's annual conference. Since taking over at DSCA, Hooper has implemented a series of reforms aimed not only at speeding the process up, but shaving costs for potential buyers. He intends to keep that reform effort going in 2020. Here's how: Continue to cut surcharge costs. In June, DSCA dropped a surcharge on American defense goods sold abroad from 3.5 percent to 3.2 percent; later that year, the agency also cut a transportation administration fee. Both those charges are used to support DSCA operations, but some in the security cooperation process had argued the increased prices for customers would lead potential buyers to look to cheaper Russian or Chinese goods in the future. Hooper said that in 2020, DSCA plans to also cut the contract administration surcharge — applied to each FMS case to pay for contract quality assurance, management and audits — from 1.2 percent to 1 percent. “This will reduce the overall costs of FMS and could potentially save allies and partners 16.7 percent in CAS surcharges in this coming year,” Hooper said. Make it easier for customers to get custom weapon systems. The FMS system is set up to help sell weapons that are identical to systems already in use by the U.S. military. It's easier to move a package of Abrams tanks equipped with the same gear that multiple countries use than to push through a custom version with specific capabilities. But Hooper noted that partners are moving away from standard designs and are looking for systems “designed and tailored to meet their needs. Our system was not initially designed to process these types of systems, which increases time and cost in the U.S. response.” To help deal with that, DSCA established an “interagency non-program of record community of interest,” which involves all the agencies that have a say in the process, to figure out ways to make moving custom systems more plausible. The goal is to have a new pathway for moving those capabilities by 2020, which Hooper says will “reduce the time it takes to review request for non-program of record systems, to facilitate industry ability to compete in this global market.” Plan out commercial offsets. Many countries require offsets from industry for big foreign military sales. These offsets are essentially throw-in sweeteners for the buying country, put together from the industrial partner. In the past, these were often things like building a new library or school. But in the last two decades, some countries specifically requested high-end technologies or tech transfer to jump-start their domestic defense industries. Because offsets are negotiated between the industrial partner and the customer nation, the Pentagon, which serves as the in-between for an FMS case, often finds out about offsets only at the end of the process. But with offsets becoming more technological, those now require more review time, and so a deal can slow down while the relevant agencies approve the deal. Hooper hopes 2020 will see industry better inform DSCA of potential offsets early in the process so that last minute hangups can be avoided. “We continue to encourage our industry partners to inform the U.S. of potential offset requirements early on so that we can begin the necessary technology security foreign disclosure and policy reviews as early as possible,” Hooper said. https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/ausa/2019/10/16/3-ways-the-pentagon-wants-to-make-buying-american-weapons-easier/

The KC-46 Pegasus is a U.S. air-refueling tanker that is expected to reach initial operating capability (IOC) around 2017. It is produced by Boeing. The KC-46 is intended to replace the first third of the U.S. Air Force (USAF) KC-135 fleet in the primary role of air-refueling, as well as in secondary roles of transport and aeromedical evacuation. Compared to the KC-135, the new aircraft can deliver more fuel at all ranges; operate from shorter runways; and carry three times as many cargo pallets, twice the number of passengers and over 30% more aeromedical evacuation patients. https://aviationweek.com/kc-46-whats-happened-so-far

By using virtual reality (VR) devices, the U.S. Air Force's 23rd Flying Training Squadron (FTS) at Fort Rucker, Alabama, has slashed flying time by 35 percent, given students 15 hours of additional practice time with aircraft controls, and cut the time needed to complete undergraduate pilot training by six weeks for the first six students using the experimental program. The 23d FTS is responsible for all Air Force undergraduate rotary-wing pilot training and is a geographically separated unit under the 58th Special Operations Wing (SOW) at Kirtland (New Mexico) AFB. It is the sole entry point for Air Force careers in the Bell UH-1N, Sikorsky HH-60G, and Bell-Boeing CV-22 tiltrotor. The experimental training program began in 2017 when the squadron found internal training efficiencies that led to a 25 percent increase in overall student pilot production. They decided to take their innovation efforts further by combining technology and innovation. The squadron initially stood up the program with six VR systems loaded with software for a Bell 412, paid for with $350,000 in 58th SOW innovation funds. Specialized Undergraduate Pilot Training-Helicopter (SUPT-H) class 20-02 was the first class to use the VR training systems starting in May 2019. The students' introduction to VR took place during the initial 19-day academics portion of the curriculum. “After 23.5 hours of VR instruction, students were able to hover, taxi, and perform various other helicopter maneuvers unassisted by their instructor pilots on their very first flight [in an actual aircraft],” said Capt. Matt Strick, 23rd FTS innovation flight lead. “We assessed the students to be at least seven days ahead of schedule at that point.” The initial goal of the project, called “Project da Vinci” or "Rotary-Wing Next," was reducing the time needed to teach the syllabus from 28 weeks to 14 weeks and to increase student production from 60 to 120 students a year without needing additional aircraft or flying hours. “We're seeing the vast potential of this program unfold right in front of us,” said Lt. Col. Jake Brittingham, 23rd FTS commander. “This is just the start,” he said. “We are focused on ensuring we continue to get even more efficient with our training, while at the same time maintaining the quality of our graduates the Air Force needs and expects.” The program's VR software is being updated to reflect the unit's Bell TH-1H primary trainer. “The [VR] acquisition proved challenging because of federal computer purchasing laws and limitations and took some time and effort between us, the 42nd Contracting Squadron at Maxwell AFB, 19th AF, and the 338th Specialized Contracting Squadron at Randolph AFB to make the initial purchase,” Brittingham said. “We really couldn't have done this in eight months without the help of the contracting team enabling us to make these purchases smarter and faster.” https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2019-10-16/usaf-slashes-helo-training-time-virtual-reality

Irving Shipbuilding Inc. handed over Halifax-class frigate HMCS Montréal (FFH 336) to the Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) following the completion of a 53-week docking work period on August 22. The vessel arrived at Halifax Shipyard on Aug. 13 last year for the docking work period (DWP). The DWP was completed on schedule and included preventive and corrective maintenance, ship system upgrades including new diesel generators and chillers to name a few, as well as installation of new equipment providing enhanced combat capabilities to ensure the longevity of HMCS Montreal. More than 400 of Halifax Shipyard's 2,000 employees worked on HMCS Montreal's docking work period, including many shipbuilders who are members of Unifor Local 1. Dozens of Nova Scotia-based suppliers worked with ISI on the Montreal, including Maritime Pressure Works, MacKinnon & Olding, CMS Steel Pro, and Pro-Insul, among others. Since 2010, all seven of the Navy's east coast Halifax-class frigates– HMCS Halifax, HMCS Fredericton, HMCS Montreal, HMCS Charlottetown, HMCS St. John's, HMCS Ville de Quebec, and HMCS Toronto – have been consecutively modernized and maintained at Halifax Shipyard. Halifax Shipyard is continuing its legacy as the Halifax-class In-Service Support Centre of Excellence, with HMCS Charlottetown currently in the graving dock for a docking work period. In addition to its Halifax-class ship maintenance work, Halifax Shipyard is building six Arctic and Offshore Patrol Ships (AOPS) and 15 Canadian Surface Combatants (CSC) over the next 25 years as part of Canada's National Shipbuilding Strategy (NSS). The Halifax class underwent a modernization program, known as the Halifax Class Modernization (HCM) program, in order to update the frigates' capabilities in combatting modern smaller, faster and more mobile threats. This involved upgrading the command and control, radar, communications, electronic warfare and armament systems. Further improvements, such as modifying the vessel to accommodate the new Sikorsky CH-148 Cyclone helicopter and satellite links will be done separately from the main Frigate Equipment Life Extension (FELEX) program. https://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/2019/october/7593-irving-shipbuilding-hands-over-hmcs-montreal-to-royal-canadian-navy.html

October 15, 2019 - The U.S. Army has awarded BAE Systems a new $437 million task order to provide open source support for the Army and Army Intelligence & Security Command (INSCOM) approved partners. The task order was awarded under the U.S. General Services Administration's (GSA) One Acquisition Solution for Integrated Services (OASIS) multiple-award IDIQ contract and the acquisition was managed by GSA's Federal Systems Integration and Management Center (FEDSIM) on behalf of the Army. Under this task order, BAE Systems will deliver open source capabilities derived from publicly available data to the Army. To support this activity, the company will provide INSCOM with training, policy and governance recommendations, assessments and implementation of emerging capabilities. BAE Systems will also establish and manage a secure cloud hosting environment for these activities. “We're proud to continue to partner with the U.S. Army and support their critical national security missions with this new capability,” said Peder Jungck, vice president and general manager of BAE Systems' Intelligence Solutions business. “Our open source solution is designed to deliver timely, objective, and cogent information to mission-critical programs in the face of evolving threats and the continuous increase in the volume and sources of open source data.” BAE Systems delivers a broad range of services and solutions enabling militaries and governments to successfully carry out their respective missions. The company provides large-scale systems engineering, integration, and sustainment services across air, land, sea, space, and cyber domains. BAE Systems takes pride in its support of national security and those who serve. View source version on BAE Systems: https://www.baesystems.com/en/article/bae-systems-selected-to-provide-open-source-intelligence-support-to-the-us-army

Les questions de défense ont dominé le conseil des ministres franco-allemand organisé à Toulouse. Un accord pour harmoniser les exportations d'armes a été annoncé. Face à l'accroissement des tensions dans le commerce international, les deux dirigeants ont aussi envoyé un message fort à Airbus. Par Grégoire Poussielgue Publié le 16 oct. 2019 à 19h15 Priorité à la défense. Le climat, les droits d'auteur et l'innovation ont, entre autres, été au menu du conseil des ministres franco-allemand qui s'est tenu mercredi à Toulouse, mais les questions de défense ont occupé une place prépondérante. Dans l'enceinte de la préfecture de Haute-Garonne, Emmanuel Macron et Angela Merkel ont pu lever les points de friction et aller plus loin dans leur politique commune de programmes d'armement. Les « blocages importants ont été levés » sur les programmes de développement du char et de l'avion de combat du futur, ont annoncé les deux dirigeants. La date de janvier 2020 a été retenue pour notifier les crédits tant attendus par les industriels de l'aéronautique qui visent la réalisation de prototypes à l'horizon 2025. La question sensible des exportations d'armes a aussi trouvé une issue. La France et l'Allemagne ont annoncé un accord « juridiquement contraignant sur les règles de contrôle d'exportations d'armement pour les programmes développés en commun ». Cet accord était indispensable pour mener à bien les programmes communs en matière d'armement. Un « résultat concret qui permettra davantage de sécurité », s'est félicitée la chancelière allemande. Un accord obtenu non sans mal car, depuis un an, les tensions sont fortes. Après l'assassinat, il y a tout juste un an, du journaliste saoudien Jamal Khashoggi, l'Allemagne a suspendu ses ventes d'armes vers l'Arabie Saoudite, ce que la France n'a pas fait. Avec l'invasion du Kurdistan syrien, les pays européens ont suspendu leurs exportations d'armes vers la Turquie. Symbole fort sur l'économie Entre Emmanuel Macron et Angela Merkel, il fallait aussi un geste symbolique fort pour marquer la solidité d'un couple franco-allemand « souvent mis à l'épreuve », comme le dit l'Elysée, et ce avant le Conseil européen de la fin de la semaine. Entre le dossier brûlant du Brexit et le rejet de la candidate française, Sylvie Goulard, à la Commission européenne , sans oublier les tensions commerciales croissantes avec les Etats-Unis, l'environnement européen traverse une zone de fortes turbulences. La relation franco-allemande n'y échappe pas. « J'entends parfois dire que la relation franco-allemande est difficile, c'est la situation du monde qui est difficile. S'il n'y avait que nous, les choses seraient plus simples et avanceraient plus vite », a dit le président français après le conseil. Pour le premier conseil des ministres franco-allemand depuis la signature, en janvier dernier, du traité d'Aix-la-Chapelle , qui renforce leur coopération, la chancelière allemande et le président français ont aussi manié le symbole. Avant les rencontres bilatérales et le conseil des ministres à la préfecture de Toulouse, les deux dirigeants ont longuement visité la chaîne de montage de l'A350 sur le site Airbus de Toulouse. Un symbole de « l'excellence européenne » selon le président français et un fer de lance de la coopération franco-allemande depuis un demi-siècle. Rassurer les salariés Après l'augmentation des droits de douane décidée par les Etats-Unis, il s'agissait aussi de rassurer les salariés français et allemands travaillant sur le site de Toulouse. « Nous tenions à venir aux côtés d'Airbus pour dire notre confiance dans l'entreprise et tout ce qui est devant elle. Vous allez construire le futur de cette entreprise. Il y a parfois des moments de doute et d'inquiétude mais c'est une entreprise formidablement solide », a déclaré Emmanuel Macron à l'occasion d'une rencontre avec les salariés. Angela Merkel y est aussi allée de son couplet. « Nous ferons tout pour garantir le succès de cette entreprise dans les années à venir », a-t-elle dit. https://www.lesechos.fr/monde/europe/defense-merkel-et-macron-trouvent-un-accord-pour-renforcer-leur-cooperation-1140681

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Army is close to triggering a competition for both a light and medium robotic combat vehicle by releasing a request for product proposals before the Thanksgiving holiday, according to Brig. Gen. Ross Coffman, the head of combat vehicle modernization for the service. The plan is to award one contract to one company to build a light variant, and repeat the process for a medium-sized robotic combat vehicle, or RCV, in March 2020. Then each company will deliver four prototypes for evaluation and testing in 12 months from contract award, Coffman told Defense News in a recent interview.. The Army anticipates a large pool of applicants based on a recent evaluation of eight different vehicles on a course at Texas A&M University's RELLIS campus, and because the response to a request for whitepapers for each variant was fruitful. The caliber of vehicles at the physical demonstration was higher than expected. Companies “really took it seriously” and brought vehicles that weren't just “modified, off-the-shelf” versions, Coffman said. Instead, the robots were “closer to purpose-built than we ever imagined,” he added. The Army is focused — across all three weight classes of robotic vehicle under pursuit — on a chassis rather than a vehicle as a whole. The idea is to integrate mission systems onto a common chassis for each weight class. On the heavyweight side, the Army completed a major experiment last month at Camp Grayling, Michigan, where four robotic versions of the M113 armored personnel carrier was evaluated for ground robotic capabilities. At the event, which will be followed by rigorous testing and evaluation at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, four robotic combat vehicles moved across the battlefield in a wedge formation. Soldiers controlled the platforms to keep them out of harm's way. “They came online, identified an enemy and then the humans called for fire based on the sensors on this robot,” Coffman said. “And then, once the artillery went in, the robots continued to traverse the terrain and engaged with direct fire against an enemy, destroying that enemy, all while the humans were in sanctuary controlling the battlefield.” The exercise demonstrated to Coffman that heavy RCVs can reduce the risk to soldiers on the battlefield. Once Army Test and Evaluation Command can put each vehicle through its paces, the platforms will head to Fort Carson, Colorado, in March 2020. “We're going to put these in the hands of soldiers and they're going to — they're going to get them dirty, they're going to execute tactical operations and they are going to fight against a live [opposing force],” Coffman said. “They are going to take them to the gunnery, and we're going to see all of the capabilities they can do.” After that phase, the Army plans to evaluate four M113s as well as four medium and four light RCVs that will form a company and execute tactical formations as the Army builds up its capability, according to Coffman. In 2023, the Army will evaluate purpose-built heavy variants with the medium and light RCVs also in a company formation, Coffman added. https://www.c4isrnet.com/2019/10/15/us-army-nears-competition-that-could-lead-to-robots-directly-engaging-the-enemy