News

By: Mike Yeo MELBOURNE, Australia — The U.S. Navy is facing growing asymmetric threats, not least of which is from China, and more specifically its anti-access/area denial strategy. The Pentagon's annual report on China' military strength from 2019 describes the A2/AD strategy as a means to “dissuade, deter, or, if required, defeat third-party intervention against a large-scale, theater-wide campaign” mounted by China's People's Liberation Army, or PLA. In short, it appears Beijing's aim is to prevent American and allied military forces from operating freely in the A2/AD airspace and maritime “bubble” around China's coastline. China has in recent years worked to extend the range of this bubble beyond the so-called first island chain and into the Western Pacific. The key to this effort is not just longer-range missiles, but also a growing number of space-based sensors. The U.S.-based Union of Concerned Scientists reported that as of 2016, China had 192 satellites in orbit, a number that has since increased, with nearly all of these belonging to organizations or companies with close ties to the government and having dual roles to for civilian and military use. Some of China's satellites include several payloads that are almost certainly for military purposes, such as electro-optical sensors, synthetic aperture radar and electronic intelligence technology. The country also uses a constellation of Naval Ocean Surveillance System satellites providing persistent coverage of water surrounding China. These capabilities can also support targeting for China's anti-ship ballistic missiles, and with sufficient numbers and integration, they could provide real-time target triangulation data to build up a robust picture of a target's location to ultimately generate a targeting approach. Meet the DF-21D The long-range, conventionally armed ballistic missile DF-21D is meant for attacking moving ships at sea, most notably the U.S. Navy's showpiece nuclear-powered aircraft carriers. The theory behind its creation is that a missile speeding down to sea level on a ballistic trajectory at speeds of Mach 5 or higher would prove extremely difficult to counter. The road-mobile anti-ship ballistic missile system is mounted on a wheeled transporter erector launcher to improve survivability against enemy counter-strikes. Said to have a range of about 780 nautical miles, the DF-21D is a version of the DF-21 family of two-stage, solid-fueled, single-warhead conventional or nuclear medium-range ballistic missiles in use by the PLA Rocket Force. The U.S. Defense Department suggests that the DF-21D reached initial operating capability with the PLA in 2010, with the system thought to employ maneuverable reentry vehicles with a terminal guidance system assisted by China's network of satellites, such as the Jianbing-5/YaoGan-1 and Jianbing-6/YaoGan-2 that provide targeting data in the form of radar and visual imaging, respectively. There are, however, questions about the missile's effectiveness. China has reportedly tested the DF-21D against fixed land targets, but it's unknown whether it was tested against a moving target. This makes it difficult to accurately assess the capability of the weapon, particularly from a maturity and efficacy standpoint. It also brings into question whether China's sensor technology can generate the kind of real-time, highly precise data required to enable the DF-21D to accurately target an aircraft carrier maneuvering at 30 knots. But the missile and its sensor net could be used to keep watch on and provide deterrence at maritime chokepoints among the first island chain, specifically the Miyako Strait between Okinawa, Japan, and Taiwan as well as the Bashi Channel between Taiwan and the Philippines. This would theoretically reduce the demand on a less-than-mature sensor net and kill chain to limited geographic areas through which potential targets would have to sail. Considering the limited combat radius of carrier-borne aircraft without large-scale support from aerial refueling tankers, the ability to keep an American carrier battle group at arm's length may be all that China's A2/AD capability requires. An attack with anti-ship ballistic missiles can be used in conjunction with other anti-ship missiles and timed to simultaneously arrive at a target. Such an attack could be mounted from longer-range anti-ship missiles like the YJ-12 and YJ-18. Both are Chinese improvements of Russian designs, derived from the Kh-31 air-to-surface missile and the 3M-54 Klub cruise missiles, respectively. Both are capable of supersonic speeds, with the anti-ship YJ-18A variant attaining its maximum speed of about Mach 2 in its terminal attack phase following subsonic cruise. The YJ-12 can fly at speeds of between Mach 2 and Mach 4, depending on launch and cruise altitudes. Both can also reach long ranges. The YJ-12 is widely believed to have a range of between 108 and 216 nautical miles, while the YJ-18 is believed to possess a range of 290 nautical miles. The YJ-12 can be launched from wheeled transporter erector launchers as well as from vertical launch cells on ships like the Type 052D or Type 055 destroyers. The YJ-12 can also be launched from aircraft, like the Xian H-6 bomber, the JH-7 fighter bomber and possibly the Shenyang J-11/15/16, Chinese derivatives of the Russian Sukhoi Flanker family. Is a new long-range air-to-air missile on its way? China's indigenous Flanker derivatives are also expected to the primary carrier platform for a new long-range air-to-air missile reportedly in development. Expected to be used to target an adversary's high-value airborne assets such airborne early warning and control systems and tanker aircraft, the missile has been given the temporary designation “PL-XX.” Observers believe the eventual in-service designation will be PL-20. The new missile was first observed in 2016 carried by a Shenyang J-16 multi-role fighter, however it almost certainly was an inert mock-up. It was seen earlier this year on a Xian JH-7 fighter-bomber. By comparing the known sizes of the parent aircraft and its hardpoints, it's been estimated the missile is about 5.8 metres (20 feet) long and about 300 milometers (1 foot) in diameter, which is significantly larger than typical medium-range air-to-air missiles, like the American AIM-120. Four rear-mounted fins bestow maneuverability and control for the missile. There is little verifiable information about the new missile's performance; however, a public schematic of how China would use the weapon shows the ramjet or solid fuel-powered missile can attain a straight-line range of 300 kilometers (188 miles). After launch, most likely with preliminary targeting data provided by a friendly airborne early warning and control aircraft, the missile would fly a parabolic trajectory on its way to its target, attaining an altitude of approximately 100,000 feet from a launch altitude of 50,000 feet, before plunging toward the target. A mixture of GPS, inertial navigation systems and space-based radars are expected to provide launch and mid-course guidance, before an active electronically scanned array radar takes over at the terminal phase. If China succeeds in putting such a weapon into service, the PLA Air Force will then be able to compel an adversary's vital force-multiplier aircraft to operate farther away, or risk being shot down. This would reduce their effectiveness and that of the tactical aircraft they are supporting in the event of a conflict. https://www.defensenews.com/global/asia-pacific/2020/06/01/chinas-missile-and-space-tech-is-creating-a-defensive-bubble-difficult-to-penetrate/

Imagine the following scenario. Four medium-sized U.S. Navy vessels depart from a port along the United States' coast. There's no crew aboard any of them. About 15 nautical miles off the coast, the four vessels rendezvous, autonomously arranging themselves in a line. Using custom mechanisms, they attach to each other to form a train, except they're in the water and there's no railroad to guide them. In this configuration the vessels travel 6,500 nautical miles across the open ocean to Southeast Asia. But as they approach their destination, they disconnect, splitting up as each unmanned ship goes its own way to conduct independent operations, such as collecting data with a variety of onboard sensors. Once those operations are complete, the four reunite, form a train and make the return journey home. This is the Sea Train, and it may not be as far-fetched as it sounds. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency is investing in several technologies to make it a reality. “The goal of the Sea Train program is to be able to develop and demonstrate long-range deployment capabilities for a distributed fleet of medium-sized tactical unmanned vessels,” said Andrew Nuss, DARPA's program manager for Sea Train. “So we're really focusing on ways to enable extended transoceanic transit and long-range naval operations, and the way that we're looking to do that is by taking advantage of some of the efficiencies that we can gain in a system of connected vessels — that's where the name ‘Sea Train' comes from.” According to DARPA, the current security environment has incentivized the Navy and the Marine Corps to move from a small number of exquisite, large manned platforms to a more distributed fleet structure comprised of smaller vessels, including unmanned platforms that can conduct surveillance and engage in electronic warfare and offensive operations. While these unmanned vessels are smaller and more agile than their large, manned companions, they are limited by the increased wave-making resistance that plagues smaller vessels. And due to their size, they simply can't carry enough fuel to make the long-range journeys envisioned by DARPA without refueling. By connecting the vessels — physically or in a formation — the agency hopes the Sea Train can reduce that wave resistance and enable long-range missions. In February, the agency released a broad agency announcement to find possible vendors. Citing agency practice, Nuss declined to share how many proposals were submitted, although he did say there was significant interest in the announcement. The agency completed its review of any submissions and expects to issue contracts by the end of the fiscal year. Sea Train is expected to consist of two 18-month periods, where contractors will work to develop and test technologies that could enable the Sea Train concept. The program will culminate with model testing in scaled ocean conditions. If successful, DARPA hopes to see the technologies adopted by the Navy for its unmanned platforms. “What we're looking to do is be able to reduce the risk in this unique deployment approach,” Ness said. “And then be able to just deliver that set of solutions to the Navy in the future, to be able to demonstrate to them that there is, potentially, a new way to deploy these vessels, to be able to provide far more operational range without the risk of relying on actual refueling or in-port refueling.” And while DARPA's effort is focused on medium-sized unmanned vessels — anywhere from 12 to 50 meters in length — the lessons learned could be applied to larger or smaller vessels, manned or unmanned. https://www.c4isrnet.com/unmanned/2020/06/01/all-aboard-the-sea-train/

By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — BAE Systems has completed a successful ground-to-ground test of its Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System rocket for the first time, the company announced Monday. The test, conducted at the U.S. Army's Yuma Proving Ground in Arizona, involved “several successful shots” of the APKWS rockets out of a launcher, built specifically for ground vehicles by Arnold Defense, according to BAE. The weapon has traditionally been launched from rotary or fixed-wing aircraft. A ground-based APKWS, delivered via the Arnold Fletcher launcher, was first unveiled in 2018. “Demand is growing for ground-to-ground precision munitions that provide a safe standoff distance for small ground units,” Greg Procopio, director of precision guidance and sensing solutions at BAE Systems, said in a statement. “We're working closely with our customer and partners to deliver that capability.” The APKWS laser-guided rocket is used by the U.S. Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps. The Navy holds the program of record. The rockets have also spread via foreign military sales to more than a dozen foreign nations. However, the U.S. Army decided to end procurement of the rockets as a result of its “night court” budget review. In its fiscal 2021 budget request, the service said it redirected $122 million in funding from the rockets toward higher priorities. Even before the Army's decision was official, BAE was working to increase the flexibility of APKWS as a low-cost, precision-strike option. Late last year, the Air Force successfully tested it for missile defense, and the ground-to-ground version would add to the military options for the weapon. The company delivered more than 35,000 APKWS units by the end of 2019 and expects to deliver 18,000 in 2020. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2020/06/01/bae-successfully-tests-ground-launched-apkws-rockets-for-first-time/

By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — In the coming years, the U.S. Navy will be faced with a decision that will radically shape the carrier air wing: Is the service willing to sacrifice dozens of new Super Hornet jets for the promise of a sixth-generation fighter in the 2030s? The Navy is opting to buy a final 24 F/A-18E/Fs in fiscal 2021, slashing a planned purchase of at least 36 Super Hornets that would have spanned FY22 through FY24. The move will save $4.5 billion, which the service plans to redirect to its sixth-generation fighter program, known as Next Generation Air Dominance, or F/A-XX. However, the decision may not be as clear cut — or final — as budget documents make it seem. The Navy is at the very start of the NGAD development process, having completed an analysis of alternatives in June 2019, as well as broad requirements and guidance for a concept of operations. The effort is now in the concept development phase, during which defense companies explore ideas “that balance advanced air dominance capabilities and long-term affordability/sustainment,” said Navy spokesman Capt. Danny Hernandez. But with an economic downturn potentially leading to even more pressure on the defense budget, the Navy may not have the funds to proceed with NGAD as a clean-sheet fighter jet. “Although the Navy would like to start developing the next generation of aircraft ... I just don't think — and increasingly people in the department are thinking — there's not going to be the money to devote to this next generation of fighter,” said Bryan Clark, an analyst with the Hudson Institute and a retired naval officer. “I think they are going to fall back to looking at F/A-XX as a modification or an evolution of the F-35,” he said. “Instead of the other half of the air wing being some new aircraft, you'll have a combination of F-35Cs and then some modified version of the F-35 or a modified Super Hornet." Jerry Hendrix, a retired Navy captain and an analyst with the Telemus Group, said the service's enthusiasm for F/A-XX is a sign of a continued preference for manned aviation as well as a desire to shut out any hope of fielding a long-range, penetrating strike drone. “I've always been in favor of extending the Hornet production line because it is solid and stable,” Hendrix said. “But the extension was based on the proviso that we're extending in order to get to an unmanned combat aerial vehicle. If it was an extension to get to the next manned fighter ... we're missing the idea of what the future competitive environment, or really the present competitive environment, is all about.” A tightrope of risk The Navy has grappled in prior years with the question of whether to cease production of the Super Hornet in favor of a future fighter, and it is an argument that lawmakers are wary of. The Navy first planned to stop buying the F/A-18 in its FY15 budget — a decision made to fund the transition to the F-35. But technical issues and delays pushed out the fielding of the Navy's F-35C takeoff-and-landing model for aircraft carriers to 2018, leaving the service dependent on a fleet of aging, battle-worn F/A-18s in need of a service-life extension. The Navy ended up listing the F/A-18 on its unfunded priorities list, and Congress followed by funding enough Super Hornets to keep Boeing's line running. “If we go back a few years and we look at what happened when we thought we were going to plant the F-35, we let the F-18 slide down,” Rep. Donald Norcross, D-N.J., said in a March 10 hearing. Norcross is the chairman of the House Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces. The process of standing up the F-35C was much slower than expected, and the Navy ended up buying additional F/A-18s to bridge the capability gap, he said. “Yet, here we are getting ready to curtail 36 Super Hornets because we are expecting, you know, the F/A-XX to come online,” he added. Asked how he could be confident that F/A-XX would stay on schedule, Rear Adm. Gregory Harris, the Navy's director of air warfare, said he could provide lawmakers a more detailed defense of the Navy's Next Generation Air Dominance family of systems in a classified setting. “We're working closely with the Air Force to ensure the systems that we put on that have the [technology readiness level] that gives us confidence that we can achieve that aircraft on time in the early 2030s to replace the F/A-18E/F as it reaches the end of its service life,” Harris said. Missouri Rep. Vicky Hartzler, the subcommittee's top Republican, pointed out that the Navy already has a fighter shortfall of about 49 aircraft, with additional F/A-18s being pulled from the operational fleet into a service-life extension period that will take at least a year. “I feel like this is too much operational risk,” she said. “If you add all those up, this is a severe shortage that we are experiencing, and if you don't account for the attrition rate, actually in combat we would have a very large gap there potentially.” James Geurts, the Navy's assistant secretary for research, development and acquisition, said there is always risk when transitioning from legacy to new aircraft, but that improved mission-capable rates and a steady flow of jets moving through upgrades will help balance the shortfall. “We're taking risk until the late 2020s. I think 2029 is when we will get to the full fighter inventory, and so we had to take some risk as we balance that,” he said. The most likely scenario is that, as the Navy presses forward with its plan to curtail funding for F/A-18s, Congress will simply continue buying more of them, Hendrix said. But one unanswered question is whether lawmakers will also intervene to force the Navy to consider a wider range of aviation options that could give the carrier air wing longer legs. “I'm hopeful that there will be a broader conversation, led by Congress and the administration, perhaps together, to say: ‘We are looking at the future security environment. We are looking at the Chinese threat. We are looking at what's happening in Taiwan, what's happening [in] Hong Kong and within the first island chain, and we really need to have this new capability of long-range, penetrating strike,' ” Hendrix said. “What I do realize is that because the Navy is very conservative right now in how it's approaching its procurement programs, the Navy will not be the one to say we need this mission.” No matter what the Navy decides, it could impact its procurement of the MQ-25 unmanned tanker drone currently under development by Boeing. Hendrix sees the MQ-25 program as a likely bill payer, particularly if the service continues to buy Hornets. “What was the reason for the MQ-25? It was to take the strain off from the Hornets,” which were being used to refuel other F/A-18s and burning through their service lives faster than anticipated, Hendrix said. “When you reopen the Hornet production line and you add 120-something new Hornets, you actually took that strain off the Hornet fleet. So there really isn't a requirement now for a recovery tanker.” Clark agrees that the Navy should develop a long-range unmanned combat aircraft but is unlikely to do so. But should the Navy choose not to proceed with an F/A-XX program, Clark believes the service could funnel some of that money into modifying the MQ-25 to supplement strike, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capacities, and could even end buy more MQ-25s than planned. “The MQ-25 program, once it gets fielded and proven out, I could see the Navy expanding it,” he said. “I think the operational and programmatic pressures have driven the Navy to embrace the MQ-25, and because it's a complement to the manned aircraft, it's generated less resentment among the manned aviation community.” https://www.defensenews.com/air/2020/06/01/at-a-budgetary-crossroads-the-us-navys-aviation-wing-must-choose-between-old-and-new/

Le bilan des exportations d'armement françaises 2019 atteint le montant de 8,3 milliards d'euros, selon les chiffres de La Tribune. Les ventes d'armes françaises baissent de 11,1% par rapport à 2018 (9,1 milliards), une année où la France avait enregistré sa troisième meilleure performance en 20 ans ; toutefois les prises de commande en 2019 consolident la place de la France dans le top 5 des exportateurs mondiaux. La Tribune rappelle que sur 10 ans, l'industrie d'armement française a vendu pour plus de 86 milliards d'euros d'armements à l'exportation. La part des achats de systèmes d'armes français par des pays européens progresse par rapport à 2018 (25%), avec 45 % du total des prises de commande de 2019, gr'ce notamment à la signature de trois grands contrats : Naval Group en Belgique, Airbus Helicopters en Hongrie (hélicoptères H225M et H145M) et Thales et Airbus en Espagne (satellites de communication sécurisée, Spainsat NG I et II). La Tribune du 2 juin

Farnborough International has launched FIA Connect: a platform to connect the global aerospace industry. Taking place during what would have been the 2020 airshow week, FIA Connect will run from July 20-24. Over five days, there will be a series of free-to-attend digital aerospace events, including a full virtual conference program focussed on topics leading industry and featuring high profile speakers, as well as range of business growth opportunities. Speaking about the launch of FIA Connect, Gareth Rogers, chief executive of Farnborough International said: “The cancellation of the airshow in response to the COVID-19 pandemic was a major shock, however the team is determined to create something that brings as many aspects of the show to the global aerospace industry as possible. “Through our biennial airshow, we have been privileged to serve as a platform for connecting industry, facilitating business growth, and showcasing the very latest in innovation and technology. “The Farnborough International team is working hard to deliver a week of world-class content and thought leadership in order to provide some support to industry at a time when we cannot meet.” Registration for FIA Connect is set to go live in the middle of June. The schedule of events includes: The FINN Sessions – a comprehensive webinar program of insight and analysis featuring leading figures and focussed on the topics that matter: MRO, defence, airlines, space, urban aviation and future workforce. Meet the Buyer is to run free-of charge on Tuesday July 21. This is a strategic opportunity, connecting suppliers with buying decision makers at pre-arranged, private and secure virtual meetings. Farnborough Friday a day developed to help address the skills gap, this virtual hub will include careers advice, inspirational speaker videos, downloads and workshops. ADS Partnership – FIA Connect is partnering with ADS Group, the U.K. trade association for aerospace, defence and security, to provide support, guidance and topical sessions of analysis, giving the best of insight and resource to help business keep up to date, informed and connected. All content for FIA is being created in-house by the team at Farnborough International with the technological capability being delivered by Eventscase: a platform designed to facilitate all key areas of live, hybrid and virtual events. https://www.skiesmag.com/press-releases/farnborough-international-has-launched-fia-connect-a-digital-aerospace-event/

By: Joe Gould Updated 5/29/20 with response from the Pentagon. WASHINGTON ― The Pentagon has spent less than a quarter of the $10.6 billion Congress gave it in March to protect military personnel and marshal American industry to procure face masks, ventilators and other products hospitals need in their fight against the coronavirus. Citing the Trump administration's most recent reports to Congress, Democratic senators say the Pentagon has placed on contract 23 percent of the funds it was provided nine weeks ago as part of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act of 2020. It's the latest criticism in a sharp back and forth between congressional Democrats and the Pentagon over the latter's response to the global pandemic. As the nation surpassed 100,000 deaths from COVID-19, nine Senate Democrats wrote to Defense Secretary Mark Esper on Thursday, calling for him to provide Congress with a spending plan for the remaining funds. Defense Appropriations Subcommittee Vice Chairman Dick Durbin, D-Ill., led the letter, which was obtained by Defense News. “We are concerned by the delays in providing this important information, the lack of transparency in the use of emergency funds appropriated to the Department, and troubling signs the funds will instead be spent for other purposes,” the letter read. “Lacking a spend plan, we are not even sure what those purposes may be.” Senate Appropriations Committee Vice Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Senate Armed Services Committee ranking member Jack Reed, D-R.I., signed the new letter with Durbin, Sens. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.; Patty Murray, D-Wash.; Jon Tester, D-Mont.; Tom Udall, D-N.M.; Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii; and Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis. Though the coronavirus rescue package included more than $1 billion for National Guard deployments requested by the administration to support state authorities, the Guard didn't need the money because the Federal Emergency Management Agency has since taken responsibility for reimbursing states. “We do not understand why the Department requested these funds ... nor do we know what they will be used for now,” the lawmakers wrote. The Pentagon has thus far obligated $167 million of the $1 billion Congress granted under the Defense Production Act, a Korean War-era law that the president recently invoked, to have industry produce key items such as N95 respirator masks and swabs needed for coronavirus testing, ventilators and other items. “Lacking further information from the Department on its plans for these funds, we are unable to answer simple questions such as whether the U.S. Government is doing everything in its power to address shortfalls in supplies which are not only needed at this moment, but also in preparation for a predicted second wave of coronavirus infections,” the lawmakers wrote. In a statement, chief Pentagon spokesman Jonathan Rath Hoffman said the department “remains committed to legally and responsibly executing these funds on the highest priorities to protect our military and their families and safeguard our national security capabilities. As we have seen, this is an evolving and dynamic situation where priorities and requirements change, which is why it is so important that we remain faithful and accountable stewards of the taxpayer dollar.” “As the Members know, the spend plan is due per the CARES Act in four weeks, on June 26th. The plan is currently in final review and approval, and we expect it to be on the Hill by close of business [May 29], a full month prior to the required due date,” Hoffman added. “In the interim, the Department has shown its commitment to transparency through daily and weekly updates from senior DoD leaders to multiple Congressional committees — both staff and members. In addition, DoD has provided hundreds of responses to Congressional COVID queries, and will continue to do so.” The Department of Defense announced its first use of the Defense Production Act on April 13 in the form of $133 million in contracts to 3M, O&M Halyward, and Honeywell to boost domestic production of N95 respirator masks. On Thursday, the DoD announced its latest: $2.2 million to Hollingsworth & Vose for 27.5 million N95 ventilator filters and 3.1 million N95 respirators per month, starting in August ― all to “relieve manufacturing bottlenecks and will expand N95 mask production and ventilator use.” The letter comes just weeks after the Pentagon made a surprise decision to move its point person for the Defense Production Act, Jen Santos, into a new job. But it's also as Democrats have urged President Donald Trump to dramatically increase domestic production of personal protective equipment and testing supplies. “Throughout this crisis, you have continued to lay blame for the public health response on others, from members of the previous administration to those who report to you now,” Schatz, Durbin, Tester and Baldwin wrote in a letter to Trump on May 15. “Your dismissal of the Pentagon's senior industrial policy official appears to be the latest example of removing a knowledgeable and well-regarded technocrat for no reason but to cover for your failure to fully invoke and utilize the DPA authorities.” In early May, Esper clapped back at accusations the DoD had not been transparent in its response to COVID-19. A letter from Senate Armed Services Committee member Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and nine Democratic colleagues, which accused the Defense Department of failing to adequately respond to the pandemic, contained “a number of misleading, false, or inaccurate statements,” Esper said. “Our commitment is to ensure that we provide Congress complete, accurate and timely information which we are doing on weekly basis,” he said, adding that he speaks with committee leaders on a weekly basis. “We recognize Congress has an important oversight role, but it should be an informed oversight role, and we are committed to doing that.” Aaron Mehta contributed to this report. https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/05/28/the-pentagon-has-spent-only-23-of-its-covid-19-response-funds-congress-is-asking-why/

Geoff Ziezulewicz For the first time, four U.S. combatant commands are coming together this week for an exercise that simulates how the military would respond to an attack on its home turf. Headed by U.S. Northern Command, the four-day exercise began this week off the East Coast and also involves U.S. Space, Transportation and Strategic commands, according to NORTHCOM. The aircraft carrier Harry S. Truman strike group and its air wing will join Canadian fighter jets and Air Force F-15s in conducting intercepts against adversary aircraft during the exercise, which began Thursday and will wrap up Sunday. This week's exercise continues a long stint at sea for the Truman's crew. The ship left Norfolk in November for its third overseas cruise in the past four years. While the strike group's deployment began to wrap up this spring, it spent its time as a rapid-response force at sea instead of pierside in order to protect the crew from exposure to COVID-19. An Air Force B-1B bomber will be used as the enemy aiming to infiltrate U.S. airspace as well. Along the way, brass hope the exercise can strengthen the military's ability to communicate and share real-time information in such a scenario, according to NORTHCOM. U.S. Transportation Command is providing refueling tankers along the coast to support defending forces during the exercise, and Space Command is providing satellite communications and GPS. “Leading complex multi-combatant command operations across multiple domains demonstrates our readiness to defend our homeland regardless of COVID-19,” Air Force Gen. Terrence O'Shaughnessy, the head of NORTHCOM, said in a statement. Correction: this article incorrectly stated when the Truman deployed last year. The carrier deployed in November. https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2020/05/29/exercise-to-unite-four-combatant-commands-to-test-homeland-defenses-for-the-first-time/

By: Sebastian Sprenger COLOGNE, Germany — A new budget proposal for the European Union shows that the bloc's defense plans are back on the table as the continent pushes to revive its economy following the coronavirus crisis. Two flagship programs to that end — the European Defence Fund and the Military Mobility initiative — are set to receive €8 billion (U.S. $9 billion) and €1.5 billion (U.S. $1.7 billion), respectively, in the seven-year plan beginning in 2021, according to a proposal unveiled this week by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. Those figures are lower than the initial proposal of €13 billion and €6.5 billion for the two budget lines. But they represent an uptick compared with recent negotiation positions that envisioned defense-related spending slashed even more. Defense spending remains an unbeloved subject in many European countries, and it is notable that there is no dedicated political narrative around building military prowess in the context of the bloc's recovery plan, dubbed Next Generation EU during a May 27 speech by von der Leyen. Still, the fact that the European Defence Fund — designed to foster intra-continental defense cooperation — remains in the mix is in itself a statement, according to analysts. Defense-spending advocates in Europe believe a robust military can strengthen the EU's hand in trying to assert its role on the world stage with other players like China and Russia. The new proposal of €8 billion for the European Defence Fund may not seem like much, given the high, upfront costs for multinational military equipment projects, said Sophia Besch, a senior research fellow at the Center for European Reform. “But it's a win for the [European] Commission in the current political context,” she added. “COVID-19 has shifted the priorities, and even before the crisis there were signs that defense was losing ground in the traditional budget battles,” Besch said. Given that, the new proposal is “better than nothing,” she argued. At the same time, the de facto reduction would make it harder to prove for the commission that the intended effects can be achieved with the amount envisioned, Besch predicted. Funding through the European Defence Fund and its associated channels ensures that certain projects in many member states can happen at all, said Yvonni-Stefania Efstathiou, an Athens, Greece-based defense analyst specializing in the emerging European defense-cooperation framework PESCO, or Permanent Structured Cooperation. “Allocations to the EDF have the potential of triggering more defense cooperation, as those funds will be used to finance collaborative research and common capability development projects,” she said. What is still missing, however, is an overarching context of where the EU wants to go with its defense ambitions, she argued. “The impact of these funds will be limited unless there is also progress on the common definition of strategic priorities and military requirements.” The cut to the budget line for military mobility means member states stand to pay more of their own money for updating bridges, roads and rail networks to ensure military equipment can quickly move along the continent in the event of a standoff with Russia. The work is seen as a critical interface between the EU and NATO, and alliance officials previously expressed hope for a funding injection that could speed projects along, especially in Eastern Europe. “Unless we have the full costings of how much bridges and roads will cost, it is hard to evaluate whether the funds are sufficient,” Efstathiou said. “What is easy to predict, however, is the dissatisfaction of the Eastern European states.” https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/05/29/the-european-unions-defense-ambitions-are-still-showing-signs-of-life/