Australia's Potentially Game-Changing Loyal Wingman Drone Has Flown For The First Time

Sur le même sujet

• 

  12 septembre 2019 | International, Terrestre

  DSEI: Shoot and scoot: Industry answers call for more mobile firepower

  By: Jen Judson LONDON — As the U.S. military and its European allies look to counter Russian capabilities observed against Ukraine in Crimea, countries are looking to move away from towed artillery systems to highly mobile mortar systems that pack a punch at greater range. The exposition floor at DSEI, a large defense trade show in London, was littered with examples of mobile mortar systems that are answering the call. “We're seeing the emergence of mobile mortars now due to changing threats and environments,” James Tinsley, a managing director at Avascent, told Defense News at the show. “Where U.S. and allied operations in Afghanistan and Iraq used largely static mortar and artillery emplacements at Forward Operating Bases, these sites are easily fixed, targeted and destroyed by more advanced conventional adversaries,” Tinsley said. “Those adversaries use unmanned aerial vehicles, electronic intelligence and counter-battery radars to quickly target and counter-fire on vulnerable artillery positions.” Militaries have increased their focus on mobile artillery solutions, as a result, Tinsley said, to include self-propelled howitzer being recapitalized with new systems like the Paladin M1299 Extended Range Cannon Artillery, Hanwha's K9, BAE Systems' Archer 155mm howitzer to name a few. And there's an effort to extend the range of rounds like the Nammo ramjet capability. Hammer of Thor BAE Systems showcased its CV90 Mjölner variant — Hammer of Thor — with a 120mm mortar system, which is about to be delivered to the Swedish Army after completing qualifications. The company is seeing a genuine requirement from customers because they are seeing the threat and so the company believes its system fits the bill due to its simplicity for the operator. Swedish Armed Forces Colour Sergeant Joakim Kylstad, a development officer at the Land Warfare Centre, said the system brings an increase in mobility and speed of firing and it can keep up with main battle tanks. The ability to shoot and move out of the way before an enemy can detect and return fire is critical, he added. And the 120mm's firepower and range are more effective than an 81mm mortar, Kylstad said. While this variant was specifically designed for the Swedish Army, there are a number of other countries interested in the platform, Dan Lindell, BAE Systems' director of combat vehicles in Sweden, said. The company has sent information on both the Mjölner variant and an advanced mortar system to the United States, but the two have very different price points, Lindell noted. The vehicle was delivered in record time to the Swedes. BAE fired the first shot from the variant just two-and-a-half months after signing a contract in December two years ago. BAE also brought its Archer system on an 8x8 truck. The system carries 21 rounds and can be fired in two-and-a-half minutes. Also packing a punch, Finnish defense company Patria displayed a 120mm Nemo turret on its 6x6 armored wheeled vehicle. While not integrated onto a vehicle at the show, German defense company Rheinmetall brought its 120mm Ragnarok mortar combat system intended for integration into combat vehicles. Downsizing But even smaller vehicles came to the show with mortar systems highlighting easy setup and high mobility. AM General's booth had one vehicle - a HMMWV with a Hawkeye 105mm mobile weapon system using a standard M20 cannon installed with a soft recoil capability. The company has been working with Mandus Group on refining and integrating the Hawkeye system to the humvee. The only parts different from what is already in the U.S. Army inventory is the gun system's cradle and the recoil mechanism, Nguyen Trinh, company executive vice president of International Defense, told Defense News. The 105mm system can be found on Korean and South African vehicles, but it's installed on huge 6x6 trucks. Yet, AM General installed the gun without making any modifications to the humvee besides adding stabilizer legs to adjust to uneven ground. In a recent demonstration, an experienced artillery crew at Fort Campbell, Kentucky, showed the benefits of a system installed on a humvee versus a towed M119. Compared to the four minutes and 41 seconds an artillery crew of seven took to set up and first fire the system, the four person crew using the HMMWV Hawkeye system fired its first shot in one minute and 54 seconds after spending a day-and-a-half training to use it, Trinh said. In emergency situations, a two-person crew can set up and deploy the weapon. Additionally, the system can fire 24 rounds within three minutes from the time the vehicle stops, and by the time a counter-battery radar has time to find the system, it's already moving to its next firing position, he added. And towed-artillery crews can normally only break down and set up the system several times before it becomes physically exhausting. But the mobility and ease of use of the Hawkeye humvee system means the crew can keep going longer. The AM General system can also shoot in 360 degrees and is the only company worldwide with this capability. The rest of the systems out there can shoot in a forward-facing “wedge.” One of the U.S. Army's priorities is to increase protective mobile fire capability because of the threats observed by Russia on the battlefield in Ukraine, and the Army is evaluating systems including AM General's system. “Mobile, self-protected howitzers we believe are the future, not only in the Army but internationally,” Trinh said. Ditching towed systems The U.S. Army has recently completed an Army Requirements Oversight Council review on mobile, self-propelled artillery and language on the way forward is expected soon. The United Kingdom is also looking at the same thing seriously and has requirements for a 155mm system. But “I would say any country that has towed systems today and that really understands the survivability challenges of towed systems are looking in general terms at self-propelled systems,” Trinh noted. While not at the show, the company also has a 155mm system called Brutus on an FMTV chassis. The system doesn't just have to go on a humvee or FMTV either, Trinh said, but any vehicle in a country's inventory. Also taking up less of a footprint was British company Supacat's High Mobility Integrated Fires Capability with an 81mm mortar system on the back. The U.S. Army has several programs that increase the mobility of 120mm mortar systems from the Future Indirect Fire Turret (FIFT) program, the Armored Multipurpose Vehicle (AMPV) and work within the Next-Generation Combat Vehicle program. Several options are being demonstrated to the Army with Stryker for the FIFT program, with a target of installing on AMPV or the future Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle. “Mortars offer significant firepower in lighter weight systems than self propelled howitzers, albeit at lower ranges. But they are a highly effective complement to other systems,” Tinsley noted. Most self-propelled mortars today are mounted in the hull of vehicles like AMPV or the Stryker combat vehicle. “These can be effective but they are slower to bring to bear, have an open roof, which is vulnerable to counter-fire and require a heavier vehicle to handle recoil or an expensive and complex recoil system,” Tinsley said. So turret-mounted systems are “coming into vogue now,” he said. “They offer high rates of fire, maintain crew protection and tightly integrate fire control or indirect and direct fire missions. Some have automatic loaders and other automation to drive even higher rates of fire.” The Army was moving in this direction back in the days of Future Combat Systems, but the program was cancelled with the rest of the program. The international market has been developing and adopting these systems more quickly, according to Tinsley, and it's likely that the providers with wares to show at DSEI are leading candidates for some of the things the U.S. Army is looking for, but will likely require U.S. production partners and integrators, according to Tinsley. https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/dsei/2019/09/12/shoot-and-scoot-industry-answers-call-for-more-mobile-firepower

• 

  4 février 2019 | International, Aérospatial

  The US Air Force wants to continue its light-attack experiment. Will industry buy in?

  By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — If the U.S. Air Force takes two years to conduct a light-attack experiment — made possible in part by industry investments — and then abandons it, why should defense contractors buy into the next one? That was the question posed to the Air Force's top uniformed acquisition official by one attendee of a Feb. 1 event held by the Air Force Association. "I think there's a skepticism out here,” said Mike Loh, a retired Air Force four-star general who now runs a consulting firm. “There's got to be a requirement or funding or both at the end of that, otherwise you've got guys in industry that are investing a lot of money, and they're looking back at light-attack aircraft,” he said. “What did you do? Nothing. You put it on the back burner.” Loh's question highlights the confusion surrounding the Air Force's path forward on the light-attack experiment, as well as unease about the way the service approaches industry investment in short-term experimentation or development campaigns with no clear contract award at the end of the process. Industry investments have already allowed the service to fly the aircraft, set up logistics infrastructure and try new capabilities Last month, Air Force officials confirmed the service would not put out a final solicitation for the light-attack program. Matt Donovan, its undersecretary, said on Jan. 18 that the service preferred to conduct additional experiments and wanted to broaden the campaign. This latest shift follows a failed attempt to acquire a light-attack plane about a decade ago. In 2009, the Air Force began the Light Attack/Armed Reconnaissance program, and its competitors — the Textron AT-6 and Sierra Nevada Corp.-Embraer A-29 Super Tucano — are the same two aircraft involved in the current experimentation campaign. That program fizzled out due to political reasons around 2013, but the Air Force is still hopeful it can press ahead with its latest light-attack effort. “I have ideas of how we go forward, and I think we know how we go forward,” Lt. Gen. Arnold Bunch, the military deputy for the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, said of the light-attack experiment on Friday. ”We are planning to broaden the experimentation out and carry the experimentation forward, and I think when our budget hits, you'll understand more of what we're doing." Bunch said the experiment has helped validate the Air Force's requirement for a light-attack capability that can counter violent extremist threats in a low-cost manner. “What I don't want to do is end up in a position that I've got F-35s chasing small buses or mopeds or whatever else we may be trying to chase,” he said. But when it came down to it, Air Force officials looked at the new National Defense Strategy — which prioritizes a high-end fight — and decided against making a large-scale buy of light-attack planes in the upcoming budget, he said. The Pentagon's annual report by the director of operational test and evaluation, released Thursday, shed some light on what may have been the Air Force's initial plans for the light-attack program. The service would have purchased 359 aircraft for eight operational squadrons and three training units, with a contract for either the AT-6 or A-29 to be awarded before September, the report said. The Air Force also considered getting a waiver so that it conduct component-level, live-fire tests for both aircraft before making a final downselect. An Air Force spokeswoman confirmed to Defense News that the timeline and procurement quantities noted in the DOT&E report are no longer accurate. Expanding the experiment What becomes of the light-attack experiment remains unknown — Air Force officials haven't made it clear what the service wants to see in future stages of the effort. Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Dave Goldfein stressed the importance of getting buy-in from international militaries during a Jan. 26 interview with Defense News. He also said aircraft like helicopters and drones could be considered in addition to the turboprop planes that dominated the first phases of the experiment. On Friday, Bunch said the service could look at “technologies we may be able to put on platforms or solutions that we may not have thought of” during the first phase of the experiment. “I know many people have talked about specific platforms. What I want to talk about [is] not necessarily that,” he said. That may point to a systems-of-systems approach similar to what the Air Force is seeking with its Advanced Battle Management System — a replacement for its JSTARS ground surveillance planes that will be comprised of a network of existing and new sensors. But the Air Force will need to be clear with industry about what it wants, said Andrew Hunter, head of the defense-industrial initiatives group at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. For example, “if the answer is that they need to do some kind of dramatic cost-cutting initiative, give them a number,” he said. It might also benefit the Air Force to incorporate prototypes in the large-scale international exercises it regularly holds with partners, which has the added benefit of giving foreign militaries more exposure to technology that the U.S. might buy, he said. “I think people will stick with it for a while because there's still a belief that the Air Force will invest and, more important, that there is still a broad international market for this capability,” Hunter said of the light-attack experiment. But, he added, the uncertainty regarding the future of the effort illustrates the constraints of rapid prototyping and experimentation: There's no promise of a program of record at the end of the road. “[While] there is some value of exercising the muscle ... not every one of these is going to lead to a production program,” he said. After two years of experimentation, the Air Force still doesn't have an answer for how it should fill its light-attack requirement, but Bunch, the acquisition official, was adamant the experiment has had value. "I may be the only one that believes it, but I actually believe it has been a success. We tried something we hadn't done. We built a partnership with industry. We experimented. We learned a lot, and we got to the point where we weren't ready to make a large buy decision at this stage. I still believe that is learning,” Bunch said. “And I believe it is something we will take the lessons learned and roll it into how we go forward,” he added. “We've got to look at ourselves in the mirror and say: ‘Was that good or was it bad, and how do we do it better?' We've got to do our own image check." https://www.defensenews.com/air/2019/02/01/the-us-air-force-wants-to-continue-its-light-attack-experiment-will-industry-buy-in

• 

  27 avril 2021 | International, C4ISR, Sécurité

  Cyberdéfense : la Suède remporte Locked Shields 2021

  L'exercice de cyberdéfense Locked Shields 2021 s'est tenu à Tallinn (Estonie) du 13 au 16 avril dernier. Il a réuni 2000 spécialistes occidentaux issus de 22 pays, qui, selon le scénario préétabli, se sont opposés à une « Red Team » (attaquants) qui aurait déclenché une vaste série d'incidents cyber contre le « Berylia », un pays situé près de l'Océan Atlantique. L'attaque aurait visé les infrastructures critiques, dont le secteur de l'eau et le secteur financier, et les systèmes de communication militaires. La « Blue Team » était chargée de protéger et de restaurer les systèmes de défense aériens et maritimes. L'exercice a impliqué quelque 4 000 attaques informatiques et 5 000 systèmes virtuels. La Suède a remporté l'édition 2021, suivie par la Finlande et la République Tchèque. Air & Cosmos du 27 avril