News

By: Bradley Bowman   The United States is now engaged in an intense military technology competition with the Chinese Communist Party. The ability of U.S. troops to deter and defeat great power authoritarian adversaries hangs in the balance. To win this competition, Washington must beef up its military cooperative research and development efforts with tech-savvy democratic allies. At the top of that list should be Israel. Two members of the Senate Armed Services Committee understand this well. Sens. Gary Peters, D-Mich., and Tom Cotton, R-Ark., introduced S 3775, the “United States-Israel Military Capability Act of 2020,” on Wednesday. This bipartisan legislation would require the establishment of a U.S.-Israel operations-technology working group. As the senators wrote in a February letter to Secretary of Defense Mark Esper, the working group would help ensure U.S. “warfighters never encounter a more technologically advanced foe.” Many Americans may be surprised to learn that they can no longer take U.S. military technological superiority for granted. In his new book, “The Kill Chain,” former Senate Armed Services Committee staff director Chris Brose notes that, over the last decade, the United States loses war games against China “almost every single time.” To halt this trend, the Pentagon must shift its ongoing modernization efforts into high gear. Early cooperative R&D with the “Startup Nation” can help in this regard. Israel is one of America's closest and most technologically advanced allies. The country boasts an “innovative and agile defense technology sector” that is a “global leader in many of the technologies important to Department of Defense modernization efforts,” as the legislation notes. Some may deem the working group unnecessary, citing the deep and broad cooperation that already exists between the United States and Israel. But, as the legislation explains, “dangerous United States military capability gaps continue to emerge that a more systematic and institutionalized United States-Israel early cooperative research and development program could have prevented.” Consider the fact, for example, that the Pentagon only last year acquired for U.S. tanks active protection systems from Israel that had been operational there since 2011. Consequently, U.S. soldiers operated for years in tanks and armored vehicles around the world lacking the cutting-edge protection Washington could have provided against missiles and rockets. That put U.S. soldiers in unnecessary risk. Such examples put the burden of proof on those who may be tempted to reflexively defend the status quo as good enough. Given the breakneck speed of our military technology race with the Chinese Communist Party, it's clear the continued emergence of decade-long delays in adopting crucial technology is no longer something we can afford. One of the reasons for these delays and failures to team up with Israeli partners at the beginning of the process is that U.S. and Israeli defense suppliers sometimes find it difficult to secure Washington's approval for combined efforts to research and produce world-class weapons. Some requests to initiate combined U.S.-Israel R&D programs linger interminably in bureaucratic no-man's land, failing to elicit a timely decision. Confronted by deadly and immediate threats, Israel often has little choice but to push ahead alone with unilateral R&D programs. When that happens, the Pentagon misses out on Israel's sense of urgency that could have led to the more expeditious fielding of weapons to U.S. troops. And Israel misses out on American innovation prowess as well as on the Pentagon's economy of scale, which would lower unit costs and help both countries stretch their finite defense budgets further. Secretary Esper appears to grasp the opportunity. “If there are ways to improve that, we should pursue it,” he testified on March 4, 2020, in response to a question on the U.S.-Israel working group proposal. “The more we can cooperate together as allies and partners to come up with common solutions, the better,” Esper said. According to the legislation, the working group would serve as a standing forum for the United States and Israel to “systematically share intelligence-informed military capability requirements,” with a goal of identifying capabilities that both militaries need. It would also provide a dedicated mechanism for U.S. and Israeli defense suppliers to “expeditiously gain government approval to conduct joint science, technology, research, development, test, evaluation, and production efforts.” The legislation's congressional reporting requirement would hold the working group accountable for providing quick answers to U.S. and Israeli defense supplier requests. That's a benefit of the working group that will only become more important when the economic consequences of the coronavirus put additional, downward pressure on both defense budgets. Once opportunities for early cooperative U.S.-Israel R&D are identified and approved, the working group would then facilitate the development of “combined United States-Israel plans to research, develop, procure, and field weapons systems and military capabilities as quickly and economically as possible.” In the military technology race with the Chinese Communist Party, the stakes are high and the outcome is far from certain. A U.S.-Israel operations technology working group represents an essential step to ensure the United States and its democratic allies are better equipped than their adversaries. Bradley Bowman is the senior director of the Center on Military and Political Power at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/05/22/securing-technological-superiority-requires-a-joint-us-israel-effort/

Nathan Strout In a new proposal, the U.S. Space Force is asking Congress to overhaul the tools it uses to acquire new space systems, allowing the new service to move with more agility and keep pace with near-peer adversaries. “Our nation requires a bold Alternative Space Acquisition System that not only matches the pace of change but also manages unpredictability and regularly disrupts our adversaries' threat cadence," the Department of the U.S. Air Force report concludes. “The features outlined in this report will create a new space acquisition approach for the USSF that is the envy of all other services and ultimately enables the USSF to rapidly leverage industry innovation to outpace space threats.” When Congress passed legislation establishing the Space Force as the nation's sixth branch of the armed services in December, it included a provision requiring the Secretary of the Air Force to provide a report by the end of March on whether the military should adopt an alternative space acquisition system. While the Pentagon did deliver a report to Congress in March, it largely kicked the can down the road on any specific acquisitions reforms. Space Force leadership have touted this more detailed acquisitions report as “groundbreaking” in recent appearances. The new report, which was first reported by Bloomberg Government, includes nine specific proposals to improve Space Force contracting, although it doesn't make any suggestions towards unifying the various organizations involved in purchasing space platforms and systems, such as the Space Development Agency, the Space Rapid Capabilities Office, the Space and Missile Systems Center, or the National Reconnaissance Office, which purchases satellites for the intelligence community. Instead, the report's recommendations include changes to the contracting tools and reporting requirements the Space Force will use to acquire new systems, with a focus on increasing flexibility and delegating authority. Three of the suggestions require legislative action, while the remaining proposals will simply require internal Department of Defense adjustments. Perhaps the most important recommendation in the report, according to the Air Force, is the consolidation of budget line items along mission portfolios, such as missile warning or communications, instead of by platform. While this has been done on a limited basis in the past for the Space Rapid Capabilities Office and some classified efforts, it marks a change from standard DoD budgeting practices. Theoretically, this would allow the Space Force to move funding between missile warning systems without having to submit reprogramming requests to Congress, something it did several times last year in order to move up the delivery date for the first Next Generation Overhead Persistent Infrared satellite. The Air Force's repeated reprogramming requests rankled some members of Congress, leading to a fight between lawmakers and the White House over the program's funding for fiscal 2020. The Air Force claims this fix is needed to give program managers the flexibility to adapt to growing threats. According to the report, transparency at the program level would be preserved in future budget documents. This change would not require legislation. Beyond that, the Air Force is asking Congress for permission to push milestone decision authority down the chain of command, similar to what's been demonstrated by the Missile Defense Agency and National Reconnaissance Office. This change would speed up decision making for space programs. The third major change the Air Force is pursuing is authority for the Space Force to use incremental funding for space systems and programs. This “Efficient Space Procurement” coding was used to acquire the fifth and sixth satellites in the Advanced Extremely High Frequency satellites at the same time as well as the fifth and sixth Space-Based Infrared System satellites, resulting in significant savings. The department claims full funding each space vehicle has lead to affordability issues in the past, and can “lead to production breaks, obsolescence, and industrial base impacts.” Instead, the department wants to spread out funding for satellites over multiple years to help keep costs in check and avoid funding spikes. Other changes include streamlining requirements validation and reporting requirements. “Under these reforms, our Nation's newest military service will have unprecedented agility to build resilient, defendable, and affordable space capabilities through streamlined processes and closer partnerships with one of America's decisive advantages—its innovative and rapidly changing commercial space industry,” Secretary of the Air Force Barbara Barrett wrote in the introduction to the report. https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/space/2020/05/21/space-force-lays-out-acquisitions-reforms-in-new-report/

By: Thomas Ayres As Americans respond to the COVID-19 pandemic, we have become acutely aware of the outsized impact of our dependence on China in the supply chain. Pharmaceutical companies learned key chemicals and minerals are exclusively made or mined in China. For instance, reports show China produces 97 percent of the antibiotics, 95 percent of ibuprofen and 91 percent of hydrocortisone consumed in the U.S. market. Hospitals also learned that while China produces 50 percent of the world's face masks, they are of dubious reliability. There is cause for concern with the quantity or quality of ventilators. In sum, we learned as citizens what we in the Department of Defense have known for some time: Our national security supply chain must be free from dependence on China. The DoD's concern for its supply chain is not new. Congress spurred activity over a decade ago by questioning the DoD's supply chain risk management, or SCRM, policies. The National Defense Strategy‘s recognition of a new era of strategic, great power competition further sharpened the DoD's focus, propelling recent efforts to enhance regulations and procedures in addressing supply chain threats. We are transitioning from analog to digital, with the goal of planes, ships, tanks and satellites all seamlessly sharing data — a lethal version of the ride-sharing app on your smartphone. Yet, even as the DoD builds this future, the threat of supply chain disruption and concerns about component quality within the electronic backbone are real. Counterfeit or planted microelectronic parts can be vectors for cybersecurity intrusions. Recently, for instance, the DoD voiced concerns that Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei's 5G solution provided back doors, purposefully or negligently, for data corruption, data extraction, system failure or worse. Similarly, SCRM policies have increasingly addressed the concern of intellectual property theft enabled by subcomponents designed to allow information to flow back to larger architectures. The COVID-19 pandemic is giving new meaning to that threat, and the risk of disruption to both raw and manufactured materials from abroad has become apparent. Our SCRM focus must broaden in response to COVID-19 to better address national production capacity and sustainability. Being able to assure access to the minerals, chemicals, subcomponents and components required to build weapon systems is essential. China supplies 80 percent of the rare earth minerals imported to the U.S., many of which are essential to electronic parts. Since 1933, the Buy American Act has required federal agencies, including the DoD, to purchase items manufactured in the U.S. Additionally, these items must be made from supplies mined or made in the U.S. The act is implemented by regulations requiring analysis of the components — where they are mined or made, and where they are assembled. Companies that falsify “Made in America” designations can be debarred from the federal marketplace. In July 2019, months before the pandemic emerged, President Donald Trump issued an executive order seeking to increase the minimum domestic manufacture thresholds above the current 50 percent floors. The pandemic now shows even more needs to be done. We must increase to President Trump's mandated percentages, and we must also analyze where each of the subcomponents are manufactured. This doesn't mean we need to back away from allied contributions or alliance-based weapon systems like the F-35 fighter jet, which benefits from the industrial cooperation of nine partner nations. But in light of COVID-19, it does mean that when we make risk-based and measured decisions to produce an alliance system, we program in several months' worth of component backlogs to allow continued production during future quarantines. The majority of our weapon systems are made in the U.S. by American companies with greater than 50 percent of component production and assembly done domestically. Yet, what is less clear are the composition of the subcomponents in the components themselves. Not recognizing the risks of the subcomponents equally jeopardizes the new reality of disruptions to our supply chain and risks of data extraction, degradation and spying, about which we have increasingly been concerned. Recently, I sought to buy a grapefruit spoon on the internet and found it exceedingly difficult to learn where the offered spoons were made. The harder it was to find, the more I suspected it was made in China. Perhaps Congress should pass a law making it easier to learn the source of manufacturing. Ensuring my access to an American-made grapefruit spoon is not nearly as vital as assuring our access to critical weapon systems, rare earth materials, and pharmaceuticals and medical supplies. A vital step is knowing the source countries of components and subcomponents. We must have deeper knowledge of the full supply chains of subcomponents, and how and where they are produced. Trust can only come once we know all that is required to understand our supply chains and we seek even greater focus in our new normal. Our security depends on it. Thomas Ayres is general counsel for the U.S. Air Force. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/05/22/the-us-needs-to-rethink-its-overseas-supply-chain/

By: Mike Yeo MELBOURNE, Australia — China has announced a 6.6 percent growth in its defense budget for this year, its lowest rate of increase for almost three decades. The growth in China's defense budget would see spending rise from $167 billion last year to $178.2 billion, an increase of about $11 billion. The country has the second-largest defense budget in the world, behind only the United States. Despite the growth of China's defense budget being at its lowest, in percentage terms, since the early 1990s, the 6.6 percent figure only represents a slightly lower figure than the 7-7.5 percent growth many analysts estimated before the pandemic. In real dollar terms, the $11 billion increase in defense spending is the fifth-highest increase ever for the country. It also shows that China is determined that the People's Liberation Army, or PLA, will remain insulated as much as possible from the negative economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, which resulted in China's economy shrinking by 6.8 percent in the first quarter of 2020 compared to the same time last year. Chinese Premier Li Keqiang said as much during his speech Friday at the opening of the annual gathering of its largely rubber stamp parliament. He pledged that the PLA would not be worse off. “We will deepen reforms in national defense and the military, increase our logistic and equipment support capacity, and promote innovative development of defense-related science and technology,” he told legislators at the opening of the National People's Congress, which kicked off Friday at the Great Hall of the People in China's capital, Beijing. Li also touched on the issue of Taiwan during his speech, reiterating that China would “resolutely oppose and deter any separatist activities seeking Taiwan independence.” He also called on the Taiwanese people to “join the mainland in opposing Taiwanese independence and to promote reunification." China views Taiwan as a breakaway province, with the self-governing island off its coast having formed its own government in 1949 when Nationalist forces fled there following defeat at the hands of Communists during China's civil war. Perhaps tellingly, Li dropped the use of the word “peaceful” when talking of reunification with Taiwan, a departure from decades of using it as the standard expression Chinese leaders used when addressing parliament and mentioning Taiwan. Although China has never renounced the possible use of force for reunification efforts. Li's call for reunification came as U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper reaffirmed that the country would stand by Taiwan. Speaking on Hugh Hewitt's radio show, Esper said the U.S. would “certainly live up to our commitments to Taiwan,” noting that it is also bound by the Taiwan Relations Act enacted by Congress, which pledges to supply Taiwan with weapons it needs for its defense. Accordingly, the U.S. State Department announced Thursday that it has approved the sale of an additional 18 heavyweight submarine torpedoes to Taiwan for $180 million. The Mk 46 Mod 6 Advanced Technology torpedoes will equip Taiwan's submarine fleet, and the approval follows another for 48 similar weapons in 2017. Taiwan has reported that Chinese military activity around the island continues unabated throughout the ongoing pandemic, with Chinese naval vessels and military aircraft regularly operating in international airspace and waters around Taiwan. China calls the movements routine training exercises. However, the island's government sees these moves as part of an intimidation campaign against Taiwan and regularly publicizes PLA ship and aircraft movements in its vicinity. https://www.defensenews.com/global/asia-pacific/2020/05/22/china-announces-1782-billion-military-budget/

OLIVIER GOSSET 20 mai 2020 10:48 Le constructeur américain a annoncé un ralentissement temporaire de la production de son avion de combat en raison des retards dans la fourniture de pièces par les sous-traitants. Les calendriers de livraison seront adaptés. Lockheed Martin a annoncé mercredi un ralentissement temporaire de la production de son avion de combat F-35, en raison des retards dans la fourniture de pièces par les sous-traitants à cause de la pandémie de coronavirus. Le géant américain de la défense et le syndicat des machinistes IAM (International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers) ont convenu d'un horaire de travail temporaire adapté pour les employés de la chaîne de production de F-35 à l'usine de Fort Worth. Le nouvel horaire, qui débutera le 23 mai, divise chaque équipe en trois groupes. Par rotation, chaque groupe travaillera pendant deux semaines et bénéficiera ensuite d'une semaine de congé. "Cet horaire alternatif permet à Lockheed Martin de doter la chaîne de production en personnel afin de répondre à un flux de travail plus lent suite aux retards des fournisseurs. En outre, il permet d'avoir un rythme de travail qui conserve l'expertise de la main-d'œuvre qualifiée et offre la possibilité d'ajuster le travail pour mieux soutenir la production", a indiqué le constructeur. Quid pour la Belgique? Les calendriers de livraison aux États-Unis et aux forces armées alliées achetant le F-35 "seront ajustés en conséquence", mais Lockheed prévoit un retour aux niveaux de production d'avant la crise du Covid-19 "d'ici la fin de l'été ou le début de l'automne", a commenté à l'agence Bloomberg Gregory Ulmer, directeur du programme F-35. Lockheed s'était engagé à livrer 141 F-35 aux États-Unis et à ses alliés d'ici la fin de l'année, contre 134 l'an dernier. Entre 18 et 24 avions pourraient ne pas être assemblés par rapport à cet objectif, selon Gregory Ulmer. Le constructeur n'a pas précisé quels pays pourraient être concernés par ce ralentissement temporaire de la production. La Belgique a commandé 34 appareils au groupe aéronautique américain. Selon le calendrier prévu, les huit premiers seront livrés en 2023 et 2024, mais resteront aux États-Unis pour servir à la formation des pilotes et des techniciens. Les quatre suivants sont attendus à Florennes l'année suivante. Trump sème le trouble La semaine dernière, le Président américain Donald Trump a semé le trouble parmi les partenaires du programme F-35 et les clients de Lockheed Martin en menaçant de rapatrier sur le territoire des USA les éléments fabriqués à l'étranger. Donald Trump a en effet estimé que la chaîne d'approvisionnement internationale de l'avion de Lockheed Martin posait problème en cas d'arrêt éventuel de la production dans des pays étrangers. https://www.lecho.be/entreprises/defense-aeronautique/lockheed-martin-ralentit-la-production-du-f-35/10228284.html

Publié le 20 mai 2020 Deux experts soutiennent que les avions utilisés par les Snowbirds sont des avions fiables, malgré leur 'ge. La question de la vétusté des CT-114 Tutor a resurgi après l'accident en Colombie-Britannique qui a coûté la vie à la capitaine Jenn Casey. Conçu par le fabricant aéronautique Canadair dans les années 1960, le CT-114 Tutor fait partie intégrante des Forces armées canadiennes (FAC) depuis 1964. Utilisé comme avion d'entraînement, jusque dans les années 2000, le modèle est toujours utilisé par les Snowbirds, le 431e escadron de démonstration aérienne des FAC. La base d'attache des Snowbirds est à Moose Jaw, en Saskatchewan. Aux yeux du président honoraire de l'Association de l'Aviation royale canadienne, André Deschamps, le CT-114 Tutor est un avion très robuste, bien b'ti, solide et très simple. Il est parfait pour les pilotes, car il n'y a pas trop de matériel excessif à s'occuper. Ancien chef d'état-major de l'Aviation royale canadienne, André Deschamps pense que l'écrasement du CT-114 des capitaines Kasey et MacDougall est dû à une perte de puissance soudaine du moteur de l'appareil. clairement pas assez pour continuer de voler, explique le lieutenant-général Deschamps. Selon lui, ce défaut de propulsion de l'aéronef peut être dû à une multitude de raisons. Outre une cause naturelle, comme un oiseau happé par la turbine de l'avion, ce type d'accident peut aussi être causé par un contaminant dans l'essence [...] Ça peut être atmosphérique, ou ça peut être un bris mécanique à l'intérieur du moteur, note André Deschamps. Un remplacement complexe En attendant les résultats d'une enquête sur les causes exactes de l'accident tragique de Kamloops, et malgré l''ge de ce modèle d'aéronef, André Deschamps affirme qu'il est vraiment dur de remplacer cet avion, à cause de ces qualités d'opération. Un point de vue partagé par Mehran Ebrahimi, directeur de l'Observatoire de l'aéronautique et de l'aviation civile de l'UQAM. Même si ces avions ne sont pas éternels (...) il ne faut pas considérer que, parce que ces avions-là sont vieux, ils sont automatiquement dangereux, précise-t-il. Le premier ministre Justin Trudeau s'est d'ailleurs entretenu à plusieurs reprises, en fin de semaine, avec le ministre de la Défense au sujet de la sécurité et de l''ge des avions des Snowbirds, selon les informations de La Presse canadienne. Une question aussi d'ordre financier De plus, la question financière entre rapidement dans les considérations gouvernementales à ce sujet. Dans un document datant de 2015, la Défense nationale du Canada estimait le coût de remplacement des Tutor entre 500 millions et 1,5 milliard de dollars. C'est beaucoup d'argent. Dans le contexte actuel, avec la trésorerie des gouvernements, ajoutez à cela la COVID-19, comment ça va se passer, questionne M. Ebrahimi. Selon André Deschamps, le remplacement des CT-114 entre dans une politique plus large de changement des avions d'entraînement pour les pilotes de chasse canadiens. Le programme de remplacement existe. (...) Il faut allier ça avec d'autres ressources. On ne veut pas acheter une flotte unique, qui existe seulement pour les Snowbirds, précise M. Deschamps. Différentes options sont là, prêtes à être évaluées, selon l'ancien chef d'état-major. Il va y avoir des décisions éventuellement, dans les années prochaines. Mais pour le moment, les Tutor sont encore sains. Une réflexion qui fait écho à un autre document de la Défense nationale du Canada, qui fait partie du Plan national de défense 2018, qui annonce la prolongation de service des CT-114 Tutor : la fin de vie des aéronefs, initialement prévue pour 2020, y est repoussée à 2030. Le CT-114 Tutor s'est révélé une plateforme très résistante, facile à entretenir et à mettre à niveau, et dont la fonctionnalité peut être maintenue à long terme, reconnaît la Défense nationale questionnée au sujet de ce plan de remplacement des CT-1. Dans son courriel transmis à Radio-Canada, le gouvernement fédéral conclut : Les Forces armées canadiennes prévoient conserver les Snowbirds comme marque distinctive de l'Aviation royale canadienne https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1704413/snowbirds-ecrasement-kamloops-casey-tutor-defense

Dans un contexte de crise économique aggravée par le coronavirus, une bagarre se joue au sommet de l'état-major indien à propos d'un appel d'offres lancé il y a deux ans pour l'achat de 114 avions de combat. Par Guillaume Delacroix Publié le 20 mai 2020 à 09h03 - Mis à jour le 20 mai 2020 à 12h42 L'épidémie de Covid-19 fait une victime inattendue en Inde : le groupe Dassault Aviation. Celui-ci est en train de voir s'envoler ses espoirs de fournir une bonne centaine de Rafale supplémentaires au géant d'Asie du Sud. Le constructeur aéronautique français, qui a reçu commande de 36 exemplaires biplaces de cet avion de combat pour 8 milliards d'euros en septembre 2016, vient d'apprendre de la bouche du nouveau chef d'état-major des armées indiennes que l'appel d'offres international lancé en avril 2018 pour l'achat de 114 autres appareils était en passe d'être annulé. C'est un marché évalué à 1 000 milliards de roupies (12,2 milliards d'euros) qui va vraisemblablement s'évaporer. « L'Indian Air Force est en train de se réorienter vers des avions de combat légers » produits dans le sous-continent, a déclaré le général Bipin Rawat à l'agence Bloomberg, jeudi 14 mai. En l'occurrence, des Tejas LCA (Light Combat Aircraft). C'est une énorme déconvenue pour l'avionneur français, à qui l'Inde devait initialement acheter 126 Rafale, et non pas 36. Les quatre premières livraisons devaient d'ailleurs avoir lieu ce mois-ci, mais la crise sanitaire mondiale en cours l'a contraint à les reporter à juillet. D'autres constructeurs en sont pour leurs frais, qui entendaient eux aussi remettre une offre pour les 114 nouveaux avions. Parmi eux, les américains Lockheed Martin et Boeing, le suédois Saab et le russe Soukhoï. Le Tejas, avion « made in India » Confrontée à un ralentissement économique historique en 2019, avec une croissance du produit intérieur brut (PIB) à moins de 5 % – alors qu'elle approchait 9 % il y a un peu plus de deux ans –, l'économie indienne prend de plein fouet les effets de l'épidémie liée au coronavirus et risque désormais de tomber en récession. Dans ces conditions, Delhi n'a plus les moyens de s'équiper auprès de fournisseurs étrangers, a fait comprendre dès la fin du mois d'avril le premier ministre, Narendra Modi, en affirmant que le pays ne se relèverait qu'en produisant « local ». https://www.lemonde.fr/economie/article/2020/05/20/en-inde-dassault-voit-s-eloigner-tout-espoir-de-nouvelle-commande-de-rafale_6040216_3234.html

By: Vivek Raghuvanshi NEW DELHI — The Indian Air Force is overhauling its plan to induct 114 medium-weight multirole fighters, with a senior service official saying the aircraft will be built in India with significant foreign technology transfer and no foreign procurement. The effort will cost about $17 billion under the Make in India economic policy. The Air Force official said the project is very much alive, but that the “final nitty-gritties have yet to be worked out, and that will take time because it will require manufacturing capability building in the country.” Daljit Singh, a retired Indian Air Force air marshal and current defense analyst, agreed that India must move quickly to create the capability to manufacture high-tech systems at home. “The main aim should be to extract the maximum [transfer of technology] from the OEM [original equipment manufacturer] and start manufacturing subcomponents through Indian companies," Singh said. Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman announced Saturday that the government will create a separate budget for domestic procurement of weapons and equipment to help reduce the imports bill. A Ministry of Defence official said a formal budget allocation of about $17 billion for the multirole fighters project will be granted sometime next year, and will be launched under the Strategic Partners procurement policy. Under that policy, the multirole fighters will be manufactured by domestic private defense companies with one of the original equipment manufacturers approved by the government. The process for selecting contractors is yet to begin, but the MoD official said the businesses will be selected within three years. No private defense company in India has made fighter jets before, but several have expressed interest in participating in the program, including Tata Advanced Systems, Adani Defence, Reliance Defence, Mahindra Defence and Bharat Forge Limited. Reliance Defence has created a joint venture with France's Dassault Aviation, which currently manufactures components for Rafale fighters. Meanwhile, Tata Advanced Systems has teamed with Lockheed Martin, an American company that produces the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. Adani Defence has announced a teaming arrangement Sweden's Saab AB, which makes the Gripen jet. Another Indian Air Force official said a request for information was sent in June 2018 to foreign original equipment manufacturers for the multirole fighters. Among those who have responded to the RFI are: Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Dassault Aviation, Saab AB, Airbus Defence and Space, Russian Aircraft Corporation, and Sukhoi Company. The Indian Air Force plans to induct all 114 multirole fighters within 12 years after the contract is awarded. The official added that the RFI included the requirement for transfer of technology, including the transfer of design, development, manufacturing and repair expertise. It also included the requirement for the unilateral capability to integrate weapons, systems and sensors. The capability to upgrade the aircraft and a provision on exporting the aircraft is also part of the program. India is also seeking transfer of technology for stealth technology, active electronically scanned array radars, avionics, electronic warfare systems and engines. “The advantage of making a fighter aircraft in India is that the customer can select the types of sensors, EW equipment, avionics and weapons, as per operational requirements. Subsequently, the customer is assured of full logistic and upgrade support without any restriction. However, it is important to embed most of these systems in the aircraft design itself to ensure low observability and systems compatibility,” he said. However, Singh, the defense analyst, said any transfer of technology agreement would need to make business sense to the OEM. “Propriety Items could still be under the control of the OEM,” he said. https://www.defensenews.com/global/asia-pacific/2020/05/21/indian-air-force-restructures-17-billion-fighter-jet-program/

By: Christina Mackenzie PARIS — As France slowly emerges from an almost complete industry shutdown imposed March 16 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, defense company executives are considering their next steps. Stephane Mayer, Eric Trappier and Herve Guillou — respectively presidents of the groups of French industries for land and air-land (GICAT), air and space (GIFAS), and naval (GICAN) systems — were witnesses at an April 23 hearing by the National Assembly's Defence Committee. They said that despite the partial return of employees to work, the supply chain is still experiencing problems. The three industry leaders explained that following discussions with unions and the implementation of modifications in the workplace that enable employees to work while maintaining a distance of at least 1 meter between each other, about 30 percent of the workforce on production sites was back by April 23. Those able to work from home are doing so, they added. More employees returned to work on May 11 when the lockdown was eased, but personnel who can continue to work from home are being urged to do, they said. Meanwhile, shifts are being modified to ensure workers don't arrive and leave at the same time, they added. However, all three agreed that the supply chain had been interrupted, most notably in the aeronautical sector because of its dual military-civilian role and the near-total halt in air traffic, which negatively affected imports. They explained that during the lockdown, defense industry leaders and the French procurement office DGA jointly set out priorities for programs and established what activities must be maintained to ensure the military continues its missions within France and in foreign theaters. How are exports performing? All three were also unanimous in their analysis that the French defense sector could take a hit in the export market, noting that German companies never completely stopped their activities; China was quick to reconnect with potential export clients; and the American defense sector benefits both from the continuation of much of its production capacity and massive support from the federal government. This was later repeated by Guillou at a video conference organized this week by the Foundation for Strategic Research think tank. “None of us can survive unless we have 50 percent of our order intake from the export market," Guillou said. "Even if the French market returns to normal, we still have that 50 percent export segment to worry about. If we want to remain competitive on the world export market, keeping in mind that the Chinese ramped up before we did, that the Russians, Germans and Dutch never stopped, we will have to restore our competitivity extremely quickly ... to stay in the race and not lose a part of this market forever.” He also stressed that the need to catch up is a major concern of the French defense industry. What about the supply chain? The supply chain in France is largely made up of small and medium-sized enterprises. Eric Beranger, CEO of European missile-maker MBDA, told French Armed Forces Minister Florence Parly on May 6 that some of the 1,200 French suppliers that work for the company are now very fragile due to the developing economic crisis. Guillou remarked during the video conference that the “terrific solidarity” among the supply chain and subcontractors, as well the prime contractors in the naval sector, is something he'd never come across in his 40-year career. But he added that the small and medium-sized enterprises serving the aeronautical sector are suffering more. The Armed Forces Ministry began slowly ramping up on May 7 based on two principles: preserving the health of staff and their families (all personnel, civilian or military, have been given masks, which must be worn by those who work in confined spaces such as workshops, restaurants or vehicles); and continuing with the ministry's essential mission. This includes programs meant to keep fielded weapons and equipment in operational condition, but it also concerns the delivery of new materials. “The reversibility of the procedures means that were the epidemic to break-out again within the ministry we would be able to handle it,” a May 7 ministry statement said. https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2020/05/21/french-defense-industry-plays-catch-up-as-lockdown-partially-lifts/