Austal USA wins first steel shipbuilding program with T-ATS towing ship contract

Sur le même sujet

• 

  1 février 2021 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

  Is Russia’s defense industry too busy to take on another fighter jet project?

  By: Alexander Bratersky MOSCOW — Rostec announced this week it has begun developing the MiG-41, a fifth-generation fighter jet set to replace Russia's MiG-31 jets currently in service. However, amid a number of other ongoing military aerospace projects, experts are questioning whether industry has the resources to produce the aircraft by its deadline of 2030. The MiG-31 fleet entered service in 1980 under the Soviet Armed Forces and was upgraded in 1990 to become the MiG-31BM. The MiG-41, originally developed by Rostec subsidiary United Aircraft Corporation, has long been expected to replace the aging jets. Work on the new aircraft started in 2010 with UAC's Mikoyan design bureau and Sokol aviation production plant, based in Nizhny Novgorod, about six hours' drive from Moscow. According to Russian news reports, the MiG-41 will be equipped with stealth technology, reach a speed of Mach 4-4.3, carry anti-satellite missiles, and be able to perform tasks in Arctic and near-space environments. If it enters service, the MiG-41 will be the country's second fifth-generation fighter after the Su-57, which was developed by UAC subsidiary Sukhoi Company and had its first flight test in 2010. The Su-57 crashed during a flight test in December 2019. The pilot has survived, leaving the plane on the catapult chair. Defense officials told the Vedomosti newspaper at that time that technical mishaps in the control system might have caused the accident. A governmental commission was founded to investigate the accident, but no public report was realized. That same year, the Russian military bought 76 Su-57 planes. The cost of a single Su-57 might be about 3 billion roubles (U.S. $40 million), Izvestia reported that year, citing defense sources. The plane is equipped with the AL-41F1 engine, which is also used on the Su-35 jet. However, the local Lyulka Design Bureau is currently developing a new engine for the Su-57. According to Ruslan Pukhov, the director of the Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, the primary focus of Russia's defense industry is to develop that engine. That main effort takes away much-needed resources for the new plane, he explained. A London-based analyst echoed Pukhov's concerns, expressing skepticism that Russia “will be able to develop, manufacture and introduce into service [the jet] in anything like the purported time frame.” Douglas Barrie, who focuses military aerospace for the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said Russia's aerospace sector is already committed to numerous projects, including further developing the Su-75, upgrading the Su-34, and modernizing various bombers such as the Tu-160 Blackjack, Tu-22M Backfire and Tu-95. “Some would argue that the sector has already more than enough to try to manage without the additional or a project potentially as complex as a new heavy interceptor, or indeed whether there would be realistic levels of funding for a program,” he said. Defense News contacted the Russian Aircraft Corporation, a subsidiary of UAC involved in the MiG-41 project, but the firm declined to comment on the jet's development. For his part, Pukhov thinks the government should ditch its costly projects and instead appropriate funds to develop drones. “This is the sphere where Russia is still behind,” he said. He added that both China and India will likely want to cooperate on the MiG-41. The latter left a joint project to develop a fifth-generation fighter aircraft based on the Su-57 in 2018. But Barrie questioned the export potential of the MiG-41, saying the number of similar jets being built elsewhere is rapidly growing. “Even if such an aircraft were eventually to be developed, it would — were it to meet the same role as the MiG-31BM Foxhound C — have a very limited export appeal.” https://www.defensenews.com/air/2021/01/29/is-russias-defense-industry-too-busy-to-take-on-another-fighter-jet-project

• 

  1 avril 2020 | International, Aérospatial, C4ISR

  Space Force awards contracts worth as much as $1B for new modems

  Mike Gruss The Space Force awarded L3 Technologies and Raytheon's Space and Airborne Systems contracts worth as much as $1 billion for the development and production of new modems that would help with protected satellite communications. The indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contracts, each worth as much as $500 million, are part of the Air Force and Army Anti-Jam Modem program, which is also known as A3M. The modems would be capable of handling the new Protected Tactical Waveform, which provides anti-jamming communications for warfighters on the battlefield. The program is led by the Army's Program Executive Office Command Control Communications – Tactical and the Space Force's Space and Missile Systems Center. Space Force officials emphasized that they awarded the contract about four months ahead of schedule. In a request for information from 2018, military officials said the modem would be used in the Air Force Ground Multiband Terminal and Army Space Transportable Terminal. The contracts are also expected to include terminals or terminal components to work with the new Protected Tactical SATCOM system, commercial satellites and the Air Force's Wideband Global SATCOM satellites. “We are very excited to be partnering with Raytheon and L3 Technologies Inc. to bring Protected Tactical Waveform anti-jam capability to both Department of the Air Force and Army users,” said Shannon Pallone, senior materiel leader, Tactical SATCOM Division, said in a release. “This was a joint team from the start, a partnership between the Space Force and the Army, and included support from the [National Security Agency].” https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/space/2020/04/01/space-force-awards-contracts-worth-as-much-as-1b-for-new-modems

• 

  28 novembre 2019 | International, Autre défense

  Canada has plenty to gain from upping its defence spending

  COLIN ROBERTSON Colin Robertson, vice-president and fellow, Canadian Global Affairs Institute If we thought passage of the new North American free-trade agreement would get Donald Trump off our back, think again. We've been served notice that Canada has got to pony up more on defence and security. We should do so, not because the U.S. wants us to, but because it serves Canadian interests, especially in exercising Canadian sovereignty in our North. The Trump administration is close to a deal with Speaker Nancy Pelosi on congressional ratification of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) on trade. The possible changes to the agreement signed last November will not trouble Canada. Tougher labour and environmental standards enforcement – “trust but verify” – are aimed at Mexico. Another change would shorten the patent-protection period for new pharmaceutical drugs. The USMCA could pass through Congress before Christmas. But even if the deal gets stuck, Mr. Trump's threat to rescind NAFTA is increasingly remote. The more Americans learned about NAFTA, the more they liked it, especially in the farming community and Mr. Trump needs their votes if he is to be re-elected next year. A new trade agreement does not mean complacency about trade. We're still paying tariffs on our lumber exports. Protectionism, especially in procurement, is endemic. We need to sustain the Team Canada effort with Congress, governors and state legislators. Rather than blame Ottawa, provincial premiers need to remind their neighbouring states why trade and investment is mutually beneficial. Premiers and governors should strive for a reciprocity agreement on procurement. But if our trading relationship is shifting out of crisis mode, defence and security will take that space. Continued free riding by the allies, as the Trump administration sees it, is not an option. With the end of the Cold War, Canada took the peace dividend and then coasted in our defence spending. But today's world is meaner with a rising China and revanchist Russia. The Trudeau Government thought its defence policy – titled Strong, Secure, Engaged – and its promise of new warships, fighter jets and active missions in Latvia and Iraq, would suffice. Wrong. For Mr. Trump, the bottom line is the 2014 commitment by the governments of North Atlantic Treaty Organization member-countries to achieve spending of 2 per cent of gross domestic product on defence by 2024. Canadian spending, according to NATO, is currently 1.27 per cent. It is scheduled to rise to around 1.4 per cent by 2026-27, well short of the allies' pledge. If we are going to spend more, then let's invest in northern sovereignty. Brian Mulroney persuaded Ronald Reagan to tacitly acknowledge Canadian sovereignty through Arctic waters. Since then, the Americans have pressed us to exercise that sovereignty. Stephen Harper instituted Operation Nanook and he made annual summer visits to the North. But the promised Arctic base in Nanisivik, Nunavut, has never materialized. The promised icebreakers are still to be built. In contrast to the American, Chinese and Russian policies, Canada's long-delayed Arctic policy framework, finally released in September, is sophomoric. It ignores both defence and security. The Americans want us to collaborate in updating the postwar North Warning System. Jointly managed as part of our NORAD alliance, its replacement will be expensive. But it's also an opportunity for us to lead in the development of innovative space and underwater applications that would buttress our Arctic sovereignty. We can take inspiration from HMCS Harry DeWolf, the first of our offshore patrol ships. The largest Canadian warship built in 50 years, it is now afloat in Halifax harbour. We are also an Indo-Pacific country. The almost year-old Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) gives us first-mover advantage over the U.S. in places such as Japan. But our Pacific partners expect us to demonstrate greater commitment to their security. This means more navy and air reach. Is our Pacific posture adequate? Does our capability, including our bases, meet the new threat assessments? Managing the trade relationship with the Trump administration is hard. David McNaughton was the right ambassador for the Trudeau government's first term and its focus on trade. Mr. MacNaughton's outreach strategy needs to become a permanent campaign. Our next ambassador will need demonstrated security chops in addition to political savvy. Handling defence and security is going to be really hard. But as a friendly ambassador, whose country faces the same challenge, observed at the recent Halifax International Security Forum, we Canadians are going to have to toughen up. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/commentary/article-canada-has-plenty-to-gain-from-upping-its-defence-spending/