Dutch Navy to buy armed sidekick ships for its air-defense frigates

Sur le même sujet

• 

  3 février 2021 | International, Aérospatial

  Russia Researching Future Interceptor Technologies, New Light Fighters

  Piotr Butowski On Jan. 22, Russian state development agency Rostec Corp. published a story on its website about the MiG-31 Foxhound interceptor in which it mentioned that the aircraft's successor, PAK DP or MiG-41, is currently under development. A few days later, the designation MiG-41 was removed from the text. The program for PAK DP, an acronym that roughly translates to Future Air Complex of Long-Range Interception, deserves close attention, as the conceptual work on it has been commissioned and is financed by the Russian defense ministry. The sums allocated to this program so far are small. The PAK DP is a research project, which aims to develop an initial concept of the aircraft and formulate requirements for a subsequent development effort. Available documents show that the main contractor for the PAK DP research work is the United Aircraft Corp. (UAC), which on Dec. 25, 2018, secured a contract from Russia's defense ministry. In May 2019, UAC ordered Russian Aircraft Corp. (RSK MiG) and Sukhoi to develop the aircraft concept. It is not clear whether each company is developing its own concept or if Sukhoi has a section of work under the RSK MiG project. That Sukhoi received the order directly from UAC, and not through RSK MiG, suggests the former. RSK MiG and Sukhoi have commissioned individual parts of the work to subcontractors. In 2020, RSK MiG ordered airborne missile designer and manufacturer GosMKB Vympel to conceptualize arming the PAK DP with air-to-air missiles. At the request of RSK MiG, part of the research work carried out in 2020—though it is not known what work specifically—was undertaken by the Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology (MITT). The engineering school deals with intercontinental and tactical ballistic missiles, as well as hypersonic technologies. Even before the contract from the defense ministry, RSK MiG had requested the Central Aerohydrodynamic Institute (TsAGI) perform tests of the PAK DP model in the T-102 wind tunnel in 2017 and 2018. The T-102 is a low-speed tunnel; the research concerned the characteristics of the PAK DP in various configurations of the wing high-lift devices at speed Mach 0.2 and at angles of attack from -7 deg. to 36 deg. A total of 246 measurements of the model were made. Judging by the meager value of these contracts so far—2.5 million rubles ($33,000) for Vympel, 3 million rubles for MITT and 8.9 million rubles.for TsAGI, the project remains in its early stages. In 2019, as part of the PAK DP program, Sukhoi commissioned the development of instructions for counteracting foreign intelligence. With the launch of any military equipment development program in Russia, an accompanying document is developed in which it is determined what features of the new design must be hidden, as well as ways to hide them—including disinformation. The PAK DP program was broadly referenced by representatives of the Russian aviation industry and the air force in previous years. In August 2017, Ilya Tarasenko, then the director general of RSK MiG, said that PAK DP will implement all the technologies that the company has to offer. In November of that year, Sergey Korotkov, UAC vice president and general designer, said that PAK DP will fight against hypersonic targets. “We will have to deal with hypersonic carriers and their weapons, which are also hypersonic,” Korotkov said. People involved in the PAK DP project have publicly used the designation MiG-41 several times. In the above-mentioned RSK MiG order for PAK DP's wind-tunnel tests, the airplane is called “izdeliye,” or “product” 41. The PAK DP project dates back to the days of the Soviet Union. In the 1980s, MiG was designing MDP, a multifunction long-range interceptor that was developed to achieve a range of 7,000 km (4,350 mi.) while flying at a cruising speed of Mach 2.35. Summing up the available information, it can be said that the purpose of the PAK DP is to fight the most demanding air targets, including hypersonic ones as well as low-orbit spacecraft. The aircraft would also fight against threats similar to those targeted by the current MiG-31, such as heavy bombers and strategic cruise missiles. PAK DP is to achieve the same cruising speed as the MiG-31 at 20 km altitude, Mach 2.35, but with a much longer radius of action. When speaking about the timing of the PAK DP program, UAC President Yury Slyusar said in August 2018 that the creation of the new interceptor “has to be synchronized with exhaustion of the MiG-31's lifetime.” In other words, the 2030s, Slyusar added. For Russia, however, the date is so distant that it is difficult to forecast anything. Current trends in the Russian economy and the aviation industry indicate that Russia will not be able to afford such an aircraft. It is possible that the tasks currently planned for PAK DP will be partially moved to an intercepting variant of the Su-57 fighter, especially after arming it with the new very-long-range missile “izdeliye 810.” In addition, the Russians may again extend the service life and upgrade the current MiG-31 fleet in order to keep it in service well beyond 2030. Light Strike Aircraft, With or Without Pilot RSK MiG, and Sukhoi too undoubtedly, are conducting conceptual work on variants of lightweight tactical combat aircraft. They all have a lower status than the PAK DP project, given there is no procurement or government financing for the variants under study. Sergey Chemezov, the CEO of Rostec, to which UAC, RSK MiG and Sukhoi belong, told reporters in early December 2020 that the corporation is developing the concept of a fifth-generation fighter “in the light- and medium-weight class.” “This could be a universal platform in manned and unmanned versions,” he added. On Dec. 16, 2020, Andrei Yelchaninov, deputy chairman of the Military-Industrial Commission board, told the Izvestia newspaper that “MiG is working on the creation of a light strike aircraft, which can be either manned or unmanned.” Both Chemezov and Yelchaninov underlined that the work “is conducted on an initiative basis and is not funded by the state.” They also emphasized the export orientation of this project and possible cooperation with a foreign partner. One of Russia's possible partners is the United Arab Emirates (UAE). In February 2017, during the IDEX 2017 exhibition, Chemezov announced that Russia and the UAE had agreed to jointly create a new-generation lightweight fighter. Chemezov proclaimed the signing of an appropriate contract later that year. The aircraft would be produced in the UAE and was intended for the UAE Air Force and neighbor services. In the following years, apart from a few general declarations that the project is up to date, details were not available. There are three known acronyms for Russia's new lightweight fighter project. The official strategy of UAC for 2016-2035 was published in December 2016. That document interchangeably uses “LFI,” an acronym translated as Lightweight Tactical Fighter, or “PLIB,” translated as the Future Lightweight Fighter-Bomber, as the names of this program. In 2018, the United Engine Corp. (UEC) said in a presentation that the LFI/PLIB's powerplant could be a single “izdeliye 30” turbofan developed for the Su-57 fighter. According to the same presentation, two modified “izdeliye 30” engines would be used to provide propulsion for the PAK DP. The RSK MiG uses the acronym “LMFS” for its lightweight fighter project. In December 2019, RSK MiG ordered TsAGI to “calculate the aerodynamics of a lightweight multifunction tactical aircraft (LMFS) in a twin-engine configuration” and compare it with foreign counterparts. One of the known RSK MiG LMFS designs is a canard that has a large delta wing, with small control surfaces at the rear and on the sides of the engine nacelles. It has a maximum takeoff weight of 24,500 kg (54,000 lb.) and is designed to reach speeds of up to Mach 2. The ferry range with additional fuel tanks will be 2,160 nm, and the basic weapon load is to be carried inside the fuselage. The current conceptual work on the RSK MiG LFMS is a continuation of the LFI lightweight tactical fighter program launched by MiG as early as 1986. The LFI fighter was later refreshed in the form of the E-721 project for the purposes of the PAK FA stealth fighter program. In 2002, the MiG E-721 lost the PAK FA competition for the Sukhoi T-50 project, the present Su-57. https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/budget-policy-operations/russia-researching-future-interceptor-technologies-new-light

• 

  13 janvier 2020 | International, Aérospatial

  FUTUR AVION DE CHASSE EUROPÉEN : LA FRANCE RETROUVE SON LEADERSHIP AÉRONAUTIQUE

  13 janvier, par Nicolas Lefebvre D'ici 2040, le Rafale français, l'Eurofighter allemand et le F-18 Hornet espagnol laisseront la place aux chasseurs de 5e génération du programme européen SCAF. Si les partenaires français de ce consortium tirent leur épingle du jeu, reste à mettre en place une gouvernance à long terme dans ce programme. Juin 2019, salon aéronautique du Bourget. Le patron de Dassault Aviation, Éric Trappier, ne cache pas sa fierté au moment de poser pour les photographes devant la maquette grandeur nature de la future fierté européenne en matière d'avions de chasse. Le SCAF (Système de Combat Aérien Futur, également baptisé Next Generation Fighter, noms provisoires) est certes sur les rails, mais il n'y a pas une minute à perdre. Le patron de Dassault est un homme pressé, et veut se donner les moyens de tenir les délais. « Ce n'est pas de l'impatience, c'est indispensable », a-t-il lancé au Bourget, avec le planning en tête : première démo en 2026, produit fini en 2040. Cela semble loin ; en réalité, c'est demain pour l'Europe de la défense. Tenir ce planning passera forcément par une bonne entente avec ses différents partenaires français, allemands et espagnols, les trois pays scellant leur avenir commun le 17 juin dernier. Genèse d'un projet pan-européen L'histoire mérite un petit retour en arrière. Initialement, Dassault devait convoler en justes noces avec les Britanniques de BAE Systems, l'un des géants européens de l'industrie de la Défense. En 2010, Paris et Londres – gr'ce au tandem Sarkozy-Cameron – sont sur la même longueur d'ondes, les premiers budgets de développement sont débloqués, le futur avion de chasse mobilise les équipes de part et d'autre de la Manche. En 2014, Dassault Aviation, BAE Systems, Thales, Rolls-Royce et Safran, auxquels se sont joints les Italiens de Leonardo, travaillent de concert. Jusqu'en 2016. Les dents grincent dans de nombreuses entreprises, Safran (ex-Snecma) a par exemple peur de disparaître, écrasé par Rolls-Royce. La coopération s'arrête, le divorce est consommé ; les Français cherchent d'autres partenaires et se rapprochent des Allemands. En juillet 2017, le tandem Merkel-Macron lance le programme SCAF, sous l'impulsion commune du Français Dassault Aviation et de l'Allemand Airbus Defence And Space, basé à Munich. La planification stratégique pour les 25 prochaines années se fera donc en haut lieu, suivant la vision de ces deux intégrateurs systémiques, piliers du projet. Ont par la suite rejoint l'aventure le motoriste allemand MTU Aero Engines et son homologue français Safran, l'électronicien français Thales et leurs homologues allemands Rohde & Schwarz et Hensoldt, ou encore le consortium européen MBDA et le fabricant allemand Diehl pour l'armement. Depuis, les Britanniques ont choisi de s'allier avec les Italiens de Aeronautica Militare et les Suédois de Saab pour développer le chasseur furtif Tempest. Mission nº1 : d'abord régler le différend avec les Allemands Retour à l'actualité. Les plus belles histoires connaissent elles aussi des couacs. Tout allait bien jusqu'en juin 2019, les Allemands sortant alors le carnet de chèque pour compléter un premier budget de 65 millions d'euros pour les 24 prochains mois, sachant que la recherche et développement s'élèvera à terme à 200, voire 300 millions d'euros. Mais Paris et Berlin sont tombés sur un os : les deux pays ne suivent pas la même politique diplomatique à l'export. Au printemps dernier, l'affaire des livraisons d'armes françaises à l'Arabie saoudite, dans le cadre de la guerre au Yémen, passe mal outre-Rhin. Le Bundestag – le Parlement allemand – est en effet très réticent à l'idée d'exporter des armes servant dans cette guerre en particulier. Une position d'autant plus paradoxale que l'Allemagne est beaucoup plus indulgente vis-à-vis des entreprises qui exportent par exemple des armes vers la Turquie, embourbée dans sa guerre contre les Kurdes. Un avion commun comportant des éléments français et allemands devra néanmoins nécessairement respecter les contraintes les plus fortes. En l'occurrence celles venues de Berlin. En septembre, le patron français de Dassault a demandé aux gouvernements français et allemand de régler cette brouille diplomatique pour ne pas entraver la bonne marche du programme commun. Mission nº2 : ensuite assurer le leadership systémique du projet Côté français, le programme SCAF réunit aujourd'hui les compétences et savoir-faire de fleurons de l'industrie de la Défense : l'avionneur Dassault Aviation, le motoriste Safran, ainsi que Thales pour la partie électronique. Trois grandes entreprises du secteur régalien de la Défense. Thales – dirigé par Patrice Caine – et Safran – dirigé par Philippe Petitcolin –ont en commun d'avoir l'Etat français à leur capital, respectivement à hauteur de 25,7% et de 11%. L'Etat français est également présent indirectement chez Dassault via la participation d'Airbus (9% environ, sachant que l'l'Etat détient 11% d'Airbus). A noter que Dassault Aviation, aux mains de la famille Dassault – détient également 24,3% de Thales. Chez Dassault, la priorité est désormais de garder la main sur le projet, et de rendre pérenne la coopération franco-allemande. Une position de nº1 qui fait d'ailleurs des envieux, notamment du côté de Thales. Entre les patrons de Dassault et de Thales, il y a d'ailleurs un petit air de Je t'aime, moi non plus, les deux entreprises se connaissant par cœur puisqu'elles collaborent sur de nombreux projets et en premier lieu sur le fleuron militaire de Dassault, le Rafale. En réalité, Patrice Caine a très mal pris de ne pas être intégré au projet SCAF, dès le début. De plus, si Dassault considère que le fuselage reste la pierre angulaire d'un avion furtif, Thales pense que l'électronique et l'intelligence artificielle ont déjà pris le pas sur plateformes. En clair, Thales ne veut plus de l'étiquette de simple « équipementier » et se rêve désormais en maître d'œuvre des grands programmes d'armements. Sachant que du terrestre au naval, en passant par l'aérien, Thales est présent absolument partout, l'argument n'est pas complètement dénué de sens. De plus, les systèmes d'armes actuels sont effectivement centrés sur la communication entre systèmes de capteurs et systèmes d'armes, cœur de métier de Thales version défense. Pour autant, Thales manque cruellement de l'expérience nécessaire à la conduite des grands programmes. Il est possible que l'adoubement de Caine par Emmanuel Macron, après le rejet de la candidature d'Henri Proglio en 2015, ait donné des ailes au patron de Thales dont l'ambition dévorante dérange, en interne comme en externe. Le groupe n'hésite pas en effet à croiser le fer avec ses condisciples industriels de défense et Patrice Caine est coutumier des joutes franco-françaises : pour marquer son territoire il n'hésite pas, par exemple, à présenter Thales face à des partenaires français comme cela a pu être le cas face au constructeur maritime Naval Group début 2019 lors d'un important appel d'offre belgo-néerlandais qu'il a finalement perdu. L'histoire ne manque pas de sel quand on sait que la société détient 35% de Naval Group. Thales ne manque pas pourtant de sujets internes de préoccupation voire d'inquiétude, parmi lesquels l'intégration de Gemalto, spécialiste de la cybersécurité récemment racheté pour 5,6 milliards d'euros. Pour revenir sur le futur avion de chasse européen, Éric Trappier garde la main. Et à travers lui, l'aéronautique français dans son ensemble. La France n'est pas la seule bénéficiaire de ce programme ; se joue aussi à long terme la souveraineté industrielle de l'Europe sur les questions de défense. https://www.taurillon.org/futur-avion-de-chasse-europeen-la-france-retrouve-son-leadership

• 

  24 juillet 2020 | International, C4ISR, Sécurité

  Intelligence Agencies Release AI Ethics Principles

  Getting it right doesn't just mean staying within the bounds of the law. It means making sure that the AI delivers reports that accurate and useful to policymakers. By KELSEY ATHERTON ALBUQUERQUE — Today, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence released what the first take on an evolving set of principles for the ethical use of artificial intelligence. The six principles, ranging from privacy to transparency to cybersecurity, are described as Version 1.0, approved by DNI John Ratcliffe last month. The six principles are pitched as a guide for the nation's many intelligence especially, especially to help them work with the private companies that will build AI for the government. As such, they provide an explicit complement to the Pentagon's AI principles put forth by Defense Secretary Mark Esper back in February. “These AI ethics principles don't diminish our ability to achieve our national security mission,” said Ben Huebner, who heads the Office of Civil Liberties, Privacy, and Transparency at ODNI. “To the contrary, they help us ensure that our AI or use of AI provides unbiased, objective and actionable intelligence policymakers require that is fundamentally our mission.” The Pentagon's AI ethics principles came at the tail end of a long process set in motion by workers at Google. These workers called upon the tech giant to withdraw from a contract to build image-processing AI for Project Maven, which sought to identify objects in video recorded by the military. While ODNI's principles come with an accompanying six-page ethics framework, there is no extensive 80-page supporting annex, like that put forth by the Department of Defense. “We need to spend our time under framework and the guidelines that we're putting out to make sure that we're staying within the guidelines,” said Dean Souleles, Chief Technology Advisor at ODNI. “This is a fast-moving train with this technology. Within our working groups, we are actively working on many, many different standards and procedures for practitioners to use and begin to adopt these technologies.” Governing AI as it is developed is a lot like laying out the tracks ahead while the train is in motion. It's a tricky proposition for all involved — but the technology is evolving too fast and unpredictable to try to carve commandments in stone for all time. Here are the six principles, in the document's own words: Respect the Law and Act with Integrity. We will employ AI in a manner that respects human dignity, rights, and freedoms. Our use of AI will fully comply with applicable legal authorities and with policies and procedures that protect privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties. Transparent and Accountable. We will provide appropriate transparency to the public and our customers regarding our AI methods, applications, and uses within the bounds of security, technology, and releasability by law and policy, and consistent with the Principles of Intelligence Transparency for the IC. We will develop and employ mechanisms to identify responsibilities and provide accountability for the use of AI and its outcomes. Objective and Equitable. Consistent with our commitment to providing objective intelligence, we will take affirmative steps to identify and mitigate bias. Human-Centered Development and Use. We will develop and use AI to augment our national security and enhance our trusted partnerships by tempering technological guidance with the application of human judgment, especially when an action has the potential to deprive individuals of constitutional rights or interfere with their free exercise of civil liberties. Secure and Resilient. We will develop and employ best practices for maximizing reliability, security, and accuracy of AI design, development, and use. We will employ security best practices to build resilience and minimize potential for adversarial influence. Informed by Science and Technology. We will apply rigor in our development and use of AI by actively engaging both across the IC and with the broader scientific and technology communities to utilize advances in research and best practices from the public and private sector. The accompanying framework offers further questions for people to ask when programming, evaluating, sourcing, using, and interpreting information informed by AI. While bulk processing of data by algorithm is not a new phenomenon for the intelligence agencies, having a learning algorithm try to parse that data and summarize it for a human is a relatively recent feature. Getting it right doesn't just mean staying within the bounds of the law, it means making sure that the data produced by the inquiry is accurate and useful when handed off to the people who use intelligence products to make policy. “We are absolutely welcoming public comment and feedback on this,” said Huebner, noting that there will be a way for public feedback at Intel.gov. “No question at all that there's going to be aspects of what we do that are and remain classified. I think though, what we can do is talk in general terms about some of the things that we are doing.” Internal legal review, as well as classified assessments from the Inspectors General, will likely be what makes the classified data processing AI accountable to policymakers. For the general public, as it offers comment on intelligence service use of AI, examples will have to come from outside classification, and will likely center on examples of AI in the private sector. “We think there's a big overlap between what the intelligence community needs and frankly, what the private sector needs that we can and should be working on, collectively together,” said Souleles. He specifically pointed to the task of threat identification, using AI to spot malicious actors that seek to cause harm to networks, be they e-commerce giants or three-letter agencies. Depending on one's feelings towards the collection and processing of information by private companies vis-à-vis the government, it is either reassuring or ominous that when it comes to performing public accountability for spy AI, the intelligence community will have business examples to turn to. “There's many areas that I think we're going to be able to talk about going forward, where there's overlap that does not expose our classified sources and methods,” said Souleles, “because many, many, many of these things are really really common problems.” https://breakingdefense.com/2020/07/intelligence-agencies-release-ai-ethics-principles/