News

By: Jeffery A. Green An ancient Chinese stratagem instructs military leaders: “Chen huo da jie,” or “loot a house when it's on fire.” The tactic is simple and self-explanatory — strike when your enemy is most vulnerable. As America's people and industries reel from the impact of a global pandemic, the United States must take immediate action to protect our economic interests from being looted by a uniquely opportunistic adversary. Many U.S. companies have been substantially weakened in both market cap and revenue by the COVID-19 pandemic. With countless companies struggling to survive this crisis, the U.S. should institute a temporary but immediate and total ban on the sale of any U.S. company deemed “critical infrastructure,” whose value has been materially impacted by the pandemic, to a Chinese-owned or controlled entity. Until the president certifies that the economy has fully recovered from the effects of COVID-19, this ban should remain in effect. This crisis necessitates action far beyond the existing review process of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States. China's aggressive weaponization of its economy is no secret. Whether through currency manipulation or the withholding of critical materials, such as rare earth minerals, from the global supply chain, China has a reputation for using its economy in a targeted manner to further its ambitious global plans. Be it overtly or obliquely, through direct ownership or by de facto monopoly, China has encroached on or outright assaulted nearly every meaningful sector of the U.S. economy. There is ample evidence of China's exploitation and deception related to COVID-19. Credible reports are emerging that Beijing has taken donations of personal protective equipment and sold them to Italy and possibly other foreign countries. Further, the dubiously low official infection and death figures released by China are being juxtaposed with higher U.S. infection and death rates to enhance the narrative that China is the more competent nation and should therefore be regarded as the preeminent global leader. But China's infiltration and manipulation of the American economy and psyche began well before the COVID-19 crisis. From a national security perspective, Chinese companies have taken ownership of U.S. companies critical to the strategic supply chain, such as cutting-edge battery technologies and microelectronics. The U.S. is entirely dependent on China for segments of the supply of rare earth minerals, which are necessary for everything from cellphones to critical weapon systems. In 2013, a Chinese company purchased Smithfield Foods, simultaneously making the company the owner of both the largest pork producer globally and more than $500 million of American farmland. Beyond industries like defense and agriculture that form America's economic and national security backbone, China has opened new fronts to project soft power as well. The Chinese conglomerate Tencent began a 2015 push, as Tencent Pictures, into Hollywood with significant investments in major U.S. films, including quintessentially American films, such as “Wonder Woman” and “Top Gun: Maverick.” The Cold War era was rife with films juxtaposing an American hero and a Soviet enemy. With Chinese investment in the U.S. film industry and the growing importance of the Chinese market for these films, it's no coincidence there is a dearth of communist Chinese government villains in today's entertainment market. In 2004, China launched the Confucius Institute program, with the stated goal of promoting Chinese culture and language overseas. With mounting concerns about the spread of Chinese Communist Party propaganda through these institutes, as well as fears of possible espionage originating from them, universities across the world began canceling their affiliations. To date, more than two dozen U.S. universities have cut ties with these programs. While America seeks to recover from the economic impacts of this pandemic, Congress and the administration must take swift action to ensure China is not afforded any opportunity to enhance its economic foothold in the U.S. As distressed companies desperately look for funding and investment, the U.S. needs to send a message that financial exploitation by China will not be tolerated, especially if it involves companies working in industries critical to national security and our broader industrial base. As part of this infiltration of our business community, defense enterprise and culture, China will likely hire an army of lobbyists and lawyers to oppose this proposal. This, too, should be prohibited for the length of the economic crisis in the U.S. For millennia, Chinese dynasties have employed the tactic of looting a burning house as they vanquished enemies all around them. America must act before we become China's latest victim. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/04/17/stop-chinas-predatory-investments-before-the-us-becomes-its-next-victim/

By: The Associated Press MOSCOW — U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov discussed arms control and other issues Friday as Moscow has signaled readiness to include some of its latest nuclear weapons in the last remaining arms control pact between the two countries. But first Washington must accept the Kremlin's offer to extend the agreement. The State Department said the two top diplomats discussed next steps in the bilateral strategic security dialogue. Pompeo emphasized that any future arms control talks must be based on U.S. President Donald Trump's vision for a trilateral arms control agreement that includes China along with the U.S. and Russia, the State Department said. Russian President Vladimir Putin has offered to extend the New START arms control treaty that expires in 2021. The Trump administration has pushed for a new pact that would include China as a signatory. Moscow has described that goal as unrealistic given Beijing's reluctance to discuss any deal that would reduce its much smaller nuclear arsenal. Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said Friday that Russia's new Sarmat heavy intercontinental ballistic missile and the Avangard hypersonic glide vehicle could be counted along with other Russian nuclear weapons under the treaty. The Sarmat is still under development, while the first missile unit armed with the Avangard became operational in December. The New START Treaty, signed in 2010 by U.S. President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, limits each country to no more than 1,550 deployed nuclear warheads and 700 deployed missiles and bombers. The treaty, which can be extended by another five years, envisages a comprehensive verification mechanism to check compliance, including on-site inspections of each side's nuclear bases. New START is the only U.S.-Russia arms control pact still in effect. Arms control experts have warned that its demise could trigger a new arms race and upset strategic stability. https://www.defensenews.com/global/the-americas/2020/04/17/russia-shows-willingness-to-include-new-nuke-hypersonic-weapon-in-arms-control-pact/

Bruxelles) Les adversaires potentiels des pays de l'OTAN vont tenter de profiter de la crise économique provoquée par la COVID-19 pour essayer de prendre le contrôle d'entreprises ou d'infrastructures stratégiques et de saper l'unité de l'Alliance, a averti mercredi son secrétaire général Jens Stoltenberg. Publié le 15 avril 2020 à 14h41 AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE « Cette crise pourrait avoir des effets géopolitiques majeurs », a-t-il affirmé au cours d'un point de presse à l'issue d'une réunion en vidéoconférence avec les ministres de la Défense de l'Alliance. « La crise économique pourrait permettre des investissements dans des industries et des infrastructures stratégiques », a-t-il expliqué. « Il est important de protéger ces entreprises », a-t-il insisté. Jens Stoltenberg n'a pas cité les États ou les groupes impliqués dans ces prises de contrôle, mais la mise en garde vise surtout les importants investissements réalisés par la Chine dans les infrastructures portuaires et les télécommunications en Europe. « La vente d'infrastructures stratégiques par les pays les plus vulnérables pourrait saper la capacité de résistance des pays de l'Alliance en cas de nouvelle crise », a estimé le secrétaire général de l'OTAN. Les pays de l'OTAN ont « besoin d'infrastructures et de télécommunications fiables en temps de crise », a souligné le Norvégien. Jens Stoltenberg a également insisté sur la nécessité de combattre la désinformation sur les actions menées par les alliés et leur unité. « Nous devons contrer les campagnes de désinformation menées par des acteurs étatiques et non étatiques sur les réseaux sociaux qui visent à nous diviser et à nous fragiliser avec de fausses informations sur l'aide mutuelle que nous nous apportons », a-t-il dit. « La meilleure réponse passe par une presse libre qui vérifie les faits et pose des questions parfois difficiles », a-t-il soutenu. « Il est encore trop tôt pour tirer les enseignements de cette crise, mais nous devons être préparés pour la prochaine », a-t-il affirmé. « La croissance est touchée et les dépenses publiques également », a-t-il reconnu. Les membres de l'Alliance se sont engagés à consacrer 2 % de leur PIB national à leurs dépenses de défense en 2024. Jens Stoltenberg a toutefois expliqué l'importance des investissements dans les capacités militaires, car elles viennent « comme une capacité d'appoint ». « L'OTAN n'est pas le principal intervenant en cas de crise sanitaire, mais elle peut soutenir les efforts du secteur civil », a-t-il soutenu. « La principale leçon de cette crise est le lien étroit entre les efforts civils et la capacité de soutien des forces militaires. Il faudra voir comment l'améliorer avant la prochaine crise », a déclaré Jens Stoltenberg. Il s'est refusé à tout commentaire sur la suspension de la contribution américaine à l'Organisation mondiale de la santé. https://www.lapresse.ca/affaires/entreprises/202004/15/01-5269469-les-pays-de-lotan-doivent-proteger-leurs-entreprises-strategiques.php

"[T]he way that the Air Force and now Space Force put their budget submissions into Congress, it puts all of the programs into individual program elements," Roper said, "and that's like locking [each] program into a little financial prison." By THERESA HITCHENSon April 16, 2020 at 4:28 PM WASHINGTON: The Air Force wants Congress to approve new powers allowing the service to fund space acquisition in ‘blocks' that would allow it more freedom to shift funds from one specific program to another, says service acquisition head Will Roper. The idea, he told reporters today, is to give the Space Force acquisition authorities that mimic those used by fast-moving and highly capable organizations such as the Special Capabilities Office and the NRO. The mechanism: putting multiple programs into one budgetary program element (PE) number so priorities can be juggled or monies shifted to ailing programs to help them cope with cost or schedule overruns. “One of the things that we are very passionate about for space acquisition is trying to consolidate the space portfolio into a few number of program elements,” Roper said, noting that when he headed the SCO “we funded almost all of our programs out of one program element. That's really important because it let me optimize the portfolio of programs, not just do individual programs,” he explained. “Well, the way that the Air Force and now Space Force put their budget submissions into Congress, it puts all of the programs into individual program elements, and that's like locking [each] program into a little financial prison.” Although it is true that other organizations with acquisition powers — including SCO, NRO and the Missile Defense Agency — have such flexibility, it is unclear whether Congress will acquiesce to the same for the Space Force. The 2016 NDAA created a new “major force program” — MFP 12 — for DoD reporting on the national security space budget precisely to overcome: a) the lack of transparency in DoD budgeting for space programs, and b) the long-standing Air Force practice to shift space funds to air power programs that were suffering setbacks. However, an MFP does not allow the Air Force or other space services to move money around without congressional assent. As late as the 2020 budget request, DoD admitted that it still had not sorted out how exactly to meet the MFP-12 requirement as it was still developing standard practices for determining what should be included or not. Joshua Huminski, director of the National Security Space Program at the Center for the Study of the Presidency and Congress (CSPC), said wryly that the Air Force request is likely to “require very artful selling to Congress.” He explained in a phone conversation today that congressional leaders already are keeping the Air Force on a short leash regarding space acquisition. Roper said the request for such new authorities will be included in the space acquisition report Air Force Secretary Barbara Barrett is required to send to Congress under language in the 2020 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). That report was due March 31 but has yet to be transmitted. Roper said the report is finished but is being reviewed by Defense Secretary Mark Esper. As I've reported, Barrett's report will punt on the question of whether the NDAA-required Space Force acquisition executive will be a fully separate office or will be organized in some fashion as a subunit of Roper's current shop. It's no secret that Roper has strenuously opposed a fully bifurcated space acquisition office. Roper confirmed today that the pending report is concentrating on how the service hopes to use its current, and newly proposed, acquisition authorities to speed the often decades-long process of moving new space capabilities from design to procurement. He explained that the Air Force will wait until after Congress decides on its proposal for future space acquisition authorities before circling back to the organizational question — in effect, meaning that the service will not address the issue until after the 2021 NDAA is passed. “And then once we determine what will be given to us or not, then for round two, we'll look at what's the right way to organize with these new authorities, and at that point we'll take on the question of whether there should be one or two service acquisition executives,” he elaborated. The service has until October 2020 to establish the controversial new space acquisition post. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/04/af-seeks-freedom-to-shift-between-space-programs

"We are going to accelerate this market for domestic use in a way that also helps our military," Roper stressed. "The Air Force is all in." By THERESA HITCHENSon April 16, 2020 at 7:15 PM WASHINGTON: ‘Flying cars' using electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) technology could be in full-up production for Air Force use in moving cargo and people within three years, says Air Force acquisition head Will Roper. Such a capability, Roper enthused, would give the US military the ability to undertake missions “in three dimensions that we normally do in two,” giving the services “much greater agility.” This is why the Air Force program for investing in commercial firms now pursuing eVTOL vehicles is called “Agility Prime,” he noted. The Air Force will take a first look at vendor offerings in a virtual pitch event at the end of the month, with a focus on small eVTOL vehicles that could be used for missions involving transport of only a few people. Roper told reporters today that the size of any future Air Force vehicle buys would depend on what missions eVTOL vehicles prove capable of carrying out. “If it's helping us to do logistics at the edge, we could end up buying these in higher quantities. If it's things like security and rescue, it will be smaller quantities,” he explained. Roper has previously said he envisions large flying cars for carrying cargo, as well as smaller vehicles for Special Operations-type missions. But no matter what, Roper added that he expects that granting commercial producers Air Force safety certifications and allowing them to rack up flying hours under Agility Prime “will really help accelerate domestic use of these vehicles and [allow some companies to] get FAA certification sooner that it would have come if we had not interjected ourselves into the market.” The Agility Prime program will hold a “virtual launch event” April 27 to allow vendors to showcase their capabilities and interact with potential investors from both the private sector and the military, the Air Force Life Cycle Management Center (AFLCMC) announced earlier this week. Roper, who will give a keynote, said the event originally had been planned as a live demonstration of capabilities by chosen vendors at the annual South By Southwest music festival in Austin that was scheduled for March 13-22, but cancelled due to the COVID-19 pandemic. “The objective of the event is to reinforce the Air Force commitment to partnering with industry, investors, and the interagency to help ensure there is a robust domestic capability in this new aerospace sector,” AFLCMC explained. Agility Prime is designed as a “challenge” where eVTOL vehicle makers compete in a series of demonstration that ultimately could result in a contract for full-scale production. According to documents provided for potential competitors on the program website, the Air Force is asking potential vendors to be able to complete a flight test by Dec. 17. In the first round, companies will need to demonstrate the following specifications: Payload: 3-8 personnel Range: Greater than 100 miles Speed: Greater than 100 mph Endurance: Greater than 60 minutes Roper said the second round of the competition would be dedicated to larger vehicles for cargo, and multiple people. Agility Prime is a unique effort that involves a number of service entities working together, including AFLCMC, the Program Executive Office for Mobility, Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL), the Air Force Warfighting Integration Capability (AFWIC) office, AFWERX, and the new AFVentures office that serves as an intermediary between vendors and venture capital providers. Roper said that besides helping to move the US into a prime spot in an emerging marketplace, he intends Agility Prime to also serve as an example to the commercial sector that the Air Force is serious about being “a good innovation partner.” One of the hallmarks of Roper's term as Air Force acquisition chief has been his focus on figuring out how to leverage commercial research and development to help DoD ensure that it can stay ahead of China in the pursuit of new technology — arguing that innovation is the new battlefield. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/04/roper-sees-air-force-flying-cars-in-production-by-2023

By: Stephen J. Flanagan and James Black As countries around the world grapple with the unfolding coronavirus pandemic, the wider business of government continues. Norway's Ministry of Defence will shortly publish its next Long Term Plan, which will then be debated by parliament. The plan outlines how the Armed Forces, in tandem with other elements of government and society, can best address the threats to Norway from hostile states, terrorists, and fragile and failing states. The plan also examines how to bolster national resilience to deal with other risks including hybrid warfare, climate change and pandemics. A new Rand report, commissioned by the MoD to inform its strategy and policy development, offers perspectives from its closest allies on the emerging security challenges and strategic options facing Norway. We found broad alignment of Norwegian and allied assessments across Denmark, France, Germany, the U.K., the U.S. and NATO institutions, but some enduring differences in emphasis and priorities. Other allies recognize Norway as punching above its weight and playing a critical role in the defense of the North Atlantic and High North. At the same time, our research concludes there is no time for complacency. Norway's key allies agree that the most significant threat in the High North is not a crisis directed against Norway itself. The more plausible danger is “horizontal escalation” — a crisis elsewhere in Europe rapidly growing into a wider conflict that threatens Norwegian waters, airspace and territory. Russia continues to demonstrate hostile intent, and its military capabilities threaten the ability of Norway and its allies to operate military forces, secure critical infrastructure and protect civilian populations. The collapse of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty in 2019 brings an increased threat from medium-range ballistic missiles, requiring Norwegian and allied defense planners to adjust to new threats to the homeland and region. Improvements in the Russian Northern Fleet, including surface vessels and submarines armed with modern cruise missiles, also pose an increased threat to NATO operations in the Norwegian Sea, to undersea internet cables and to sea lines of communication essential to reinforcing Norway from North America or Europe in the event of any conflict. There is also strong consensus on the enduring threats posed by terrorism, nonstate actors and challenges such as climate change in the Arctic. While all allies recognize the need to consider the strategic implications of a rising China, the United States sees China as a more direct and imminent security threat. Allies also welcome Norway's contributions to missions on NATO's eastern and southern flanks. Allies perceive Norway as having an impressive mix of high-end capabilities for a country of its size and a mature total defense concept — its strategy for engaging all elements of society in national defense. These capabilities and commitments, coupled with a well-respected approach to strategy development, have allowed Norway to have significant influence on strategic thinking within NATO. Nevertheless, significant security challenges remain, and to address them our report suggests a number of options for Norwegian leaders to consider: Strengthen deterrence in Norway: Expand surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities; increase the military posture in northern Norway; enhance the protection of bases and forces against air and missile threats; maximize the F-35 fighter jet's potential to aid joint operations; and prepare for operations in contested cyber, space and electromagnetic environments. Expand capacity to receive allied reinforcements: Build on lessons from the joint Trident Juncture 2018 exercise, which allies viewed as an important milestone but not a full stress test; pursue increasingly challenging training scenarios; ensure sufficient pre-positioned stocks of consumables and equipment; upgrade and expand infrastructure along with concepts for dispersing forces to prevent attack; and deepen cooperation to enhance military mobility and interoperability. Explore concepts to hold potential adversaries at risk: Invite allies with more advanced reconnaissance and deep-attack systems to deploy them to Norway periodically; develop longer-range weapons for Norwegian forces; explore the utility of low-cost, unmanned assets; collaborate with key allies on concepts to deny adversaries access to the sea and to better project forces onto the littoral; and refine parallel strategic communications to control escalation. Enhance national and societal resilience: Test and refine Norway's whole-of-government approach and the mechanisms for civil support to the military; contribute to NATO's strategy for addressing hybrid threats, such as disinformation, economic pressure and cyberattacks; and explore further measures to enhance collective preparedness and will to fight. Solidify Norwegian contributions to NATO and partners: Continue contributions to NATO operations beyond the north; help to address variations in defense expenditure across all NATO nations and rebalance trans-Atlantic burden-sharing; promote deeper NATO cooperation with Sweden and Finland; and use innovation and industry to enable influence within NATO. Other countries can learn from how Norway chooses to tackle these emerging challenges, and they can benefit from its lessons learned, particularly with respect to the total defense concept. Pursuit of some of these options, along with the Norwegian government's ongoing efforts to seek allied views, could help enhance deterrence in the north and overall NATO defense. Stephen J. Flanagan is a senior political scientist at the think tank Rand. James Black is a senior analyst in the defense, security and infrastructure program at Rand Europe. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/04/16/allies-share-views-on-enhancing-defense-of-norway-and-the-high-north/

By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — The Air Force One replacement program has hit a major development milestone, and it did so without the in-person meetings that have become more risky in the age of the novel coronavirus, the U.S. Air Force's top acquisition official said on Thursday. The Air Force recently completed the critical design review for the Presidential Aircraft Replacement program, which will replace the legacy VC-25A Air Force One planes with a new variant of the Boeing 747-8 known as the VC-25B. Although the classified portions of the review still must be done via face-to-face meetings in secure spaces, much of it was accomplished using virtual tools and applications, said Will Roper, assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition, technology and logistics. “I was really excited that the team was able to shift their CDR [critical design review] and go virtual,” he told reporters in an April 16 teleconference, adding that more programs will shift toward using virtual meetings to conduct key reviews and milestones even after the COVID-19 pandemic subsides. “I don't know if it makes any sense to do CDRs, at least at an unclassified level, outside of tools like this. And we're working really hard to provide the same capabilities at the secret level,” he said. While Roper did not detail which communication tools were used by the program office to conduct the CDR, he described it as being very similar to widely used applications like Zoom, where the briefer can share PowerPoint slides and participants can share thoughts and questions via a written chat function. “It allows a greater level of productivity than a meeting itself,” he said. “In meetings, you have someone speaking and you want to get a question in, but you've got to wait for them to stop, and then everyone else wants to ask a question. It's hugely inefficient. It's just such an antiquated way of sharing information that is ingrained in us.” The Air Force One replacement drew considerable attention in 2016 after then-President-elect Donald Trump tweeted that the program was too expensive at more than $4 billion and should be canceled. After Trump held numerous meetings with Dennis Muilenburg, who led Boeing at the time, the Air Force awarded Boeing a $3.9 billion contract to modify two 747s into VC-25B jets. However, once all costs are included — such as buying a new hangar for the aircraft and the base cost of the 747s themselves — the Air Force will pay $5.3 billion, according to Defense One. That expense includes an $84 million contract awarded to Boeing on Wednesday to modify Boeing 747 technical specifications and manuals to the VC-25B configuration. Roper doesn't project any schedule delays to the program as a result of COVID-19, which has pummeled prime contractor Boeing's commercial business and caused a temporary pause to certain defense production lines. In February, Boeing began modifying the two 747s slated to become VC-25Bs at its facility in San Antonio, Texas. During the first part of the process, Boeing will cut out large pieces of the aircraft's skin and structure and replace that with two specially designed “superpanels,” according to an Air Force release. The VC-25Bs will also receive upgrades including enhanced electrical power, specialized communication systems, a medical facility, a customized executive interior and autonomous ground operations capabilities. The new Air Force Ones are expected to be operational in 2024. https://www.defensenews.com/air/2020/04/16/a-key-milestone-of-the-air-force-one-replacement-program-was-conducted-using-virtual-tools-it-wont-be-the-last/

While Army and Navy spending nearly double, Air Force and independent agency spending drops almost 40 percent. By THERESA HITCHENS and SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR.on April 14, 2020 at 4:07 PM Breaking Defense graphic from DoD data WASHINGTON: The Pentagon is asking Congress for $2.865 billion for hypersonic weapons in 2021, up not quite 14 percent from a 2020 total of $2.508 billion, according to DoD budget documents obtained by Breaking Defense. Army and Navy hypersonics spending would nearly double in 2021. Each increases by 95 percent. But that's offset by a 40 percent reduction in spending by independent defense agencies like DARPA, which are handing off much of the work to the services as programs move from basic research to prototyping, and a 35 percent cut in the Air Force, which cancelled one of its two major hypersonics programs. Hypersonic weapons fall into two main categories. The more conservative approach — relatively speaking, since these are all bleeding-edge weapons — is known as boost-glide, because it uses a conventional rocket booster to accelerate the weapon to hypersonic speed, after which the glide body containing the warhead detaches from the booster and coasts, skipping along the upper limits of the atmosphere like a stone across a pond. The Navy and Army programs are both boost-glide weapons, and the two services are using a common booster rocket, built by the Navy, and a Common Glide Body, built by the Army and lead contractor Dynetics. The Navy also plans to customize the weapon to launch from submarines, while the Army version will fire from trucks, a much simpler engineering challenge. Notional flight paths of hypersonic boost-glide missiles, ballistic missiles, and cruise missiles. (CSBA graphic) The Air Force had two boost-glide programs. HCSW (pronounced hacksaw), the Hypersonic Conventional Strike Weapon, which would have used a modified version of Army-built Common Glide Body. But the Air Force decided to cancel HCSW and focus its efforts on the more compact ARRW (arrow), the Air-launched Rapid Response Weapon. (Both HCSW and ARRW are Lockheed Martin programs). Finally, DARPA is working on an alternative to boost-glide: air-breathing hypersonic cruise missiles that spend their entire flight in the atmosphere, with their engines providing continuous thrust. That allows the engine to take in oxygen from the air as it flies, rather carrying bulky oxygen tanks — as a boost-glide weapon's rocket boosters do. But flying through the atmosphere also creates friction, heating up an air-breathing hypersonic weapon in ways a boost-glide design, which spends most of its time in a near-vacuum, doesn't have to worry about. Since the air-breathing technology is more ambitious, it remains a DARPA effort for now, with two contracts: Northrup Grumman and Raytheon are working on the Hypersonic Air-Breathing Weapons Concept (HAWC) and Lockheed Martin on the Hypersonic Strike Weapon air-breathing (HSW-ab). While these programs will probably transition to the Air Force in the near future, they don't yet have their own budget lines in the documents we obtained; they're almost certainly folded into the figure for independent defense agencies. Breaking Defense graphic from DoD data The documents summed up a portfolio of programs the Pentagon now refers to as “missile defense and defeat,” a euphemism which combines offensive and defensive programs. As Breaking D readers know, DoD has taken to lumping long-range strike efforts known as left-of-launch into its budget reporting on missile defense, with a total of $3.26 billion included for such activities in the 2021 request. Spending on hypersonic weapons is listed as a subcategory of “nontraditional” missile defense funding, defined as: funding for missile defeat efforts outside of the above missile defense efforts. This captures ‘left-of launch' efforts that defeat missiles before they take flight via high-speed strike (e.g. Conventional Prompt Strike) or cyber-attack operations. We combed through the document to extract the offensive hypersonics programs from traditional missile defense, directed energy (lasers), cyber warfare, and other means of neutralizing enemy missile salvos. The document broke down 2020 funding and 2021 requests for Army, Navy, Air Force and defense-wide, both for foundational science, technology, test and evaluation (STTE) as well as for each individual service's programs to develop hypersonic missiles. Meanwhile, the Missile Defense Agency and the Space Development Agency are working on a space-based sensor to detect adversary hypersonic and cruise missiles, under the Hypersonic & Ballistic Tracking Space Sensor (HBTSS) Prototyping program. The Navy is the big spender in 2021, with the bulk of the funds slated for the Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS), a submarine-launched boost-glide weapon set to enter service in 2025. Its total hypersonic budget in 2020 is set at $526 million, but jumping to just over $1 billion in the 2021 request. (DoD agencies spent $31 million in 2020 wrapping up their portion of CPS, but the whole program will be in the Navy budget as of 2021). The Air Force's 2020 budget includes $848 million, the budget documents show, but that drops in the 2021 request to $554 million due to the cancellation of HCSW. The Air-launched Rapid Response Weapon (ARRW) is funded at $286 million in 2020 and the service is asking for $382 million in 2021. As for the Army, the documents put 2020 spending at $441 million, and the 2021 request is for $859 million. That increase is driven by a big jump in the budget for the land-based version of the common Army-Navy boost-glide weapon, the Long Range Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW), from $409 million in 2020 to $801 million in 2021. (This LRHW line item also includes some work on the cancelled Mobile Intermediate Range Missile. DoD never said publicly what MIRM would be, or even whether it would be a hypersonic missile or a conventional ballistic missile, and it appears to have been stillborn). The documents also show the Army spending $19 million on the Operational Fires ground-launched hypersonic missile program in 2020, and asking for another $28 million in 2021. OpFires is a joint program with DARPA. Lockheed Martin scored a $31.9 million contract from DARPA in January to begin Phase 3 Weapon System Integration under the program. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/04/exclusive-dod-asks-2-9b-for-hypersonics-in-2021

Boeing a effectué avec succès le premier vol du chasseur F-15QA, version la plus avancée du F-15 développée pour l'armée de l'air qatarie (QEAF). L'avion a démontré ses capacités au cours d'un vol de 90 minutes. L'appareil a décollé et a atterri de l'aéroport international Lambert à Saint-Louis. Cure de jouvence pour le F-15 Enfin une bonne nouvelle pour Boeing, même si le F-15 n'est plus vraiment ce que l'on peut appeler un appareil de première fraîcheur. L'avionneur de Saint Louis (ex division McDonnell Douglas en conséquence) a effectué avec succès le premier vol du chasseur F-15QA, version la plus avancée du F-15 développée pour l'armée de l'air qatarie (QEAF). L'avion a démontré ses capacités au cours d'un vol de 90 minutes. L'appareil a décollé et a atterri de l'aéroport international Lambert à Saint-Louis. « Nous sommes très fiers de cet accomplissement et nous nous réjouissons avec beaucoup d'enthousiasme des succès continus de ce programme », a déclaré le colonel Ahmed Al Mansoori, commandant de l'escadre F-15 de la QEAF. « Ce premier vol réussi est une étape importante qui rapproche nos escadrons d'un pas vers le pilotage de cet avion au-dessus du ciel du Qatar. » 9G L'équipe d'essais en vol de Boeing, dirigée par le pilote d'essai en chef Matt Giese, a mis en place une liste de vérification précise de la mission pour tester les capacités de l'avion multirôle. L'avion a démontré sa maniabilité lors de son décollage vertical en tirant neuf G, soit neuf fois la force de la gravité terrestre, au cours de ses manœuvres subséquentes dans l'espace aérien d'essai. Les vérifications des systèmes tels que l'avionique et le radar ont également été couronnées de succès. Une équipe d'essai qui surveillait les données en temps réel a confirmé que l'avion s'était comporté comme prévu. 6,2 MD$ pour 36 avions Le département américain de la Défense a attribué à Boeing un contrat de 6,2 milliards de dollars en 2017 pour la fabrication de 36 avions de chasse F-15 pour la QEAF. Boeing commencera à livrer des avions au client en 2021. De plus, Boeing a obtenu un contrat de vente militaire à l'étranger de l'US Air Force en 2019 pour les équipages F-15QA et la formation à la maintenance pour la QEAF. Le F-15QA apporte à ses exploitants des technologies modernes telles que les commandes de vol CDVE (commandes de vol électriques), cockpit numérique, capteurs modernisés, radars et des capacités de guerre électronique. L'augmentation de la fiabilité, de la durabilité et de la maintenance permet aux opérateurs de défense de rester en avance sur les menaces actuelles et en évolution. Vers le F-15EX pour l'USAF Gr'ce à des investissements dans la plate-forme F-15QA et un partenariat avec l'US Air Force, Boeing se prépare maintenant à construire une variante nationale du chasseur avancé, le F-15EX. Huit appareils devraient être assemblés pour commencer, les plans futurs prévoient jusqu'à 144 appareils. https://www.air-cosmos.com/article/le-boeing-f-15-qa-ralise-son-premier-vol-22929