Boeing preps for next test of US Navy’s future aerial tanker drone

Sur le même sujet

• 

  4 décembre 2024 | International, Terrestre

  Slovakia spends 2.2% of GDP on defence in 202 - GlobalData

  Slovakia's defence budget is projected to increase consistently from 2024 to 2029, surpassing NATO's 2% of GDP target.

• 

  8 septembre 2020 | International, Aérospatial

  MQ-NEXT: US Air Force Considers Reaper Replacement

  The General Atomics-built MQ-9 Reaper — a medium-altitude, long-endurance unmanned aerial vehicle with millions of hours of operation under its belt — has had a ubiquitous presence over battlefields in the Middle East. But with the Pentagon preparing for future fights in contested, non-permissive environments against peer adversaries, the service is beginning its search for the aircraft's replacement. The Reaper — which is larger and carries more payload than its predecessor the MQ-1 Predator — provides the military with a “hunter-killer” capability by executing both strike and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance collection functions. But officials say it is time for a new platform that can take on those same missions and more. The service signaled its intent in President Donald Trump's fiscal year 2021 budget request by zeroing out its proposed buys of MQ-9s as it pursues a follow-on aircraft, though legislators may push back on the move. “We made the pivot to divest MQ-9s to pivot into high-end warfighting,” said Will Roper, assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition, technology and logistics, during a press briefing in July. The service is now pursuing a replacement system dubbed the MQ-Next. The move to acquire a new platform — the second such effort for the Air Force following a canceled program known as MQ-X in 2012 — comes as the Pentagon shifts to great power competition with advanced adversaries Russia and China, as outlined in the 2018 National Defense Strategy. In June, the Air Force released a request for information to industry seeking input about a new medium-altitude drone, with particular focus on innovative development and business practices, and digital engineering initiatives. Responses were due in late July and a number of major defense companies responded. Affordability and versatility will be key as the Air Force looks for the Reaper's replacement, Roper noted. “We're going to have to explore more than just the MQ-9 mission or else we're not going to be able to create enough of an asset within the Air Force budget itself to afford to pursue the program,” he said. “If all we do is replace the MQ-9 mission, we really generated a bill for the Air Force.” The Department of the Air Force has a number of expensive programs on its shopping list as it pursues an ambitious modernization strategy that includes fifth-generation fighters, a new nuclear-capable stealth bomber and ground-based strategic deterrent, space systems superiority and joint all-domain command and control. If the new drone is “another mouth to feed and it's not helping us with high-end warfighting, then it's not likely to be first in the queue,” he said. Using a baseball analogy, Roper said he wants to see the replacement platform be a true utility player. He envisions a future where the aircraft could go from collecting ISR data to being weaponized to conduct air-to-air operations. “Can I have a drone that I can put forward in a high-end fight that can provide a picket line that makes it difficult for enemy fighters to push through?” he asked. “Can I pull that drone back to the rear and have it protect high-value assets, aircraft and even bases?” Because the Air Force is looking for a UAS that can perform a variety of missions, it may need to pursue more than one aircraft, Roper said. “I'm open to families of systems,” he said. The service wants industry to think outside-of-the box about how the Air Force can conduct high-end warfighting against a peer adversary. Increased automation is one solution, which will also help with affordability, Roper noted. “It takes a ton of people to operate even one MQ-9,” he said. “That's not a knock against the platform — it was designed at a different point in technology. And now many of the things we have people do, we can automate.” The service intends to have airmen in the loop for critical decisions — especially lethal ones — and will not delegate that to machines, he said. But it wants to simplify how users interact with the next-generation drone. “We have to automate as much as possible if we're going to keep the platform affordable,” he said. Technology such as artificial intelligence can assist with automation and reduce operating costs, he added. “We can really drop the cost per hour of ISR ... if algorithms are doing most of the triaging of the raw video and only sending back to remote operators objects that are of interest,” Roper said during a Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies event. Additionally, in regions such as Central Command and Africa Command there is a possibility that the service could reduce the number of airmen that have to operate the MQ-Next platform if AI and new commercial technology is adopted. Meanwhile, survivability and expendability will be important considerations for the program. “I imagine being in industry shoes. I would either try to have something that is so cheap that I can proliferate it broadly — and that comes with a logistics challenge for us — or something that is reasonably defendable enough so that if I'm an adversary, I have to truly commit capital assets to take it out,” he said. Moving to an architecture that supports expendable aircraft will not be easy, he noted. “We have been able amazingly to build airplanes that we expect to return every single time they take off,” he said. “You can imagine designing things that may not return is a complete culture shift for us and for industry.” Based on informal engagements he has had with companies, Roper said he expected to see a great deal of creativity in industry responses to the RFI. The service is aiming for initial delivery beginning in 2030, and initial operational capability by 2031, according to the RFI. “In a digitally engineered future, 10 years is an eternity. I would hope we could spiral multiple times within that 10 years,” Roper said. If “we can't get it done by 2030 then something is wrong with our system. Ten years should never be the time you take for development except for extremely exceptional things.” General Atomics is responding to the RFI and plans to leverage its experience with the MQ-9 as it pursues the effort, according to a company spokesperson. “The technology advancements we propose will leverage open architecture, artificial intelligence, autonomy, modularity and interoperability to maximize both system effectiveness and service investments,” the spokesperson said. “We believe our technology advancements offer lower lifecycle cost and provide warfighters with enhanced unmanned capabilities that enable commonality and joint interoperability on the battlefield.” The company is embracing the possibility of a family of systems for the program, the spokesperson noted. It is planning to leverage more automation in future platforms and is already integrating such technology on the MQ-9. “This includes automatic take-off, landing and remote taxi, and a portable aircraft control system for aircraft launch and recovery that eliminates the need for forward-deployed launch/recovery crews,” they said. “We also developed a single-seat ground control station and have a multi-mission control capability that lets a single pilot control up to six MQ-9s.” If the Air Force were to use all of these automation tools on the Reaper, the spokesperson projected that it could reduce the service's manpower bill by 50 percent and free up 1,500 aircrew billets “that could be applied towards expanded MQ-9 mission capability, reallocated to other priority personnel requirements, or eliminated to realize multi-billion dollar savings over the remainder of the MQ-9 service life.” Analysts say the likely competitors to incumbent General Atomics include Lockheed Martin, Boeing and Northrop Grumman. In a statement, a Lockheed Martin spokesperson said the company intended to respond to the RFI and would leverage work done by its advanced development program division, Skunk Works, which has expertise in developing unmanned platforms. Boeing and Northrop Grumman said they plan to pursue the program but declined to provide specific details on their RFI submissions. MQ-Next will be an important program for General Atomics because the MQ-9 is its bread and butter, said Phil Finnegan, director of corporate analysis at the Teal Group, a Fairfax, Virginia-based aerospace and defense market analysis firm. “They're going to fight hard to try to build a replacement,” he said. The company would be in a difficult position if it lost the competition because it brings in a lot of revenue from the Reaper. However, Larry Dickerson, a senior defense analyst at Forecast International, a Newtown, Connecticut-based marketing consulting firm, noted that it wouldn't be all doom and gloom for General Atomics if it loses the MQ-Next competition. “The Reaper systems are going to be in [service] for a long time, which means there's going to be a lot of long-term support and maintenance contracts that are going to be coming towards them,” he said. Meanwhile, while the Air Force is gung-ho about pursuing a replacement for the MQ-9, some in Congress appear to be less so. In the House fiscal year 2021 defense appropriations bill — which was passed by the chamber in late July — lawmakers included funding for 16 MQ-9s at a cost of $344 million that would keep its production line going, according to a summary of the legislation. As of press time, a final appropriations bill had yet to be passed. “The Air Force's fiscal year 2021 budget request proposes to terminate production of MQ-9 aircraft, citing an excess of aircraft compared to projected operational requirements,” said the House Appropriations defense subcommittee in its version of the spending bill. “The committee does not accept this proposal and recommends additional funding for 16 MQ-9 aircraft.” Lawmakers said they were concerned that the Air Force reached its decision without adequate planning for a follow-on system. The committee directed the service to submit a report about an MQ-9 follow-on program to congressional defense committees before the fiscal year 2022 budget request. “The report shall detail the desired features of such a system, the cost and timeline required to achieve development and fielding, proposed measures to ensure full and open competition, and an explanation of how such a system would fulfill the goals of the National Defense Strategy,” the bill said. Roper noted that the Air Force will need to convince the Hill about the usefulness of a new platform. “Building a utility player that can meet multiple mission demands is not something that our acquisition system has historically been good at,” he said. “We've got to get good quickly to convince Congress that this is a good pivot, and I look forward to having those discussions.” Finnegan noted that lawmakers' reluctance to shut down the MQ-9 production line could be a hurdle for the MQ-Next program. “If there's one thing Congress doesn't like, it's shutting down production lines. And trying to kill a program is extremely difficult,” he said. “We're already seeing that.” Meanwhile, in July the Trump administration announced that it was loosening some UAS export rules associated with the Missile Technology Control Regime, which could have impacts on both the Reaper and the MQ-Next programs. The adjustment would affect “Category 1” systems that have a maximum airspeed of less than 800 kilometers per hour. The new policy is expected to increase trade opportunities for U.S. companies, according to analysts. For General Atomics, the loosening of rules could drum up new business abroad for the MQ-9 but there are still some hurdles, Dickerson said. How the MTCR changes will affect sales of a future MQ-Next platform is still up in the air, he noted. “It depends on the type of system they select,” he said. “The U.S. will not want to sell this system to everyone.” https://www.uasvision.com/2020/09/08/mq-next-us-air-force-considers-reaper-replacement/

• 

  10 août 2020 | International, Naval

  Major Submarine Contractor Drops Navy Missile Tube Biz

  The disclosure comes as the Pentagon has been looking for ways to backstop key parts of its industrial base as supply chains slowed due to the COVID epidemic. By PAUL MCLEARY WASHINGTON: One of the Navy's primary suppliers of missile tubes for its nuclear submarines is planning to walk away from the military business, a move that will drop the number of domestic companies capable of doing the work to two at a time when the service is in a scramble to ramp up its sub-building efforts. BWX Technologies President Rex Geveden says that the company is “not likely to pursue” any more Navy business and will repurpose a factory in Indiana that makes the components once the next set of deliveries of missile tubes wrap up in 2022. The Navy work “just doesn't have the margin profile that we want to see in the business,” Geveden said in a Tuesday investor call. BWX was slated to build the missile tubes for the new Columbia subs, but prime contractor Electric Boat says it has options to replace the company in coming years. The company “works with multiple suppliers to ensure we can meet the Navy's schedule requirements on these important programs,” a spokesperson emailed. “These are Babcock Marine, BAE Systems, Precision Custom Components and BWX Technologies. BWX Technologies will complete all currently contracted work for EB by 2022.” This comes as the Pentagon has been looking for ways to bolster key parts of its industrial base as communities shut down and workers are told not to report to work or take time off, due to the COVID epidemic. In a call with reporters late last month, Navy acquisition chief James Geurts acknowledged that the service is deeply worried that such closures and slowdowns could have wide-ranging impacts on shipbuilding. “I am absolutely interested in ensuring that we don't lose large chunks of the industrial base,” he said. “Restarting an industrial base that you lose is really hard, really painful, and takes a long time. We are absolutely focused on ensuring we do not lose an industrial base because we don't have the time or resources to re-generate it later when we need it.” The winnowing of such a key part of the industrial base will place more pressure on the handful of other companies who can do this sort of work, something to which Pentagon leadership is particularly sensitive. Overall, the Navy plans to buy 12 Columbia-class submarines between 2021 and 2035, with 10 of those coming 2026 and after. In the near-term, it plans two Virginia-class subs per year between 2021 and 2026, meaning shipyards will have to pump out two to four submarines a year in the mid-2020s. The new Columbia submarines will begin being delivered to the Navy in 2030, just in time to begin replacing the Cold War-era Ohio-class subs as the Navy's leg of the nation's nuclear triad. The subs will carry 70 percent of the nation's stockpile of warheads allowed by the New Start treaty with Russia. Falling in to replace the Ohio's on time would be a critical failure for the nation's nuclear triad, as the aging ships will have next to no life left in them by the end of the decade, and leaving the sea leg of the nuclear enterprise in some jeopardy. Babcock Marine is a UK-based company, but does work on some components that are used for both the Columbia program and the UK's Dreadnaught submarines, which shares similar missile tubes with the Columbia effort. In 2018, Virginia-based BWX was forced to pay $27 million to fix welding problems on the Columbia tubes, after issues were found on a total of 44 tubes. So far, 21 of those have been fixed and 11 delivered to the Navy. Navy officials have closely tied the modernizing of the current Virginia-class subs with the building of new Columbia's, warning that since they share a base of companies who can make precision parts for nuclear-powered submarines. So any problem with one program will have knock-on effects to the other. Geurts and others have said the Navy would prioritize the health of the Columbia effort over Virginia if they had to. If the House of Representatives gets its way, however, billions more will flow into the Virginia program than the White House has called for. Last week, the House voted to fund the construction of a second Virginia-class submarine in the 2021 budget request, after the White House dropped the planned buy to one submarine in its submission. The push was led by Rep. Joe Courtney, chairman of the Seapower Subcommittee who represents the Connecticut district that's home to Electric Boat. The bill now includes $6.8 billion to produce two Virginia-class attack submarines, approximately $2.5 billion more than the White House's own request, and $2.2 billion more than the Senate's. “The budget request we received from the White House flew in the face of testimony that we've heard from Navy leaders, experts, and combatant commanders,” Courtney said in a statement. “It requested the fewest ships in over a decade, and it eliminated construction of the second Virginia-class submarine in 2021—a vessel that the Navy quickly listed as its most important unfunded priority in 2021.” https://breakingdefense.com/2020/08/major-submarine-contractor-drops-navy-missile-tube-biz