11 janvier 2018 | International, Aérospatial

Cascade Aerospace Awarded Contract to Modernize Mexican Air Force C-130 Hercules Aircraft

Abbotsford, BC – Cascade Aerospace Inc. (Cascade) is pleased to announce that it has been awarded a contract for the avionics modernization of one Fuerza Aérea Mexicana (FAM) L-100 (C-130) Hercules aircraft. This contract follows on the recent delivery of two modernized C-130K Hercules aircraft delivered to the FAM and fitted with advanced digital avionics from Rockwell Collins.

This program will be contracted through the Canadian Commercial Corporation (CCC) under the auspices of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Canadian and Mexican governments.

”Completing the C-130 fleet modernization represents a significant milestone for Cascade and affirms our excellent relationship with the Mexican Air Force as a support provider of choice since 2013,” said Cascade's EVP & COO, Kevin Lemke. “The upgrade of this aircraft will establish a common cockpit configuration for the entire FAM C-130 fleet thereby enhancing fleet capability, as well as providing efficiencies in maintenance, training, and operational availability.”

This modernization program includes the installation and integration of an advanced Rockwell Collins Flight2 TM digital avionics suite. In addition, Cascade will provide operational and technical training for Mexican Air Force personnel at the company's facility and headquarters in Abbotsford, British Columbia.

About Cascade Aerospace

Cascade Aerospace, an operating unit of IMP Aerospace & Defence, is a leading Canadian specialty aerospace contractor that provides long-term integrated aircraft fleet support and program management, aircraft maintenance, modification, engineering & integrated logistics support to domestic and international military, government, and commercial customers.

About Canadian Commercial Corporation (CCC)

Established in 1946, the Canadian Commercial Corporation (CCC) is a Federal Crown corporation of the Government of Canada that acts as Canada's international contracting and procurement agency. CCC reports to Parliament through the Minister of International Trade.

CCC acts as the prime contractor for foreign governments who wish to contract with Canadian companies and expertise through a government-to-government channel. CCC's strong relationships with international buyers and access to Canada's innovative industrial base, puts CCC in a unique position to facilitate and promote international trade.

Media Contacts:

Kim Tamminga
Cascade Aerospace
Direct: +604-557-2646
ktamminga@cascadeaerospace.com
www.cascadeaerospace.com

https://www.impgroup.com/newsitem.aspx?mid=3D58A7E8-8A48-4F41-B2A8-39AAFF70ABF6

Sur le même sujet

  • The future of the US surface fleet: One combat system to rule them all

    15 janvier 2019 | International, Naval

    The future of the US surface fleet: One combat system to rule them all

    By: David B. Larter WASHINGTON — As the U.S. Navy's surface fleet moves into 2019, a radical shift is coalescing among its leaders: a move away from a model that has driven the way the service has built its ships for decades. When the Navy built its Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, installing the Aegis combat system into the hull meant a large suite of hardware — computers, servers, consoles and displays — designed and set up specifically to run Aegis software. Any significant upgrades to the suite of systems already installed, or to the Aegis system in general, required cutting a hole in the ship and swapping out all the computers and consoles — a massively expensive undertaking. And what's more, Aegis isn't the only combat system in the fleet. Raytheon's Ship Self-Defense System runs on many of the amphibious ships and the Ford-class carriers. Both classes of littoral combat ship run different combat systems, one designed by Lockheed Martin and the other by General Dynamics. And in regard to the ships themselves, there are multiple, siloed systems that don't feed into the main combat system. If Navy leaders get their way, that's going to change. What the surface fleet wants is a single combat system that runs on every ship, and runs everything on the ship, and that doesn't mind what hardware you are running so long as you have the computing power for it. The goal here is that if a sailor who is trained on a big-deck amphibious ship transfers to a destroyer, no extra training will be necessary to run the equipment on the destroyer. “That's an imperative going forward — we have to get to one, integrated combat system,” Rear Adm. Ron Boxall, the chief of naval operations' director of surface warfare, said in a December interview at the Pentagon with Defense News. Boxall describes the current situation to an integrated combat system as the difference between a flip phone and an iPhone. When buying a flip phone, most of the hardware and software are already included, leaving you with a limited ability to upgrade the phone. And if you want to run more advanced applications, you need a new phone. Instead, Boxall wants the combat systems to run like the iPhone. “For us to get faster, we either have to keep going with the model we had where we upgrade our flip phones, or we cross over the mentality to where it says: 'I don't care what model of iPhone you have — 7 or X or whatever you have — it will still run Waze or whatever [applications] you are trying to run,” he said. On a ship, that means that if the Navy adds a new radar, missile or laser, the software that runs the new equipment is developed as an application that interfaces with the single integrated combat system, the way Waze integrates with the iPhone or Android software. This has the benefit of having everything linked into the central nervous system for operators in the combat information center, sonar control, on the bridge or in the ship's intelligence-gathering center. It also means that new systems are quickly integrated, skipping the expensive process of ripping out old servers and consoles. And it means the companies that develop the myriad combat systems in service today — say, Raytheon or Lockheed Martin — won't have a lock on developing software for Navy ships because the Navy wants the combat system to be developed with interfaces that are accessible by outside application developers. “We need to continue down the path to be more aggressive and get a lot more competition in the open-architecture space,” Boxall said. “I wouldn't call it completely open, but as open as we can be, and then share that with people who can, if they are properly classified and secured, they should be able to come into a common space and apply their expertise to develop products that we may or may not want to buy. That's where I'd like to get to.” The vision The grand vision for this operating system from the deck-plates perspective would be the merging what are, today, disparate functions into one unified system, said Bryan McGrath, a retired destroyer skipper and consultant who heads The FerryBridge Group. One of the areas in which this segmentation creates limitations falls between the combat information center — which collects and displays information gathered by ships' sensors — and the intelligence hub known as the Ship's Signals Exploitation Space — which uses top-secret sources to collect data on the theater in which the ship is operating. “We need to break down the barrier between CIC and SSES, and the barrier is both a physical bulkhead and computing systems and platforms,” McGrath said. “That's what an integrated combat system is: You have the traditional combat system function, and the intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance functions — non-real-time and [top-secret information] functions — merged into one multilevel security-protected computing platform.” In that scenario, if SSES receives information that three Iranian F-14 jets took off from Bushehr Air Base, a watchstander in the combat information center with the proper security clearance could see what information SSES has on the aircraft and their mission while stripping out top-secret information such as sources and methods that SSES needs to protect. And once CIC has a radar track associated with that intelligence, all SSES data will get merged into it so decision-makers in combat have the necessary intel at their fingertips. But the logic applies to all the ship's sensors, not just intelligence collection data. The unified combat system would associate every piece of sensor data with the track being displayed in CIC, McGrath said. Everyone connects to a single system that gives every watchstander all the information they need on every track, both real-time and non-real-time data. “The integrated combat system includes all mission areas,” he said. “It's electronic warfare, it's anti-submarine warfare — we don't segment out air and missile defense and electronic warfare, they are all just applications within the combat system. The Navy has to stop thinking of SESS, sonar, combat, electronic warfare and the bridge as different and separate elements. They have to be part of the whole.” Staggering costs There's a number of obstacles to getting the surface fleet on a unified system, but one that could be insurmountable: the staggering cost of replacing the fleet's outdated computer hardware. The Common Source Library, developed for the Navy by Lockheed, begins moving the Navy down this path of a single, unified combat system. The CSL is essentially the iOS of an iPhone: The Navy can use CSL to program applications that run sensors and weapons systems. So, if the Navy has a new missile system it wants to run, the software application to run it will be designed to run off of the CSL — and ships with the CSL will be able to rapidly integrate it, just like downloading the latest navigation or gaming software for a smartphone. But the issue is that CSL requires specific hardware to function, said Tony DeSimone, chief engineer of Lockheed Martin integrated warfare systems and sensors, in a roundtable with reporters late last year. “One of the challenges the Navy has, the constraints, is the hardware and infrastructure to support a [common integrated combat system],” DiSimone said. “So while we are marching forward with the capability to be open and take in apps, there is an antiquated architecture out there and there is hardware that doesn't support it. ... You can't run [integrated operating] systems today on UYK-43s. You're just not going to be able to do it. So let's gut them and put some blade servers in, and we'll work with you.” The UYK-43 was once the Navy's standard 32-bit computer for surface and submarine platforms. The issue with replacing a fleet full of ancient computers that run old combat systems is the astronomical cost. For example, when the Navy converted the cruiser Normandy into an Aegis Baseline 9 ship, which includes updated displays and blade servers, it cost the service about $188 million and nearly a year offline. When you stretch that over dozens of surface combatants in need of updated computers, you start eating up billions of dollars and lose decades of operational availability. So while CSL does give the Navy an interface with which developers can create applications to run various systems, it's all for naught if the service doesn't have the right equipment. “Our Common Source Library has made us radar-agnostic,” said Jim Sheridan, vice president of Lockheed Martin's naval combat and missile defense systems. “We're also weapons-agnostic. The blocker is that we are not infrastructure-agnostic.” Furthermore, even if the Navy did back-fit all the surface ships with updated servers, you'd need to get various companies to play nice in the sandbox by sharing proprietary information for the benefit of a unified combat system. Ultimately, however, the Navy must affect a paradigm shift that decouples the computer suites that run its combat systems from the system itself, Boxall said. “You can either upgrade the existing ships on that model, which is expensive and you rip the ship apart to do it — cost hundreds of millions of dollars and a year offline — or you design the ship with the idea that you are going upgrade the hardware over its time, and you separate the hardware/software layers,” Boxall said. “We know Aegis,” he added. “What we don't know [is how to] upgrade Aegis at the pace I think we need moving forward in the future. We don't have a structure in place and a process by which we do that upgrades with speed. “When we buy Aegis, it's kind of flip-phone technology: You buy the software and the hardware together. And you can upgrade it, it's just hard to do. If we don't go to a more adaptable model, we are not going to be able to pace the threat.” https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2019/01/14/the-future-of-the-us-surface-fleet-one-combat-system-to-rule-them-all/

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

    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

  • OVHcloud Hit with Record 840 Million PPS DDoS Attack Using MikroTik Routers

    7 juillet 2024 | International, Sécurité

    OVHcloud Hit with Record 840 Million PPS DDoS Attack Using MikroTik Routers

    OVHcloud mitigates record-breaking 840 Mpps DDoS attack, highlights surge in attack frequency and intensity, and warns of potential MikroTik router th

Toutes les nouvelles