10 octobre 2018 | International, Terrestre

Decision coming soon on who will build prototypes for a new Army light tank

By:

WASHINGTON — The Army is expected to make a decision by the end of the year on which companies will build prototype vehicles as part of its light tank competition.

The requirement for a Mobile Protected Firepower vehicle to provide infantry brigade combat teams a protected, long-range, cyber-resilient, precision, direct-fire capability for early or forcible entry operations was first laid out in the Army's combat vehicle modernization strategy released in October 2015.

The Army is looking to rapidly procure this capability by turning to commercial off-the-shelf technology rather than spend years developing it.

Several competitors submitted offerings to the competition in late February in the hopes that they are selected to build 12 prototypes that will be demonstrated and evaluated — and that will ultimately lead to the service selecting a winner to go into production.

The low-rate initial production plans are for roughly 54 vehicles — 26 to start, with an option to build 28 more, as well as retrofitting eight of the prototype vehicles. The first unit equipped is planned for 2025.

If selected, the contractors have 14 months to deliver MPF prototypes to the Army.

A final request for proposals will likely come out in late October or November, and the service will make a decision shortly thereafter.

SAIC partnered with Singapore's ST Kinetics and Belgium-based CMI Defense; BAE Systems and General Dynamics Land Systems all submitted written proposals, vehicles and armor coupons for testing.

The SAIC team integrated CMI's Cockeril 3105 turret on an ST Kinetics next-generation armored fighting vehicle chassis as its offering.

BAE Systems is offering an M8 Buford Armored Gun System with new capabilities and modernized components.

GD submitted an offering that combines a version of its latest Abrams turret with a chassis that leverages experience from the United Kingdom's AJAX program.

“We have additional new and proven technologies to meet MPF specific requirements,” a GD spokesperson said.

The Army has already moved through its testing and evaluation ahead of a decision later this year. Vehicle bid samples were tested to evaluate mobility and firepower performance, and the armor coupons were tested to evaluate protection performance.

According to Jim Scanlon, senior vice president and general manager of SAIC's defense systems group, the company did both pre-validation and follow-on testing of its vehicle offering before and after the Army's own evaluation period.

The company has brought the vehicle to the Association of the United States Army's annual conference.

If selected, SAIC plans to perform final integration work in its Charleston, South Carolina, facility, with the other companies in the team building their contributions in their own facilities.

However, Scanlon said, the company is working to come up with ways to do more and more of the production work in the United States, and both companies involved are on board and see moving some work into the country as a necessary investment as big combat vehicle programs gain traction. All options are being considered, Scanlon said.

BAE plans to build its EMD prototypes within its manufacturing network including York, Pennsylvania, Aiken, South Carolina, Anniston, Alabama and Sterling Heights, Michigan, according to the company's MPF capture lead Greg Mole.

GD said it would not release build locations for the vehicles at this time.

The MPF program now falls under the Army's Next-Generation Combat Vehicle cross-functional team's purview, which lies under the new Army Futures Command, charged with modernizing the force more rapidly to maintain overmatch against peer adversaries.

https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/ausa/2018/10/10/decision-coming-soon-on-who-will-build-prototypes-for-a-new-army-light-tank

Sur le même sujet

  • Four rocket companies are competing for Air Force funding, and it is war

    14 août 2019 | International, Aérospatial

    Four rocket companies are competing for Air Force funding, and it is war

    By ERIC BERGER Monday marked the deadline for four US rocket companies to submit bids for Air Force contracts, encompassing all national security launches from 2022 to 2026. This is a hugely consequential and much-contested bid process that has implications for the American aerospace industry for the next decade and beyond. The Air Force is seeking two providers for about two dozen launches. The prime contractor will receive 60% of the launches while the secondary contractor claims the remaining 40%. As the US military pays a premium for launch contracts to its nine reference orbits, this guaranteed revenue is extremely valuable to US companies aspiring to run a profitable launch business. The lead-up to Monday's deadline has included heavy political lobbying from the four companies: United Launch Alliance, SpaceX, Blue Origin, and Northrop Grumman. As a result of this, Congress is considering some changes to the Air Force's procurement policy, including an on-ramp for a third provider during the 2022 to 2026 period. But so far, the Air Force is resisting this. Here's a look at the four bidders and what is at stake for each of them. United Launch Alliance United Launch Alliance—a joint venture between Boeing and Lockheed Martin that enjoyed a monopoly on national security launches before the emergence of SpaceX—may be bidding for its life. To wean itself off its costly Delta boosters (as well as the Russian rocket engines that go with its workhorse Atlas V rocket), ULA has been developing the Vulcan rocket to cut costs while maintaining performance. The company says the Vulcan will be ready for its first flight in 2021. "Vulcan Centaur will provide higher performance and greater affordability while continuing to deliver our unmatched reliability and orbital accuracy precision from our treasured cryogenic Centaur upper stage," ULA's chief, Tory Bruno, said in a news release Monday. "ULA is the best partner for national security space launch, and we are the only provider to demonstrate experience flying to all orbits including the most challenging heavy-class missions, providing the bedrock foundation for the lowest risk portfolio of two launch service providers for the US Air Force." With increasing competition from SpaceX, Europe's Arianespace, Japan's Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, and Russian launch vehicles, ULA has been unable to capture much of the commercial market for satellite launches in the last decade. Therefore, it has largely been reliant on government business, mostly from the military. But ULA also relies on NASA through its science missions and lifting cargo and crew missions to the International Space Station. If the company does not emerge victorious from this competition, it faces an uncertain future unless Vulcan can become commercially viable. Moreover, ULA will lose out on hundreds of millions of dollars in government money to finalize Vulcan if it does not receive an award. Historically, Boeing and Lockheed have been stingy parents, and whether or not they would pay to complete Vulcan is unclear. One intriguing twist with ULA's bid is that its Vulcan rocket will use the BE-4 rocket engine, which is being developed and manufactured by Blue Origin—one of the four competitors in the Air Force bidding process. Blue Origin has said the Air Force competition was designed to unfairly benefit ULA. SpaceX The Hawthorne, California-based rocket company is the only bidder proposing to use rockets that are already flying—the Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy boosters. This family of rockets has had a string of 49 successful launches since a static fire accident in September 2016, and according to SpaceX, it can meet all of the Air Force's desired orbits and payload specifications. "SpaceX means to serve as the Air Force's long-term provider for space launch, offering existing, certified, and proven launch systems capable of carrying out the full spectrum of national security space-launch missions and requirements," said the company's president and chief operating officer, Gwynne Shotwell. Since the Air Force agreed to admit SpaceX to the national security launch competition in 2015, the company has won several contracts for key missions and begun flying them for the military. These include the National Reconnaissance Office Launch 76, Orbital Test Vehicle 5, Global Positioning System III-2, and STP-2 flights. SpaceX also likely will offer the government the lowest price on service to orbit. However, in its criteria for awarding missions, the Air Force listed price among the last of its considerations. Due to its lower price point, especially with is reusable Falcon 9 rocket, SpaceX has considerable commercial business to offset the loss of Air Force contracts. But it would hurt financially, all the same. Blue Origin Jeff Bezos' rocket company has bid its very large New Glenn rocket for the Air Force missions. However, when this rocket will begin flying is not entirely clear, as there are questions about whether it will be ready by the beginning of the 2022 contracting period. What is clear is that Blue Origin does not believe the US Air Force has created a fair bidding process. Already, the company has filed a "pre-award" protest with the US Government Accountability Office. "The Air Force is pursuing a flawed acquisition strategy for the National Security Space Launch program," Blue Origin said, according to SpaceNews. The Air Force decision to award contracts to just two companies creates a "duopoly," Blue Origin says, and it limits commercial development of strategic US assets such as rocket engines and boosters. Bezos has been investing about $1 billion a year of his own money into Blue Origin, which has largely been used to support development of the BE-4 engine and New Glenn rocket. He is likely to continue development of the New Glenn rocket without Air Force funding, but company officials say it is not fair to hold their wealthy founder against their bid. Northrop Grumman Northrop has been developing the Omega rocket for this competition since at least 2016. The Omega vehicle differs from the other entrants in the competition as its first and second stages, as well as side-mounted boosters, are powered by solid-rocket motors rather than liquid-fueled engines. The bet by Northrop is that the US military, through its national security launch contract, would want to support one of the nation's most critical suppliers of solid-rocket motors for intercontinental ballistic missiles. Northrop officials have not said whether they would continue development of the Omega rocket if Northrop were to lose out on the Air Force contract. Northrop's bid suffered a setback in May when an "anomaly" occurred during test firing of its solid-propellant Castor 600 rocket motor, the Omega rocket's first stage. From a video provided by the company, a major part of the rocket's large nozzle appeared to break apart, blasting debris around the area. Afterward, a Northrop vice president, Kent Rominger, called the test a success. "It appears everything worked very, very well on this test," he said. "And at the very end when the engine was tailing off, we observed the aft exit cone, maybe a portion of it, doing something a little strange that we need to go further look into." Nevertheless, the test cannot have instilled absolute confidence in the Air Force. https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/08/four-rocket-companies-are-competing-for-air-force-funding-and-it-is-war/

  • US projected to spend $117B on nuke command and control in next decade

    18 juillet 2023 | International, C4ISR

    US projected to spend $117B on nuke command and control in next decade

    Newer nuclear arms are expected to enter the stockpile after 2030 — and with it comes the opportunity for more-advanced information technology.

  • Japan unveils its hypersonic weapons plans

    16 mars 2020 | International, Aérospatial

    Japan unveils its hypersonic weapons plans

    By: Mike Yeo MELBOURNE, Australia — Japan has outlined its research and development road map for its homegrown, standoff hypersonic weapons, confirming that it is seeking an incremental growth in capability and providing more details about the kinds of threats it is targeting with this new class of weapon. In a Japanese-language document published on the Acquisition, Technology and Logistics Agency website, the government said two classes of standoff hypersonic systems will be deployed — the Hypersonic Cruise Missile (HCM) and the Hyper Velocity Gliding Projectile (HVGP). The former will be powered by a scramjet engine and appears similar to a typical missile, albeit one that cruises at a much higher speed while capable of traveling at long ranges. The HVGP, on the other hand, will feature a solid-fuel rocket engine that will boost its warhead payload to a high altitude before separation, where it will then glide to its target using its altitude to maintain high velocity until impact. The agency also provided more details regarding warhead payloads, with different warheads planned for both seaborne and land targets. The former will be an armor-piercing warhead designed specifically for penetrating “the deck of the [aircraft] carrier,” while a land-attack version will utilize a high-density, explosively formed projectile, or EFP, for area suppression. Area suppression effects for the latter will be achieved via the use of multiple EFPs, which are more commonly known as a shaped charge. An EFP is made up of a concave metal hemispherical or cone-shaped liner backed by a high explosive, all in a steel or aluminum casing. When the high explosive is detonated, the metal liner is compressed and squeezed forward, forming a jet whose tip may travel as fast as 6 miles per second. Japan's road map also revealed the country is taking an incremental approach with regard to designing the shapes of warheads and developing solid-fuel engine technology, with plans to field early versions of both in the 2024 to 2028 time frame. They are expected to enter service in the early 2030s. The agency expects both systems to navigate via satellite navigation with an inertial navigation system as backup. Japan is seeking to establish a network of seven satellites to enable continuous positioning for its self-defense forces, which will enable it to provide continuous navigation data without relying on foreign satellites. Warhead guidance is achieved via either radio-frequency imaging converted from doppler shift data — which the government agency said will be able to identify stealthy naval targets in all weather conditions — or an infrared seeker capable to discriminating specific targets. Japan has been conducting R&D into various areas related to hypersonic weapons for a number of years, although most of it was to benefit other fields like satellite navigation and solid-fuel rockets. More work remains, however, in areas like hypersonic guidance systems, warhead and missile-body thermal shielding, and hypersonic propulsion systems in order for Japan to be able to field a viable standoff hypersonic weapons capability. https://www.defensenews.com/industry/techwatch/2020/03/13/japan-unveils-its-hypersonic-weapons-plans/

Toutes les nouvelles