Contracts for April 30, 2021

Sur le même sujet

• 

  2 novembre 2020 | International, Aérospatial

  Japan names contractor to build its future fighter jet

  By: Mike Yeo MELBOURNE, Australia — Japan has named Mitsubishi Heavy Industries as the prime contractor to build its next-generation fighter jet, with the Defense Ministry announcing earlier Friday that it signed a contract with the company. “We will steadily proceed with the development of the next fighter (F-X) together with the company,” the ministry said in a brief statement posted on it website. Local media is reporting Defense Minister Nobuo Kishi said the country will select an overseas partner by the end of this year for collaboration on aircraft technology, with stealth technology being one area of focus. The selection of MHI as the prime contractor for the F-X program comes as little surprise, given Japan was determined to restart its indigenous fighter aircraft capabilities. The company is the only one in Japan with experience in this area. The firm took the 21st spot on Defense News' most recent ranking of the top 100 defense companies in the world. Reuters previously reported the contract for the aircraft is worth up to $40 billion. Defense News emailed the Defense Ministry's Acquisition, Technology and Logistics Agency for an update on the contract value but did not receive a response by press time. The Defense Ministry is also seeking more funding for F-X research and development in its latest budget request submitted to the country's Finance Ministry in late September. The Defense Ministry requested $555.8 million for the main program and an additional $113.6 million for R&D of fighter subsystems, such as radars and mission systems integration. The funding will allow Japan to continue its R&D work into fighter technology, which it has kept up over the past decade despite the end of production on the Mitsubishi F-2 fighter jet and the decision to buy the Lockheed Martin F-35. Work the country plans to continue includes the development and refinement of stealth designs and materials, active electronically scanned array radars, and afterburning turbofan engines. Toward that end, local engine manufacturer IHI is expected to continue work on its XF9-1 afterburning turbofan. Japan conducted a series of test flights of a locally designed and built fighter technology demonstrator from 2016 to 2018 to validate its work. The country used the data gleaned from the test program to further refine its indigenous capabilities. The ministry previously said it wants to launch the basic design process for the F-X airframe and engine before the end of the current Japanese fiscal year, which ends March 31, 2021. This would be followed by the production of the first prototype, which is planned to begin in 2024, with flight tests earmarked to start in 2028 following finalization of the design and production plans. Japan plans to replace its fleet of approximately 90 F-2 jets with the new fighter jet starting around 2035. The F-2 was developed in conjunction with Lockheed in the 1990s, and resembles a larger version of the American company's F-16 multirole fighter but is primarily equipped with indigenous systems. Japan also plans to acquire 147 F-35s, which will include 42 of the short-takeoff-and-vertical-landing variants. That version, the F-35B, will operate from a pair of helicopter destroyers currently undergoing modifications to handle the jet. Japan also recently selected Boeing to upgrade 98 of its license-built Mitsubishi F-15J/DJ Eagle interceptors that will see the jets fitted with newer radars and integrated with standoff land-attack missiles. https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2020/10/30/japan-names-contractor-to-build-its-future-fighter-jet/

• 

  8 juillet 2019 | International, Aérospatial, C4ISR

  General Dynamics wins $217M contract for the Air Force’s network

  By: Cal Pringle General Dynamics Information Technology will provide the Air Force's 480th Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Wing with network technology through a contract worth up to $217 million, according to a June 26 news release from the company GDIT already works for the Air Force to provide network support for the service's Distributed Common Ground System), a contract the company has held for 20 years, the report said. That program is the Air Force's primary ISR planning, collection, processing and exploitation, analysis and dissemination weapon system. GDIT developed and implemented the initial design for the global network that supports the system, the report said. As a result of the contract, the program's operations center will receive network administration, network engineering, information assurance, computer network defense, systems administration, computer network defense, systems administration, project management and C4ISR engineering, according to the report. The company will also work to help modernize the network, the release said. https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/it-networks/2019/07/05/general-dynamics-wins-217m-contract-for-the-air-forces-network/

• 

  4 juin 2020 | International, Aérospatial

  US Should Pull Drones From Missile Control Regime: Mitchell Institute

  "I have great hopes that this administration, with its bold unilateral actions on so many fronts, would take unilateral action with this regime on UAVs," says Keith Webster, former DoD head of defense cooperation. By THERESA HITCHENSon June 03, 2020 at 12:48 PM WASHINGTON: The Trump administration should unilaterally declare that it will no longer subject drone sales to export control restrictions under the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), says a new Mitchell Institute study. And Congress should use the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) to redefine unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) as aircraft, which not only remove them from MTCR restrictions but also would ease US domestic export controls, asserts the paper, “”Modernizing UAV Export Policy for Effective Coalition Forces,”. “The US Congress should craft language in the 2021 NDAA that defines UAVs as aircraft, not cruise missiles, but as aircraft, and subject to the same export considerations as any other military aircraft,” said Heather Penny, senior resident fellow at Mitchell and the paper's author, during a webinar today. “We believe that this language, a statute, would be sufficient to be able to remove UAVs from being subject to the MTCR guidelines.” The 35-nation MTCR agreement requires a “strong presumption of denial” for sales of so-called Category 1 drones — those that can carry a 500 kilogram payload more than 300 kilometers. The Category 1 definition is considered as the minimum capability a missile needs to carry a nuclear warhead. Smaller unmanned aerial vehicles also are covered under MTCR's Category 2 rules, but those export restrictions are less stringent. Even the treaty-hating Trump administration sees the MTCR — a political agreement rather than a treaty — as a key tool in preventing the proliferation of ballistic and cruise missiles. This is despite its long-standing efforts to ease drone sales to allies, including through revamping US domestic law to allow “Direct Commercial Sales” by companies, rather than requiring all sales to go through the formal Foreign Military Sales process that requires approval by DoD, the State Department and Congress. Indeed, over the past year the administration tried — and failed — to convince its MTCR partners to revamp the rules to allow drones flying less than 800 kilometers per hour to slip out from under the Category 1 rules, said Penny. Washington is now expected to try again at the annual MTCR signatories meeting, she said, instead suggesting a 600 kph speed limit as the line of demarcation between the two categories of export restrictions. (The meetings are usually held in the fall, although there has yet to be an announcement of the 2020 dates.) But, Penny argued, even if this new effort comes to fruition, it would fail to fix the underlying problem of allowing allies to buy high-end US combat drones — and preventing them from fully integrating with US operations. Secondly, she asserted, complying with MTCR rules “distort the market” in favor of Chinese sales, she said, since China is not a member of the MTCR and has few formal restrictions on arms exports. “Continuing to adhere to and apply MTCR guidelines to UAVs facilitates Chinese strategic interests,” Penny said. “It's working against US interests.” Keith Webster, former DoD head of defense cooperation, agreed — calling efforts to revise the MTCR as a “Band-Aid” that would soon loose viability because of the rapid pace of technology improvement. “I wish we would act unilaterally,” he told the Mitchell Institute webinar. “We have the ability to act unilaterally. And I would like to see us do so very soon. I have great hopes that this administration, with its bold unilateral actions on so many fronts, would take unilateral action with this regime on UAVs.” That doesn't mean, Webster hastened to add, pulling out of MTCR itself. “Stay in the MTCR,” he said. “It served its purpose.” The experts acknowledged that a unilateral US move to exempt UAVs from MTCR could spur other nations to do the same for their own weapons systems that could exacerbate nuclear proliferation. Penny stressed that it was key for the US to renew its commitment to nonproliferation of ballistic and cruise missiles, and support MTCR's rules for those systems. Saying that “we need to be honest with ourselves about the implications” while seeking “creative solutions” to the UAV issue, Webster seemed to suggest that ultimately the US may decide the MTCR itself isn't worth the trade off. “There are challenges with compliance within the regime with at least one member,” he warned. As Breaking D readers know, US military leaders and Congress have sounded the alarm on the proliferation of cruise missiles by Russia (an MTCR member) and China that can more easily slip through US ballistic missile defense systems. This is especially true for hypersonic missiles, which have speeds above Mach 5 and while visible on radar are extremely hard to target. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/06/us-should-pull-drones-from-missile-control-regime-mitchell-institute/