12 août 2024 | International, Terrestre
Norway to purchase HIMARS from Lockheed Martin, snubbing Hanwha
Norway has requested to buy 16 of Lockheed Martin’s M142 High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems.
4 mars 2020 | International, Aérospatial
Boeing’s future attack recon helicopter has no name but 3 rotor systems
By: Jen Judson
WASHINGTON — After dropping a brief teaser trailer several weeks ago on social media with split-second glimpses of shadowy outlines of its offering to the U.S. Army' Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft competition, Boeing prompted plenty of speculation on its design.
The company has kept its FARA design close to its vest since receiving a small design contract from the Army. The company even held a 30-minute press briefing at the Association of the U.S. Army's annual conference in October 2019 where it told reporters they wouldn't be unveiling anything just yet.
Boeing finally went public on March 3 just ahead of the Army choosing two competitors from a pool of five to move forward to build a flying prototype with the intent of picking a winner at the end. The service is expected to make its selection some time this month.
Boeing is the last of those competitors to reveal its hand.
That helicopter is simply being called “Boeing FARA,” and its clean-sheet design features a hingeless, six-bladed, high-solidity main rotor; a four-bladed conventional tail rotor; and a propeller on the back, Shane Openshaw, Boeing's FARA program manager, told a small group of reporters ahead of the company's March 3 unveiling.
“That main rotor is purpose-built for this particular aircraft,” Openshaw said. “Think of it as the means to provide the agility and maneuverability that this aircraft requires.”
The tail rotor will give the aircraft the maneuverability characteristics at lower speeds of a more typical helicopter, Openshaw said, and the propeller “will give it the the speed and maneuverability that is needed to support the FARA requirements.”
Some of the “nuances that occur with an articulated rotor system” will not be experienced with the Boeing FARA design, he added. For instance, the design eliminates high rotor blade flapping.
The Army is requiring that FARA reach a cruise speed of at least 180 knots at 4,000 feet in 95 degree temperatures.
Openshaw added that the helicopter also features a Modular Open Systems Architecture, or MOSA, required for the FARA program and takes sustainment into account through a maintenance-friendly design using common Army equipment and components.
The Army wants all designs to be able to accept its Improved Turbine Engine Program's engine, which is currently under development and built by General Electric. The service also wants to incorporate an integrated munitions launcher it has internally developed.
Every design must incorporate the Army's MOSA backbone to be able to upgrade the aircraft into the future, which means the aircraft has to be able to accept capabilities with very little tweaking in order to combat threats not yet on the horizon.
The Boeing FARA design also features a single-engine aircraft with tandem cockpit seating.
“We did not go into this effort with our mind made up on what our approach was going to be,” Openshaw said. “We went through an array of trades and prioritization efforts to define our solution, and it is purpose-built for the Army. It will have the right kind of capabilities to make it a key element of their vision of the ecosystem, and it will be capable, simple and effective.”
Competition
Boeing is using its experience in model-based systems engineering, specifically what was used for its winning advanced trainer jet design for the Air Force — the T-7 Red Hawk — and also the MQ-25 Stingray aerial-refueling unmanned aircraft system for the Navy, according to Mark Cherry, general manager and vice president of Boeing Phantom Works.
FARA was specifically designed in the Phantom Works division of the company.
“It's a legacy that gives us an assurance that we're going to be able to meet prototyping requirements at the schedule that the Army is looking for,” Cherry said. Along with that, he noted, Boeing is paying close attention to life cycle costs and is using its “extensive background in design testing to ensure that we have the data that supports our analysis to ensure that the Army understands what we're providing, and more importantly, all of the parameters, so they can make their evaluations on the right capability for their needs.”
FARA is intended to fill a critical capability gap currently filled by AH-64E Apache attack helicopters teamed with Shadow unmanned aircraft following the retirement of the Bell-manufactured OH-58D Kiowa Warrior helicopters.
Boeing is competing with AVX Aircraft Co. partnered with AVX Aircraft partnered with L3 Technologies; Bell Helicopter; a Karem Aircraft, Northrop Grumman and Raytheon team; and Lockheed Martin-owned Sikorsky. The Army awarded each a design contract in April 2019.
The AVX and L3 team unveiled its design for FARA at the Army Aviation Association of America's annual summit in Nashville, Tennessee, in April 2019. The single-engine design uses AVX's compound coaxial and ducted fans technology.
Bell revealed its design — the Bell 360 Invictus — based off its 525 technology shortly before the AUSA annual conference last year. It features a single main rotor in a four-blade configuration and a low-drag tandem cockpit fuselage.
Karem announced it would team with Northrop and Raytheon and came out with its design at AUSA — its AR-40 — with a single main rotor, tilting compound wings and a rotating tail rotor.
Sikorsky's offering — Raider X — is based on both its X2 coaxial technology seen in its S-97 Raider and the Sikorsky-Boeing-developed SB-1 Defiant, which are now both flying. Raider X is already under construction.
The Army continues to look for ways to accelerate FARA fielding and is on an ambitious schedule to get prototypes flying by 2023. A production decision could happen in 2028.
Much is riding on the competition. The service has tried and failed three times to fill the armed reconnaissance gap with an aircraft.
The Boeing-Sikorsky RAH-66 Comanche program was one of those attempts. The program was canceled in 2004 after the Army had already spent roughly $7 billion when the aircraft became unaffordable.
Boeing had offered a version of its AH-6 Little Bird for the most recent Armed Scout Helicopter competition attempted in 2012. This time the Army didn't want to get locked into keeping inflexible requirements, but did request that aircraft have a maximum 40-foot-rotor diameter.
The Army will consider speed, range and payload possibilities, but wants to encourage innovation by industry for designs that push the envelope and make FARA a true next-generation aircraft that can contribute to the fleet for the good part of a century.
Sur le même sujet
-
-
9 juin 2023 | International, C4ISR
Germany moves ahead with plans to buy Israel's Arrow-3 missile defence for 4 billion euros
Germany plans to buy Israel's Arrow-3 missile defence system for almost 4 billion euros ($4.30 billion) in total, and will ask lawmakers to release advance payments of up to 560 million euros next week, according to documents seen by Reuters on Friday.
-
5 mai 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité
The defense industry needs new entrants, and a supportive government during crises
By: Venture capital community leaders The COVID-19 health crisis is quickly leading to an economic meltdown, throwing millions of Americans out of work and forcing strategic reevaluations across industries. The defense industry is no exception. We are praying for a swift end to the crisis, but its effects will linger, shaping the Pentagon's priorities, organizational structure, military operations, logistics, supply chains and interactions with the defense-industrial base for years to come. In the past few weeks, we have had numerous conversations with government officials about our venture and growth equity investments in the defense sector. These discussions have centered on the eligibility rules of the CARES Act's Paycheck Protection Program and the risk of foreign capital seeking entry into defense technology startups desperate for investment in these trying times. But these are secondary questions. The primary question is this: How can the Pentagon best preserve its innovation base and develop the most competitive and advanced technologies? The answer is simple: Buy commercial. New and emerging defense startups — and our men and women in uniform — don't need symbolic gestures. What they need is concerted action to bring the latest and most advanced technologies — many of which are routinely used in industry — to dangerously antiquated defense weapons systems and internal IT infrastructure. This was true before COVID-19, it is true now and it will be true when the next crisis strikes. All too often the government has responded to crises by circling wagons around incumbent firms — the large prime contractors, whose political connections afford them bailouts in the name of “ensuring ongoing competition.” This process is already underway. After announcing its hope for a $60 billion relief package for the aerospace manufacturing industry, Boeing successfully lobbied for $17 billion worth of loans for firms “critical to maintaining national security.” The CARES Act also announced provisions to streamline the Defense Department's contracting process, which sounds promising, except for the fact that these provisions apply only to contracts worth over $100 million. This discriminates against smaller, more nimble innovators and providers of cutting-edge technology. This isn't how things have always been. After complaints about large horse dealers monopolizing military contracts during the Civil War, the government allowed quartermasters to purchase horses and mules from any dealer on the open market. In World War II, Congress created the Smaller War Plants Corporation, which awarded tens of thousands of contracts to small, competitive firms. Today, through innovative use of Small Business Innovation Research money, other transactional authorities, rapid work programs and the like, the Pentagon is certainly signaling interest in emerging technologies. But let us be clear: We are not advocating continuing to invest larger dollar amounts into never-ending, short-term pilots and prototypes. The key to sustaining the innovation base through this crisis and any future crises is transitioning the best of these companies and products into real production contracts serving the day-to-day needs of the mission. Host tough, but fair competitions for new innovations, and then rapidly scale the winners. America's technological supremacy has afforded our country nearly a century of military hegemony, but it is not a law of nature. Sovereign states and peer competitors like Russia and China will quickly outpace us if we take our prowess for granted. We need new entrants into the defense industry more than ever, but without government support through crises like this one, the talent and capital simply won't be there. Why do investors say defense isn't a safe bet? As the Department of Defense readily acknowledges, its mission is fundamentally changing. Breakthroughs in technological fields like artificial intelligence, autonomous systems, robotics, resilient networks and cyberwarfare mean that future conflicts will look nothing like those we have seen before. The DoD of tomorrow needs a fresh wave of technical expertise to understand and respond to these new kinds of threats. That is not to say that legacy defense contractors are not needed; their expertise in large air and sea vehicles is currently unparalleled. But the expertise to build these new technologies resides in pockets of talent that the big and bureaucratic incumbents, who made their names with 20th century technology, lost access to decades ago. The DoD has publicly exalted the importance of innovative defense startups for years. That is partly why we are so excited to invest capital into the defense sector at this moment in history. Silicon Valley has a chance to live up to its oft-ridiculed but sincere ambition to make the world a better place by investing in American national security. However, we as venture capitalists and growth equity investors also have a duty to our limited partners who have entrusted us to invest and grow their capital. If we see the same old story of the government claiming to support small businesses but prioritizing its old incumbents, those investment dollars will disappear. Times of rapid and unprecedented change, as COVID-19 has precipitated, also provide opportunities. The DoD and Congress can reshape budget priorities to put their money where their mouths have been and support innovative defense technologies. Each dollar awarded to a successful venture capital and growth equity-backed defense startup through a competitively awarded contract attracts several more dollars in private investment, providing the DoD significantly more leverage that if that same dollar was spent on a subsidy or loan to a large legacy contractor. This leverage of private capital means that every contract a startup receives accelerates by up to 10 times their ability to build technology and hire talent to support the DoD's mission. The bottom line is this: There's no reason to let a health crisis today become a national security crisis tomorrow. The DoD has an opportunity to not only sustain but grow its innovation base, and give contracts, not lip service, to innovators. We, the undersigned, hope they do. The contributors to this commentary are: Steve Blank of Stanford University; Katherine Boyle of General Catalyst; James Cham of Bloomberg Beta; Ross Fubini of XYZ Capital; Antonio Gracias of Valor Equity Partners, who sits on the boards of Tesla and SpaceX; Joe Lonsdale of 8VC, who also co-founded Palantir; Raj Shah of Shield Capital, who is a former director of the U.S. Defense Innovation Unit; Trae Stephens of, Founders Fund; JD Vance of Narya Capital; Albert Wenger of Union Square Ventures; Josh Wolfe of Lux Capital; Hamlet Yousef of IronGate Capital; and Dan Gwak of Point72. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/05/04/the-defense-industry-needs-new-entrants-and-a-supportive-government-during-crises/