7 novembre 2017 | Local, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR

Esterline CMC Electronics and NovAtel® partner on new aviation certified GNSS Receiver

(Montreal, QC and Calgary, AB, Canada, November 7, 2017) - Esterline CMC Electronics and NovAtel Inc. (NovAtel) are pleased to announce a new strategic partnership, extending their collaboration in Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) positioning technology that started in the late 1990s. The partnership will see NovAtel's industry-leading GNSS measurement technology integrated into a new Esterline CMC-designed multi-constellation, multi-frequency (MCMF) chipset for certified aviation use. The DO-254 Level A certified chipset will allow both companies to develop new GNSS receiver solutions for use in a variety of safety critical applications, including DO-178C Level A certified products designed for commercial aviation, military and unmanned aerial systems (UAS). Combining the world-class capabilities of NovAtel's GNSS expertise with Esterline CMC's aviation and certification experience will allow the companies to bring innovative solutions to the market, meeting the requirements of new and evolving industry standards as the modern age of MCMF GNSS positioning in aviation is ushered in. As two industry-leading technology companies, NovAtel and Esterline CMC will combine their complementary resources to deliver competitive solutions that will establish a new standard for excellence in this exciting application space.

John Studenny, Director Aviation GPS Products at Esterline CMC Electronics, said: Esterline CMC and NovAtel have a highly successful and growing relationship built on the strengths of both companies often described as “1+1 yields 3!”. While Esterline CMC Electronics is an acknowledged industry leader with its reliable, dependable, DAL-A certified CMA-5024 and CMA-6024 landing system receivers, our company will usher in a new generation of high-performance Multi-Constellation-Multi-Frequency (MCMF) GNSS products certified to the highest levels, supporting current and new aircraft GNSS precision approach.”

Jonathan Auld, Vice President of Engineering and Safety Critical Systems at NovAtel said “We are proud to extend our long-standing and successful collaboration with Esterline CMC Electronics. We believe that this partnership will strengthen the technology portfolio of both companies. NovAtel is a major supplier of precise GNSS technology to mission-critical military and civilian UAS, for example, and with this new, certified chipset we will extend our solution portfolio with assured positioning solutions to meet the emerging industry standards.”

https://www.novatel.com/about-us/news-releases/news-releases-2017/esterline-cmc-electronics-and-novatel-partner-on-new-aviation-certified-gnss-receiver/

Sur le même sujet

  • Smol: Why Sweden is leagues ahead of Canada on fighter-jet technology

    20 août 2019 | Local, Aérospatial

    Smol: Why Sweden is leagues ahead of Canada on fighter-jet technology

    With the election looming, the Liberal government has set in motion, at least on paper, its commitment to consider bids for the purchase of new fighter jets. Of course, how committed the government is to move ahead on its renewed commitment remains to be seen. Meanwhile, any Canadian truly committed to seeing a modern, well-equipped RCAF, supported by a capable military procurement program, should take special note of one of the top contenders to replace Canada's aging fleet of fighters: Sweden. This non-aligned country, approximately the size of Newfoundland and Labrador, with a population only slightly larger than that of Quebec, has not only succeeded in developing generations of fighter jets, but has seen impressive success in exporting them. Apart from Sweden, Saab's JAS 39 Gripen, the latest version released in 2016, is being used by the Czech Republic and Hungary within NATO. The governments of Brazil, South Africa and Thailand are also purchasing the aircraft. Other countries such as India, Botswana, Indonesia and the Philippines are seriously considering the Gripen. But instead of fretting about how much Canada's aging fighters stand to potentially be outdone by the air forces of the developing world, we should instead look squarely at how Sweden came to be a serious contender to arm and equip this country's emaciated airforce. We should instead look squarely at how Sweden came to be a serious contender to arm and equip this country's emaciated airforce. The answer lies in the national mindset of the two countries. Unlike Canada, and especially when it comes to defence, Sweden refuses to allow itself to fall into dependency status vis-à-vis Europe, NATO or any other military power. In other words, while they actively cooperate with NATO in the defence of Europe, they make it clear that the defence of Sweden is first and foremost a Swedish responsibility. It is why the Swedish army, navy and airforce use high-tech equipment, much of which is built by the Swedes themselves. It is why the Swedes supplement their advanced military technology with elaborate defence-in-depth war plans and civil defence policies. The manual, “If crisis or war comes,” has been recently mailed to every household in Sweden. By contrast, we Canadians have chosen a quasi-colonial mindset with respect to our defence, clearly reflected in our epically embarrassing procurement shortcomings and failures. For the last 60 years, beginning with the cancellation of the Avro Arrow, Canada has been falling into a pattern of dependency on the United States on all matters related to defence. Sweden, on the other hand, has remained committed to designing and developing much its own military aircraft, ships, submarines and army equipment. In the mid-1950s, both Canada and Sweden were working independently on their own advanced fighter aircraft. While Canada was working on the Arrow, the Swedish military and engineers were hard at work on the Draken, which came out the same year. The Draken had a similar delta wing design to the Arrow and was the first European-built fighter jet to break the sound barrier. But that is where the comparison ends; the two countries went on very different paths with respect to their airforces. Canada cancelled and destroyed its Arrow aircraft and took on second-rate Voodoo fighters from the United States. It is what we Canadians wanted, as no successive Conservative or Liberal government has since tried to “bring back the Arrow.” Sweden aggressively continued development of new fighter technology, replacing the Draken with the Viggen in the 1970s, while Canada continued to try to squeeze more life out of our then-aging fighter jets. In the 1980s, as Canada was finally taking on the U.S built F-18, Sweden was working on the first version of the modern Gripen. Of course, as had been well documented, the early Gripen had problems. But as with the Draken and Viggen, the Swedes, unlike Canada, stayed with their national fighter jet. Today, Canada can only dream what our military aircraft industry might have been like in 2019 if then-prime minister John Diefenbaker, with the tacit support of the opposition Liberals, had not cancelled the Arrow, accelerating our descent into military dependency on the United States and national impotence on military procurement. https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/smol-why-sweden-is-leagues-ahead-of-canada-on-fighter-jet-technology

  • Artificial intelligence at border could infringe on human rights: report

    26 septembre 2018 | Local, Sécurité

    Artificial intelligence at border could infringe on human rights: report

    By Anna Desmarais Using artificial intelligence at Canada's official points of entry can lead to serious human rights violations, according to a new report. Released Wednesday by the University of Toronto's International Human Rights Program (IHRP) and the Citizen Lab at the Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, the report says the use of artificial intelligence (AI) at regular points of entry is “quite risky” without appropriate government oversight. “We know that, in other contexts, AI is not neutral,” report author Petra Molnar told iPolitics. “It's basically like a recipe. If your recipe is biased, then the result that is going to come out of the algorithm is also going to be biased.” What these technologies could do, according to the report, is decide whether a marriage is genuine, an application is complete, or whether someone entering the country is deemed “a risk” to public safety. If the government doesn't provide more oversight, such decisions could rely on appearance, religion, or travel patterns as “proxies” for more relevant data normally gathered by immigration officials. This could compromise some quintessential human rights for immigrants and refugees at the border, including the right to equality and to be protected from discrimination under the law. The report says AI machines could be taught algorithms for how to assess “red flags,” “risks,” and “frauds” based on pre-existing biases in some of the immigration and refugee system's current regulations. For example, the report said the Designated Country of Origin list, which classifies which countries are “safe” for refugee claimants, uses an “incomplete” definition of safety that does not take into account specific risks for minority groups, such as women or members of the LGBTQ community. The use of AI technologies could mean cases are likely to be determined only based on these types of guidelines and might not include the discretion and empathy employed by immigration officials when reviewing the details of a refugee claim. “Depending on how an algorithm is designed, it may result in indirect discrimination,” the report found. “The complexity of human migration is not easily reducible to an algorithm.” If someone is triaged or flagged for early deportation, it could also affect their ability to apply for a visa, appeal a negative immigration ruling, or continue to move between borders. AI technologies also bring up procedural-rights issues, such as how a potential immigrant or refugee claimant would challenge the outcome of his case at the border. “When you introduce AI, if you don't agree with the decision, where do you appeal? And what kind of appeal are you crafting?” Molnar said. “These are all new questions we have to ask ourselves.” The report found that the government has been experimenting with artificial intelligence since 2014. Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada confirmed to the report's authors in June it was already using an automated response to “triage,” or separate, simple claims from complicated ones that need further review. This summer, the government sent out an RFI (a preliminary procurement document) seeking an “Artificial Intelligence Solution” to provide legal support for migrants entering at formal points of entry. These investments fit into the federal government's $125-million Pan-Canadian Artificial Intelligence Strategy to “develop global thought leadership on the economic, ethical, policy and legal implications” of AI research throughout the country. Molnar said she heard from government officials that their use of AI is “preliminary” at best. What the government is considering, she continued, is using AI technologies only for preliminary screening. After AI technologies have reviewed a case, Molnar said immigration officers should still be asked to review the decision and make any appropriate changes. Molnar said it's still too soon to tell what AI could look like at the borders, but noted the technological changes could be vast. “It can be as simple as an Excel sheet, all the way to totally autonomous robots in other sectors,” she continued. “In immigration, how this could manifest ... could include a triage system where a traveller might be designated a high risk or low risk, or streamed for high risk and low risk.” To solve these possible human-rights infringements, the report suggests installing an independent, arms-length government-oversight body to “engage in all aspects of oversight,” before the government continues to develop these technologies. This recommendation, Molnar said, is in line with the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat's review into responsible use of AI throughout government offices. Among other recommendations, the board suggests more transparency from government offices about when AI technologies will be used during a discretionary decision-making process. The report notes this suggestion “is promising, from a human-rights perspective,” but the document is non-binding and is still subject to change. Until the review body is created, the report suggests government freeze “all efforts to procure, develop or adopt” any new automated-decision-system technology before a government oversight process is in place. https://ipolitics.ca/2018/09/26/artificial-intelligence-at-border-could-infringe-on-human-rights-report/

  • Canada’s military facing challenges like pilot training, part shortages amid COVID-19 - National | Globalnews.ca

    26 avril 2021 | Local, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

    Canada’s military facing challenges like pilot training, part shortages amid COVID-19 - National | Globalnews.ca

    The pandemic has also made it more difficult to source spare parts and conduct other maintenance activities on the air force's various fleets.

Toutes les nouvelles