Argentina eyes surplus CH-46 helicopters as Mi-17 replacement

Sur le même sujet

• 

  12 mars 2024 | International, Terrestre

  Maxar wins US Army One World Terrain simulation contract

  Three phases of the OWT prototype project were previously said to be worth nearly $95 million.

• 

  24 avril 2020 | International, C4ISR

  Top Air Force general defends Advanced Battle Management System from critical report

  Valerie Insinna A report by a government watchdog that slammed the Air Force's major command-and-control program did not include key classified information and was outdated by the time it was released last week, the service's top general said Wednesday. On Friday, the Government Accountability Office delivered a scathing report on the Air Force's Advanced Battle Management System, which seeks to overhaul the U.S. military's command-and-control infrastructure so that any platform will instantly and seamlessly be able to share data with another weapon system on the battlefield. The problem, according to the GAO, is that the Air Force has not provided enough detail on exactly what technology it needs, how it plans to field it and how much it will cost. But speaking to reporters on Wednesday, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Dave Goldfein said the agency did not have access to key information that may have fleshed out the service's plans. “There is a bit of latency to the reporting,” Goldfein said. “Two things I would offer is that they were not able to get to our December ABMS demo. So they didn't actually ... see in real time what we were connecting.” The other problem, Goldfein said, is that the organization was not cleared to receive information about the classified portions of the program. “That makes it challenging because if the technology you're moving forward, if a lot of it is in the classified realm — if a lot of it, quite frankly, was in the space realm — and the GAO doesn't have access or clearance to be able to look at it, then the report is going to be on a very small portion of what the Advanced Battle Management System really is,” he said. In an email to Defense News, GAO director Marie Mak disputed Goldfein's characterization of the report, saying that the organization has a full understanding of past and present ABMS efforts, including the December exercise and numerous classified discussions. “Those discussions did not change our finding that the Air Force still does not have an overall plan for ABMS, a point which they openly acknowledged and in fact concurred with our recommendations,” she said. “The Air Force still needs to develop an overall plan, to include preliminary costs and schedule. Without some type of overall plan in place, it will be difficult for the Air Force to prioritize this program among the acquisition efforts within the Air Force.” When Goldfein became the Air Force's chief of staff in 2016, he made connecting the joint force one of his major priorities. Since then, the service has canceled efforts to replace legacy aircraft that play a role in battlefield management, such as a recapitalization of the E-8C Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System aircraft. Instead, it has put its financial resources toward ABMS, which it envisions as a family of systems that will be more survivable than a direct replacement for JSTARS aircraft or other assets. The service tapped Preston Dunlap to manage the ABMS effort in 2019. It then conducted its first set of technology demonstrations in December, where it tested 28 different technologies, with 26 of them proving to be successful. However, some lawmakers have remained skeptical about the Air Force's approach and lack of transparency. In March, Republican Sen. David Perdue called for the Air Force to deliver an analysis of alternatives and capability development document — two pieces of documentation typical to defense acquisition programs. “The development of ABMS is encouraging, but we need to make sure Congress has proper oversight throughout the process,” said Perdue, whose home state of Georgia is the location of Robins Air Force Base, where ABMS is slated to be based. Goldfein did not directly address one of the GAO's major complaints: that the program is at greater risk for schedule delays and cost growth because it does not have a firm business case that spells out capability requirements and cost. But he acknowledged that the Air Force has to do more to share information with Congress and the GAO in a timely matter. However, the pace of the ABMS program may also require lawmakers and the GAO to put in more time to keep updated on the effort's progress, he said. “The GAO has got to keep up ... and we've got to help,” Goldfein said. “This is not a poke or criticism. We've got to help them. We've got to help Congress. We've got to help think tanks. We've got to help others realize that we are moving out and we are developing capability faster than we've ever developed capability before. We're connecting things faster than we've ever connected them before.” “Every four months we are connecting new capabilities that have never been connected. That's a hard one to deliver a report on, but I'm eager to sit down with the GAO and get them up to speed.” Updated on 4/23/19 at 11:45 a.m. with comment from the GAO. https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/c2-comms/2020/04/23/top-air-force-general-blasts-critical-advanced-battle-management-system-report/

• 

  11 juin 2018 | International, Aérospatial

  Is a light attack aircraft coming to the Corps?

  By: Shawn Snow The Senate Armed Services Committee plans to dish out millions for a Marine light attack aircraft and the Corps' futuristic sea drone, known as the MUX. The committee voted 25-2 on May 24 to give $100 million for a Marine light attack aircraft and $100 million for the MUX sea drone in its markup of the fiscal year 2019 annual defense legislation. The Air Force is still in pursuit of a light attack aircraft. Two aircraft, Textron Aviation's AT-6 Wolverine and the A-29 Super Tucano, are currently undergoing three months of demonstrations, which kicked off in May at Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico. So, what will the Corps choose? “The Marine Corps is monitoring the Air Force-led Light Attack Experiment to procure a cost-effective, observation and attack (OA-X) air platform for employment in permissive environments, with the intent to employ such an asset as a joint force capability,” Marine spokesman Capt. Christopher Harrison told Marine Corps Times in an email. “The SASC's decision to authorize $100 million for a light attack platform is only reflected in a policy bill ― nothing has been appropriated to this program yet.” Light attack aircraft are seen as a cost-effective means to deliver close-air support in more permissive environments like Iraq and Afghanistan. The A-29 Super Tucano is already fielded by the Afghan air force. Military officials in the past have come under criticism for using expensive aircraft to destroy low key targets. For instance, on Nov. 20, 2017, an F-22 Raptor was used for the first time in Afghanistan, to destroy a narcotics lab. Gen. John Nicholson, the commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, said the F-22 was selected because of its ability to carry the small diameter bomb. As for the MUX, the Corps submitted a request for information in March that spelled out some details the Marine Corps wants in its new futuristic drone. The Corps is looking for a drone to compliment the long distances of some of its other aircraft like the MV-22. According to the March RFI, the Marines want the MUX to be able to fly 700 nautical miles and carry a 9,500-pound payload. The Corps wants its future sea drone to have strike capabilities, surveillance and electronic warfare. Military.com first reported that the Senate Armed Services Committee voted to give $100 million for a Marine light attack aircraft. https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/your-marine-corps/2018/06/04/is-a-light-attack-aircraft-coming-to-the-corps/