Defence ministers address strengthening NATO’s deterrence and defence, support to Ukraine

Sur le même sujet

• 

  10 janvier 2019 | International, C4ISR

  U.S. Air Force Contracts Lockheed Martin To Continue GPS Ground Control System Sustainment

  COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo., January 9, 2019 – The U.S. Air Force awarded Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT) the GPS Control Segment Sustainment II (GCS II) contract to continue to sustain and further modernize the Global Positioning System (GPS) satellite constellation's ground control system through 2025. This is the follow-on contract to Lockheed Martin's current GCS contract awarded in 2013. Under the GCS II contract, the continued upgrade of the GPS Architecture Evolution Plan Operational Control Segment (AEP OCS) will allow GPS' legacy ground control system to support GPS III satellite on-orbit operations, developed under the GPS III Contingency Operations (COps) program. COps will enable the AEP OCS to support the positioning, navigation and timing missions of the Air Force's new GPS III satellites, which began launching in 2018. In addition, GCS II will sustain the operational M-code capability being deployed in 2020 that is in development under the M-code Early Use (MCEU) contract. Operational M-code is a critical warfighter capability to support missions in contested environments. Under the GCS contract, Lockheed Martin executed numerous engineering modifications to the OCS, including the COTS Upgrade 3(CUP3)/Ground Antenna Air Force Satellite Control Network (AFSCN) Interface Technology Refresh (GAITR) upgrade, the Remote Site COTS Network (RSCN) project, the GPS Information Protection Reinforcement (GIPR) project, the COTS Upgrade #2 (CUP2) project, and Red Dragon Cybersecurity Suite (RDCSS). These projects modernized the infrastructure, improved the cyber posture and added mission capability. The GCS II contract continues that commitment to evolving the OCS to address today's mission needs. Under GCS II, LM will continue to manage the technical baselines for the OCS and GPS Information Network (GIN) and regularly procure, develop, fabricate, integrate, test, and install software and hardware modifications into the GPS operational baseline. Focus areas will be performing a technical refresh of the GIN and increasing the resiliency of the OCS. “Lockheed Martin's experience integrating GCS projects as well as the system engineering and software integration performed on GPS III Contingency Operations (COps) and M-Code Early Use (MCEU) position us well to deliver GCS II,” says Maria Demaree, VP/GM Mission Solutions for Lockheed Martin Space. “We look forward to supporting the Air Force as it deploys the next generation GPS III satellites and their new capabilities for our warfighters.” For additional GPS Ground Control System information, photos and video visit: https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/products/gps.html. About Lockheed Martin Headquartered in Bethesda, Maryland, Lockheed Martin is a global security and aerospace company that employs approximately 100,000 people worldwide and is principally engaged in the research, design, development, manufacture, integration and sustainment of advanced technology systems, products and services. https://news.lockheedmartin.com/news-releases?item=128657

• 

  4 février 2021 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

  As mission-capable rates languish, Pentagon should embrace digital engineering

  Ben Kassel and Bruce Kaplan While many Pentagon initiatives face a change of course under new Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, its digital engineering strategy deserves a push forward. The strategy, issued in 2018 by then-Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering Michael Griffin, aimed to help military services harness modern sustainment methods like additive manufacturing, digital twin and augmented reality. For the Department of Defense, enterprisewide implementation of these techniques would lower costs, increase weapon systems' mission-capable rates and afford flexibility in fleet modernization. But digital engineering requires digital, 3D data — and the DoD doesn't have enough. Modern sustainment practices hinge on the availability of what's known as the model-based definition, 3D models and digitized descriptive information for a system or component. Using computer-aided design programs, engineers can manipulate the data to enable practices like condition-based maintenance, eliminating weapon systems' unnecessary downtime. Digital data can facilitate seamless transit from original equipment manufacturers, or OEM, to procurers and sustainers in the field and at maintenance depots worldwide. However, the technical data for most weapons systems remains elusive to the services and their program management offices, or PMO, or the datasets are available only in 2D documentation, such as blueprints. Meanwhile, readiness suffers. Of 46 weapons systems reviewed by the Government Accountability Office, only three achieved annual mission-capable targets at least five times between 2011 and 2019. More than half (24) failed to meet their goal even once, according to GAO's November 2020 report. The KC-13OJ Super Hercules air refueler and the MV-22B Osprey tiltrotor were among the programs to miss their target all nine years. GAO cited inaccessible technical data as a contributing factor for both programs. Of the Super Hercules, the report says: “The Navy and Marine Corps were unable to obtain the technical data of the aircraft ... the lack of the technical data compromises [their] ability to analyze and resolve sustainment issues.” Similar concerns were raised about the P-8A Poseidon anti-submarine aircraft, saying “technical data needed for maintenance has not been readily available to the Navy.” Dozens of systems, including the F-35 fighter jet, face similar obstacles. Notably, the GAO report referred not to 3D, model-based data but rather legacy incarnations: blueprints and documents that may have been converted “digitally” into PDFs. This is a far cry from the machine-readable formats required to use digital engineering technologies across the enterprise. The GAO cited the production of 170 “structural repair manuals” as a means of narrowing the Osprey's technical data gaps. The labor-intensive replication of physical documents — the PMO projected five years to deliver all of them — is a piecemeal solution, at best. Troublingly, modern sustainment methods seem beyond the reasonable expectation of not just PMOs but even forward-looking organizations like the GAO. To foster its DoD-wide implementation, the digital engineering strategy needs reinforcement, which could take the following forms: Champion the availability of model-based technical data in policy. Modern sustainment requires a shift from decadesold practices. Paper data that supports secondhand manuals and haphazard 2D-to-3D conversion should no longer be the norm. Services cannot lead this transition on their own, however. Federal guidance on the acquisition, creation, use and management of authentic, model-based technical data would jump-start the movement toward digital sustainment. Educate PMOs to acquire technical data rights strategically. Policy must be partnered by the right mindset. One reason PMOs don't have technical data is that sometimes they never asked for it. An afterthought at the time of procurement, technical data is often overlooked until maintenance is needed. Then it's too late — or too expensive — to acquire the needed rights. Leadership can encourage PMOs to identify potential sustainment solutions — and the technical data rights needed to execute them — at the time of acquisition. Assert the government's rights to model-based technical data. A sea change in sustainment depends on building unprecedented trust between OEMs and PMOs. OEMs understandably need to protect intellectual property, but their grip on model-based technical data must loosen for digital sustainment to flourish at scale. This can be accomplished without OEMs surrendering their competitive advantage. In many cases, OEMs need not transfer custody of the data itself for sustainment activities. Limited-rights agreements and trusted third-party arrangements can be tailored to enable data availability only when needed or to execute specific solutions. Giving OEMs confidence in these approaches will entail extensive dialogue and commitment by DoD leaders. Given the GAO's assessment, seeking a breakthrough is worth the attempt. Operationalizing the DoD strategy requires work in other areas as well, particularly in removing intra- and inter-organizational stovepipes, and securing the data's transmission and storage. But the first step toward a model-based sustainment enterprise is ensuring the availability of modern technical data. This need will only grow more crucial. Today's sustainment practices too closely resemble those of 30 years ago, not what they should be 30 years from now. We're already playing catch up. It's time to view sustainment with 3D glasses. Ben Kassel is a senior consultant at LMI. He previously worked with the U.S. government on defining and exchanging technical data used for naval architecture, marine and mechanical engineering, and manufacturing. Bruce Kaplan is a fellow at LMI. He previously served as technical director of logistics for research and development at the Defense Logistics Agency. https://www.c4isrnet.com/opinion/2021/02/03/as-mission-capable-rates-languish-pentagon-should-embrace-digital-engineering/

• 

  26 juillet 2019 | International, Autre défense

  Budget deal advances despite GOP worries over costs, smaller boost for military

  By: Leo Shane III and Joe Gould House lawmakers on Thursday advanced a two-year, $2.7 trillion budget plan with $738 billion in military funding in fiscal 2020 over the objections of conservative colleagues who objected to the increased federal spending levels. The measure — which passed 284-149 — has the support of President Donald Trump and leaders from both chambers, but drew the support of only 65 Republicans in the final vote. That's roughly one-third of the House GOP membership. Senate lawmakers are expected to take up the matter next week. The measure is designed to prevent a partial government shutdown this fall and stabilize appropriations plans for all aspects of federal agencies until after next year's presidential election. On the House floor Thursday, House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith, D-Wash., called the deal a critical step forward in restoring regular budget order and predictability not just for military programs, but for all of the government. “There is no secret we have big differences between the Democratically controlled House and White House and the Republican-controlled Senate,” he said. “Despite those differences, we have to function. We have to be able to fund the government and meet our responsibilities to the American people.” Ahead of the vote, Trump worked to bolster Republican support for the measure, which would increase Defense Department spending by more than 3 percent over fiscal 2019 levels. He tweeted that the new budget plan “greatly helps our Military and our Vets.” White House officials (and Republican congressional leaders) had pushed for even more in defense spending recent weeks, while congressional Democrats had insisted any military funding increase be offset with additional non-defense spending. In the end, the non-military money in the new budget deal will grow by about $10 billion more than defense spending over the next two years, and the military spending for fiscal 2020 will fall about $12 billion short of the White House's hopes. Rep. Mike Johnson, R-La., and chairman of the Republican Study Committee, in a statement called the compromise plan “a massive spending deal that will further in debt future generations and remove reasonable safeguards to prevent the growth of government and the misuse of taxpayer dollars.” Rep. Mike Gallagher, R-Wis., and a House Armed Services Committee member, said he would only vote for the deal if it were paired with congressional action to look for paths toward debt reduction. “It you could create a commission that was empowered to bring its recommendations to the floor for an up or down vote, and had members who were younger, next-generation members, I think it could work,” Gallagher said in a video posted to Twitter. Two weeks ago, House Republicans voted against a $733 billion military spending topline as part of the annual defense policy bill, in large part citing insufficient funding totals for national security. House Armed Services Committee ranking member Rep. Mac. Thornberry, R-Texas, on Thursday voted for the slightly larger defense spending total, telling reporters the two-year deal would provide much-needed stability for the military. “Given the political turmoil that comes with an election year ... having a two-year budget deal that takes us to the end, hallelujah, of the Budget Control Act is more valuable than if you had held out for a few billion,” Thornberry said. Democrats had misgivings of their own, including the deal's lack of restrictions on Trump's ability to shift money within the budget toward a controversial border wall. The Pentagon was expected to shift a total of about $6.1 billion from its budget to help build a border wall, including about $3.6 billion from military construction projects. But in the end, all but 16 Democrats in the House backed the measure. House members began their extended summer break on Thursday night, leaving the details of separate appropriations bills reflecting the new budget deal to be sorted out in September. The Senate is scheduled to begin their break at the end of next week, after voting on the measure. https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2019/07/25/budget-deal-advances-despite-gop-worries-over-costs-smaller-boost-for-military/