20 novembre 2017 | Local, Aérospatial

CAE USA a signé un contrat de sous-traitance avec Lockheed Martin afin d'appuyer l'élaboration de dispositifs d'entraînement aux systèmes d'armes

Tampa (Floride, États-Unis), le 20 november 2017, 2017 - (NYSE : CAE; TSX : CAE) - CAE USA a remporté un contrat de sous-traitance de Lockheed Martin visant à appuyer la conception, l'élaboration et la fabrication de six dispositifs d'entraînement aux systèmes d'armes (WST) pour l'appareil C-130J de la United States Air Force et de la Air National Guard américaine.

La commande de ces six dispositifs d'entraînement aux systèmes d'armes pour l'appareil C-130J a été reçue au cours du deuxième trimestre de l'exercice financier 2018 et a été incluse à l'annonce de revenus trimestriels effectuée le 10 novembre 2017.

« Nous sommes heureux de poursuivre notre partenariat de longue date avec Lockheed Martin pour la conception et l'élaboration de systèmes de formation relatifs à l'appareil Super Hercules C-130J », a déclaré Ray Duquette, président et directeur général de CAE USA. « Les capacités haute fidélité de ces dispositifs d'entraînement aux systèmes d'armes pour l'appareil C-130J permettent aux Forces aériennes d'intégrer de plus en plus la formation virtuelle à leur programme de formation global, ce qui, en fin de compte, favorise la sécurité, l'efficacité et l'état de préparation aux missions pour les équipages. »

Les dispositifs d'entraînement aux systèmes d'armes pour le C-130J sont des simulateurs de mission à système de mouvement complet qui simulent avec exactitude l'appareil et ses diverses missions. Les simulateurs recréent les sons, le mouvement, l'environnement virtuel et tous les autres systèmes requis pour fournir un environnement de formation en vol haute fidélité et réaliste. En 2020 et en 2021, ces six dispositifs d'entraînement aux systèmes d'armes pour l'appareil C-130J seront livrés à diverses bases aériennes.

http://www.cae.com/CAE-USA-awarded-subcontract-from-Lockheed-Martin-to-support-development-of-C-130J-weapon-systems-trainers/?LangType=1036

Sur le même sujet

  • OPPORTUNITY: Meet with US DoD Foreign Comparative Testing Program at CANSEC 2023

    18 avril 2023 | Local, Autre défense

    OPPORTUNITY: Meet with US DoD Foreign Comparative Testing Program at CANSEC 2023

    The Canadian Defence Liaison Staff (Washington) and the Trade Commissioner Service would like to make Canada’s defence industry aware of an opportunity to meet with the US Department of Defense Foreign Comparative Testing (FCT) Program at CANSEC 2023! We ask that you share this message with your colleagues, contacts, and clients who may benefit from the FCT Program.   Interested firms should complete the attached Product Sheet and return to via email to LCdr Alain Gilbert - alain.gilbert@forces.gc.ca – (with a CC to Trade Commissioner Bobby Tate – Robert.tate@interational.gc.ca) by Friday, May 12th.   The FCT program scans for vendors in non-US countries that have innovative technologies that speak to the US DoD’s 14 Critical Technology Areas. Please note that the Critical Technology Areas have been updated for 2023:   o          Biotechnology o          Quantum Science o          Future Generation Wireless Technology (FutureG) o          Advanced Materials o          Trusted AI and Autonomy o          Integrated Network Systems-of-Systems o          Microelectronics o          Space Technology o          Renewable Energy and Storage o          Advanced computing and Software o          Human-Machine Interfaces o          Directed Energy o          Hypersonic o          Integrated Sensing and Cyber   The USD(R&E) Technology Vision for an Era of Competition provides additional context. It can be found here: https://www.cto.mil/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/usdre_strategic_vision_critical_tech_areas.pdf   DoD will also consider technologies that satisfy urgent operational needs on a relevant fielding schedule and/or technologies that provide significant life cycle savings. In short, they’re looking for technology that does an existing capability better, cheaper, or faster!   For more information, an overview presentation on the FCT program can be found here: https://ac.cto.mil/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/fct_overview_presentation_approved_7_14_2020.pdf   Companies who submit a product template may have the opportunity to meet with the FCT program during the CANSEC exposition  (31 May – 1 June 2023).  The expo will be held at the EY Centre in Ottawa, Ontario. Again, interested firms should complete the attached FCT Product Sheet, and send it to LCdr Alain Gilbert, A/Defence Cooperation Attaché at alain.gilbert@forces.gc.ca with a CC to Bobby Tate at Robert.tate@international.gc.ca   We hope you consider this opportunity to learn more about the U.S. Department of Defense’s FCT program.   Questions may be addressed to LCdr Alain Gilbert, Assistant Defence Cooperation Attaché at alain.gilbert@forces.gc.ca and Mr. Bobby Tate, Trade Commissioner, Defense, Security, and Aerospace, at robert.tate@international.gc.ca

  • Fight the Information War Without Sacrificing Canadian Values

    29 octobre 2020 | Local, Terrestre

    Fight the Information War Without Sacrificing Canadian Values

    David Scanlon Defence Watch Guest Writer Recent news reports have shown the Canadian Armed Forces are struggling to define ethical boundaries as they expand their capability to meet the rising threats of the information age. A global information war is now being fought in a “grey zone” where malign state and non-state actors are trying to sow confusion and division across the international community. American professor of strategy and author Sean McFate writes that future military victories “will be won and lost in the information space, not on the physical battlefield.” But he warns that “some democracies may be tempted to sacrifice their values in the name of victory.” Recent mishaps by Canada's military underscore this temptation. In April, the Ottawa Citizen published this headline: “Canadian Forces ‘information operations' pandemic campaign quashed after details revealed to top general.” The article reported that the “IO” campaign was targeted at Canadians and “called for ‘shaping' and ‘exploiting' information” with the aim of maintaining civil order and ensuring “public compliance with suppression measures” during the coronavirus pandemic. A parallel effort involved the “data mining” of personal social media accounts in Ontario by a team assigned to military intelligence. The military shared data with the province, including findings that some of its citizens were unhappy about its response to the pandemic. Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan ordered a review of the information operations campaign and an investigation into the legality of the data-mining activities. Given the Canadian Armed Forces were tasked with helping the provinces of Quebec and Ontario deal with the cruel impact of the coronavirus in long-term care homes, it is disquieting that such a campaign would be contemplated, let alone put in writing. Chief of the defence staff General Jon Vance reportedly avowed that, “as long as he was in charge information operations tactics wouldn't be used in a domestic situation, except in the case where an enemy had invaded the country.” Despite the defence chief's promise, only six months later the armed forces were caught conducting a disinformation campaign on Canada's Atlantic coast. Under the headline, “Canadian Soldiers Cry Wolf, Alarming Residents,” the New York Times reported that a military psychological training exercise had “gone wrong,” and that a “fake disinformation exercise had become a real one.” For reasons as yet unexplained, military personnel circulated a forged letter from the province of Nova Scotia warning certain residents to be wary of a wandering wolfpack, backed by loudspeakers blaring the sounds of growling wolves. It took some time for the armed forces to accept responsibility and apologize. Meanwhile, baffled local officials assured affected residents the province had not issued the letter and there were no wolves in the area. The defence minister rightly supports training the military “on how best to respond to foreign actors who use influence activities.” But to avoid further mistakes he ordered such training paused until an investigation into the wayward wolfpacks was concluded. Emma Briant, a US-based British academic and author who specializes in propaganda and political communication, told the New York Times she finds the recent incidents “appalling,” a “failure of governance,” a “failure to ensure restraint,” and a “failure to ensure ethics are built into training and planning operations.” “They seem to have introduced a policy of weaponization of influence, domestically,” Briant observes. Instead, she advises, Canada's military needs to be building “a relationship of trust with the public.” The military's pattern of ethical breaches appears to reveal an embedded operational mindset fixed on tactics, as opposed to a strategic one focussed on building public trust. British military historian Hew Strachan wrote that armed forces are attracted to the operational level of war, as opposed to the strategic. It allows them to “appropriate what they see as the acme of their professional competence,” enabling them to operate in “a politics free zone.” This may in part explain General Vance's decision in 2015 to “operationalize” the military's public affairs branch, which is responsible for public communication. The branch was seen as not delivering tangible “effects” in support of so-called “operations in the information environment.” By operationalizing a strategic function like public affairs, the military was in effect reducing it to an operational or tactical capability, like special operations forces or precision-guided missiles. Ostensibly, these can deliver precise, tangible “effects” under direct military control. Some of the perils of this new approach were exposed when a senior public affairs officer, Brig.-Gen Jay Janzen (then a colonel), began using his Twitter account to target journalists, commentators, and politicians. In April 2018, for instance, he sparked a heated Twitter exchange with opposition defence critic James Bezan. The defence committee had been debating a military deployment to Mali to help defeat cancerous African offshoots of ISIS and al-Qaeda. Janzen tweeted that questions about the mission from opposition Members of Parliament were “nonsensical.” He even proposed “better” questions for opposition parties to ask. For a serving senior officer to publicly criticize elected officials was unprecedented. Government ministers must have been perplexed to see a high-ranking service member tweeting better debate questions to opposition MPs. Janzen's tweets, which appear to have at least the tacit approval of his superiors, set an example for other service members. Another perplexing public information moment occurred last April when the Canadian military reported that a Canadian frigate patrolling off the Greek coast had “lost contact” with its Cyclone maritime helicopter. It was later revealed the helicopter was moments from landing on the ship when, as the CBC reported, “it went down in full view of horrified shipmates.” Tragically, all six aboard the Cyclone were killed in the crash. The military was widely criticized for misrepresenting the facts—contact was in fact never “lost” and officials failed to explain the miscommunication. Some practitioners of public affairs and information operations have been telling their military bosses that with scientific techniques like “target audience analysis” they can change people's perceptions and behaviours with astounding precision. Canada's defence department recently paid over a million dollars to Emic Consulting Limited (whose founder worked at the UK's controversial and now defunct Strategic Communication Laboratories) to teach public affairs officers and others how to conduct “actor and audience analysis” and otherwise weaponize behavioural science. But is this training being misapplied? One aim of information operations is to change the perceptions and behaviours of target audiences using a range of influence techniques, including “psychological” and “deception” operations. As the defence chief alluded, such techniques should not be approved for use in Canada, other than in exceptional circumstances against clearly defined foes, such as terrorists. Military public affairs, by contrast, is about ensuring Canada's armed forces follow federal communications policy, which calls for maintaining “public trust,” and directs that federal communications “must be objective, factual, non-partisan, clear, and written in plain language.” In a free and democratic society, public trust is a priceless strategic “effect.” As malign actors seek to create confusion and division, Canadians need trusted sources of information. Surveys consistently show that Canadians trust their military. Military leaders and their public affairs advisors must preserve this trust. As called for in defence policy, Canada's armed forces do need the tools to wage information and cyber warfare. They are already facing such threats on missions overseas. But the armed forces also need the tools to communicate with Canadians and other friendly audiences in a timely, truthful, and accurate fashion. Transparency is a potent democratic deterrent against disinformation. Informed by the investigations into recent mishaps, the defence minister and chief of the defence staff should consider the following: o To ensure that information operations have proper approvals and oversight, and are conducted ethically, robust policy, doctrine, and governance are essential. o To ensure broad awareness of ethical considerations when conducting influence activities, related training and education needs to be incorporated at all rank levels. o To explain their actions and help build public trust, the armed forces need to field uniformed spokespersons more often. (The military's “chief spokesman” cited by the New York Times in the “wolves” story was a civilian.) o To ensure coherent doctrine and effective implementation of information-related capabilities, a professional total force cadre of practitioners should be created. o Military public affairs must be reinvigorated as a strategic capability that promotes transparency, provides unhindered advice to commanders at all levels, and ensures close coordination with the civilian communication arms of government. o Policy and doctrine, along with leaders, operators, and information practitioners, must clearly differentiate between activities intended to inform Canadians, such as public affairs, and information operations designed to influence or deceive adversaries. Fighting disinformation is a serious whole-of-nation challenge. It requires an informed public, ethical and transparent government, an engaged private sector, a vigorous and valued free press, and armed forces that respect and reflect Canadian values. https://www.thechronicleherald.ca/news/canada/fight-the-information-war-without-sacrificing-canadian-values-513691/

  • Defence minister says Canada 'very fortunate' to have Vance as defence chief

    16 décembre 2019 | Local, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

    Defence minister says Canada 'very fortunate' to have Vance as defence chief

    OTTAWA — Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan has come out in support of Canada's top military general, saying the country is "very fortunate" to have someone like Gen. Jonathan Vance leading the Canadian Armed Forces. The comments come amid questions over whether the newly re-elected Liberal government plans to replace Vance, who was first appointed chief of the defence staff by Stephen Harper and is now in his fifth year in the position. "When it comes to the chief of defence staff, this is a decision for the prime minister and so we'll reflect on that and make a decision accordingly," Sajjan told The Canadian Press during a wide-ranging interview last week. However, he added, "Canada has been very fortunate to have somebody like Gen. Vance in this role at a very important time." Vance is already one of the longest-serving defence chiefs in Canadian history, and his lengthy tenure has coincided with a number of significant decisions and developments for the Armed Forces - both positive and negative. Those include significant new investments in the military through a new defence policy, the deployment of troops to Iraq, Mali and Latvia as well as efforts to crackdown on sexual misconduct and recruit more women. Yet he has also faced his share of criticism over the years, including over his decision to suspend Mark Norman in 2017, more than a year before the now-retired vice-admiral was charged with breach of trust. The case was eventually dropped. Vance also found himself under fire for the way he handled replacing Norman as the military's second-in-command last year, which saw significant upheaval and instability in the Armed Forces' senior ranks. The defence chief has also been accused of being too supportive of controversial decisions by the Liberal government such as its plan to buy interim fighter jets while some in the Forces have grumbled about a domineering style. While he wouldn't say whether the government planned to replace Vance any time soon, Sajjan said the general has brought important qualities and attributes to the high-profile and difficult position over the past four-plus years. Those include Vance's experience having served in Afghanistan and elsewhere and the work that he put into helping the government develop its defence policy, which was released in June 2017. "I'm very happy with the service that Gen. Vance has given," Sajjan said. "There's only one four-star general in our Canadian Armed Forces. You don't get there easily and every single one brings a unique experience. And Gen. Vance has brought very important experience during a very important time." Speculation about Vance's future has been mounting if for no other reason than the amount of time he has spent as Canada's top military general, said defence analyst David Perry of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. Exactly who would replace him is an open question, however. Norman's suspension and subsequent retirement contributed to a wider series of changes within the top ranks that have left many senior commanders relatively new in their positions. The reality is that Vance and Sajjan, who has served as defence minister since the Liberals were first elected to power in fall 2015, have emerged as the "constants" at the Department of National Defence and Canadian Armed Forces, said Perry. Given that and indications the Liberals do not have big plans to dramatically switch directions or roll out new initiatives for the military, "I think there's going to be a lot of continuity," he added. Which on the surface would suggest no immediate changes at the top. "Certainly the signals the government has sent to this point of time look a lot more like continuity and continuing to implement the policy and the framework that they set in place during the last Parliament." This report by The Canadian Press was first published on Dec. 15, 2019. https://www.nsnews.com/defence-minister-says-canada-very-fortunate-to-have-vance-as-defence-chief-1.24035658

Toutes les nouvelles