Contract signed for new Anti-Submarine Warfare Frigates

Sur le même sujet

• 

  12 septembre 2019 | International, Aérospatial

  US Air Force restricts KC-46 from carrying cargo and passengers

  By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — In a move that could have major impacts on the already-delayed tanker program, the U.S. Air Force has indefinitely barred the KC-46 from carrying cargo and passengers, Defense News has learned. The decision was made after an incident occurred where the cargo locks on the bottom of the floor of the aircraft became unlocked during a recent flight, creating concerns that airmen could potentially be hurt or even killed by heavy equipment that suddenly bursts free during a flight. “As a result of this discovery, the Air Force has submitted a Category 1 deficiency report and is working with Boeing to identify a solution,” Air Force Mobility Command spokesman Col. Damien Pickart said in a statement. The service uses the term Category 1 to describe serious technical issues that could endanger the aircrew and aircraft or have other major effects. “Until we find a viable solution with Boeing to remedy this problem, we can't jeopardize the safety of our aircrew and this aircraft,” he said. The problem was discovered during a recent overseas operational test and evaluation flight, when KC-46 aircrew noticed that numerous cargo restraint devices had come unlocked over the course of the multiple legs of the trip. “Prior to departing for each of these missions, aircrew fully installed, locked and thoroughly inspected each restraint, and performed routine inspections of the restraints in flight,” Pickart said. “Despite these safety measures, the unlocking of cargo floor restraints occurred during flight, although no cargo or equipment moved and there was no specific risk to the aircraft or crew.” A source with knowledge of the issue told Defense News that if all restraints on a particular pallet had become unlocked, it would be able to roll freely throughout the cabin. If all cargo became unlatched, it could pose a safety risk to aircrew or even unbalance the aircraft — making the plane “difficult, if not impossible” to control. While this problem has only been observed on one KC-46, the Air Force does not have enough information to rule out other aircraft having a similar defect. The problem also poses a danger to the tanker's operational test schedule, Pickart said. The program was set to start initial operational test and evaluation this fall, with pre-IOT&E activities already initiated. “This is a multi-mission aircraft, it's for carrying cargo and passengers, it's for refueling and also the aeromedical evacuation mission,” he said. “If you can't carry cargo pallets and patient litters, a significant amount of your core missions cannot be properly tested.” In a statement, KC-46 manufacturer Boeing acknowledged that it had been notified of the new issue. “The company and the Air Force are cooperatively analyzing the locks to determine a root cause,” Boeing stated. “The safety of KC-46 aircraft and crew is our top priority. Once a cause has been identified, the tanker team will implement any required actions as quickly as possible.” But the problem could be bad news for Boeing's bottom line. The company is locked into a fixed-price contract for where it is responsible for paying for any expenses beyond the initial $4.9 billion award for development of the aircraft. So far, the company has paid more than $3.5 billion of its own money to fund corrections to ongoing technical issues. The latest Cat-1 deficiency brings the total up to four: The tanker's remote vision system or RVS — the camera system that allows KC-46 boom operators to steer the boom into a receiver aircraft without having to look out a window and use visual cues — provides imagery in certain lighting conditions that appears warped or misleading. Boeing has agreed to pay for potentially extensive hardware and software fixes, but the Air Force believes it will be three or four years until the system is fully functional. The Air Force has recorded instances of the boom scraping against the airframe of receiver aircraft. Boeing and the Air Force believe this problem is a symptom of the RVS's acuity problems and will be eliminated once the camera system is fixed. Boeing must redesign the boom to accommodate the A-10, which currently does not generate the thrust necessary to push into the boom for refueling. This problem is a requirements change by the Air Force, which approved Boeing's design in 2016. Last month, Boeing received a $55.5 million contract to begin work on the new boom actuator. While the KC-46 program has clocked several key milestones this year, it has also hit some publicly embarrassing stumbles. After several years of delays, the Air Force finally signed off on the acceptance of the first tanker. However, due to the list of technical problems, Boeing was forced to accept an agreement where the service could withhold up to $28 million per aircraft upon delivery. About $360 million has been withheld so far, Defense One reported in July. The Air Force plans to buy 179 KC-46s over the life of the program, and 52 are currently on contract. So far, Boeing has delivered 18 tankers to McConnell Air Force Base, Kan.; Altus Air Force Base, Okla; and Pease Air National Guard Base, N.H. But deliveries were interrupted earlier this year by the discovery of foreign object debris in multiple planes. The Air Force suspended KC-46 flights at Boeing's production line in Everett, Wash., this February after finding debris. Then it paused all tanker deliveries in March as the service investigated the extent of the problem. The service began accepting tankers again later that month, only for deliveries to stop — and restart — in April due to similar problems. Will Roper, the service's acquisition executive, told reporters at the Paris Air Show this July that the service expects to find foreign object debris in KC-46s moving through the line, and it may be months before planes are reliably clean. “As those airplanes flow forward down the line, we think it's going to take some time for the new quality assurance inspection processes to start early enough so that airplanes will flow that are FOD-free,” he said, according to Defense One. “It's not the way we want to get airplanes into the Air Force, but it's what we're going to have to do in the meantime.” https://www.defensenews.com/breaking-news/2019/09/11/air-force-restricts-kc-46-from-carrying-cargo-and-personnel

• 

  22 avril 2020 | International, Aérospatial

  50 Vendors Vie For Air Force Flying Car

  The "Agility Prime" event next week will kick off with speeches by Air Force Secretary Barbara Barrett, Chief of Staff Gen. David Goldfein, Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao, and Air Force acquisition head Will Roper. By THERESA HITCHENSon April 21, 2020 at 5:47 PM WASHINGTON: The Air Force is pulling out all the stops next week to demonstrate the potential utility of ‘flying cars' to military users across the services, as well as civil agencies within the US government including the Department of Transportation. The Agility Prime program's virtual event, being held April 27-May 1 will open with speeches by Air Force Secretary Barbara Barrett, Chief of Staff Gen. David Goldfein, Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao, and Air Force acquisition head Will Roper, who has been championing the idea since last summer. Some 50 vendors of electric vertical take off and landing (eVTOL) aircraft will be given a chance to strut their stuff to potential buyers across the military services and the US government, Col. Nate Diller, Agility Prime team lead, told reporters today. The high-powered line-up is a testimony to the Air Force's dedication to becoming an earlier adopter of flying car technology for moving people and cargo, as commercial actors such as Uber move out on developing designs for the commercial market. Diller said the Air Force also has been working closely with NASA — which itself has been working with Uber on an eVTOL craft — and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to create operational standards and licensing issues for future vehicles. The FAA regulates US airspace and NASA obviously has expertise in providing safety certification for aircraft and spacecraft carrying people. Bob Pearce, NASA's associate administrator for aeronautics research, and Michael Romanowski, the FAA's policy chief for aircraft certification, will speak at the event as well, Diller said. Agility Prime is first focused on mid-sized eVTOL craft that can carry three to eight people. Diller explained that the service sees potential utility in two other classes of vehicles: very small craft that can carry only one or two people (which he said some vendors are already test flying using FAA licenses applying to ultra-light aircraft); and larger aircraft that could ferry cargo and a large number of people. The first round of Agility Prime prototype contracting, Diller said, in some cases bounce off the Air Force Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Phase I and Phase II contracts already held by some vendors. However, he stressed, the door is wide open to new entries — with next week's event offering “virtual booths” for newcomers to show off their wares. He would not, however, provide an estimate of planned Air Force spending on the program. The Air Force also is wooing private sector investors to the event in hopes they will kick in funds to the companies showing the most promise, both technologically and in plans for getting their wares on the street. As Breaking D readers know, Roper has launched a concerted effort to revamp the service's approach to SBIR funds, led by the new AFVentures unit, designed to match Air Force funds to investments from venture capital funds and ‘angel' investors (read, interested rich people.) Roper has said that he intends for AFVentures to invest about $1 billion a year in some 30 to 40 “game-changing” startups in hopes of helping them vault over the infamous ‘valley of death' between demonstrating a capability and becoming a DoD program of record. One of the hallmarks of Roper's approach to Air Force acquisition chief has been a focus on leveraging commercial research and development to help DoD ensure that it can stay ahead of China in the pursuit of new technology — arguing that ‘innovation is the new battlefield.' https://breakingdefense.com/2020/04/50-vendors-vie-for-air-force-flying-car/

• 

  3 décembre 2019 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

  SASC chairman: We must build the national security innovation base our defense strategy requires

  By: Sen. Jim Inhofe Since World War II, the American people have believed our military has had the best of everything, but the technological superiority that kept us 20 years ahead of our competitors has rapidly diminished. In some cases, we're already behind. By 2030, unless we pursue “urgent change at significant scale,” as former Defense Secretary Gen. James Mattis put it, it's likely the U.S. will face an enemy with superior weapons, superior equipment and superior capabilities. Nowhere is this better illustrated than in our strategic competition with China. China used to just steal our technology. Now, through heavy investment, they are improving it. The result? China is outpacing the U.S. in key areas like hypersonic weapons, artificial intelligence and biotechnologies — not to mention conventional capabilities. China isn't the only one. Technological development is accelerating across the globe, expanding to more actors and changing the very nature of war. We can't afford to let our advantage erode further. It is up to the Department of Defense and Congress to make sure that the defense-industrial base becomes, as the National Defense Strategy demands, an “unmatched 21st century National Security Innovation Base.” If we want to “sustain security and solvency,” we need to consider wholesale change to industry culture and its interface with the Department of Defense, shed outdated management processes, and reimagine a resilient supply chain that mitigates 21st century risks. This begins with software, which is foundational to military capability. The DoD and its traditional hardware-dominant industry partners have been behind on software in almost every way — talent, tools, development and delivery processes. Software innovation has failed in countless DoD programs, including the Ford-class carrier, the F-35′s Autonomic Logistics Information System and the GPS next-generation operational control system. Instead of taking the Pentagon for granted as an endless source of cash flow, partners must refocus their attention on delivering secure capability that actually works. Next, the Department of Defense needs to continue to expand capacity — prioritizing speed of delivery and adapting its systems to maximize value and output. For too long we have been slow to expand our stockpiles of fifth-generation weapons required to fight peer adversaries. The second production line for JASSM-ER cruise missiles is a good start toward building the capacity needed to retain advantages that will make any enemy think twice before attacking. We must do the same for other fifth-generation weapons, including air-to-air missiles. Shipbuilding, including aircraft carriers, surface ships, submarines and our logistics fleet, is another area where our capacity is severely limited. The Chinese People's Liberation Army Navy, which recently surpassed ours in size, is on track to reach 400 ships in 2025 and is nearly self-sufficient for all components. Size of the fleet isn't a sole consideration. We've focused on ensuring the capability of our fleet remains unmatched and bolstering suppliers of critical components, but we must also improve the construction performance of lead ships in new classes to maintain and build upon our capability advantage. The last thing we want is a fair fight. Innovation is best done at the subsystem level through a rigorous engineering-based process centered on building knowledge through full-scale prototypes, which can then inform ship design. We are eager to work with the Navy to identify and fund more of these prototypes, which will serve as the building blocks of the future fleet. We also must accelerate innovation. Recent defense authorization legislation encourages the DoD to streamline acquisition, take a business-minded approach to contracting, and tap into nontraditional suppliers and public-private partnerships. This must continue. Dilapidated testing infrastructure is holding us back from catching up to our enemies. Just look at hypersonic weapons: Beijing is parading around dozens of its newest weapons, and we have yet to build one. The DoD has looked to Silicon Valley, but we are competing with Chinese influence there as well, and the Pentagon has often proven an impossible customer due to its antiquated bureaucracy. Any technological improvements will be meaningless if vulnerable to being infiltrated or stolen. Recent legislation continues support for the DoD as it assesses and mitigates risks to its supply chains posed by adversaries. Both the government and contractors need to cooperate on and use modern verification tools to identify trusted suppliers and manufacturers, as well as fix vulnerabilities. To make these tools useful, the DoD must first establish a working digital model of its suppliers. Lastly, while we must continue to invest in the domestic, organic industrial base, it's important to remember that we can't take on China and Russia alone — which is why the National Defense Strategy emphasizes our network of allies and partners. We must remove unnecessary barriers to industrial cooperation that degrade our collective competitive edge. We do not have to make a false choice between investing domestically and in our allies — we can do both. Under our National Technology and Industrial Base partnership with Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom, we can develop a more diverse, resilient industrial base, secure our supply chains, and become a “five eyes for defense procurement.” It's in our best interest to ensure our allies can leverage our technological advantages and we can leverage theirs. Without a strong national security innovation base, the Pentagon cannot implement the National Defense Strategy. Congress' job is to put the appropriate, tailored policy in place and provide sufficient, predictable resources to help the industrial base meet these challenges. Together, we can harness the power of American innovation to ensure that we are able to win the wars of the future. Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., is the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. https://www.defensenews.com/outlook/2019/12/02/sasc-chairman-we-must-build-the-national-security-innovation-base-our-defense-strategy-requires/