16 mars 2021 | International, Aérospatial
Relativity Space wins responsive launch contract
The award was made through the Defense Innovation Unit as part of the Pentagon's Rapid Agile Launch Initiative.
23 octobre 2020 | International, Aérospatial
European nations should shape their air-combat fleets to support the F-35, US analysts say
COLOGNE, Germany — European NATO nations without the fifth-generation F-35 combat jet should mold their fleets to complement the U.S.-developed aircraft in future operations, according to a new report commissioned by U.S. European Command.
The analysis, done by the think tank Rand and published Oct. 22, ascribes such a vital advantage to the F-35′s stealth and sensor-fusion features that the jet would be the only aircraft suitable for an initial contact with Russian forces in the event of a conflict.
Following that logic, European nations that have already signed up for the Lockheed Martin-made jet should hone their tactics toward that initial engagement, and countries with less advanced aircraft should strive to maximize their ability to complement such an operation, the authors argued.
The United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Belgium and Italy are European NATO members in various stages of getting F-35 aircraft. One tier below that, in the eyes of Rand analysts, are countries like Germany or France whose Eurofighter and Rafale fleets, respectively, have sensors advanced enough to be considered “fourth-generation-plus” aircraft.
The report's recommendations are based on the hypothetical premise of a Russian land grab on the alliance's eastern flank.
“One common scenario considers a calculation by the Russian government that Russia could leverage a regional imbalance in ground forces to occupy some slice of NATO territory, employ air defenses to stave off allied air forces, present a fait accompli similar to that seen in Crimea, and politically divide NATO by calling for negotiations,” the document stated.
“The ability of European fifth-generation fighters to penetrate Russian air defenses and make significant combat contributions from the opening hours of a response — at the vanguard — would most likely challenge the logic behind this scenario, improving deterrence by increasing the Russian risks associated with this approach.”
The observation follows the belief, which the authors propose is shared by Russia, that NATO forces have the upper hand in air-combat capability, whereas Moscow has the lead in ground forces.
To be sure, the Rand analysis covers only one dimension in a potential confrontation with Russia. Air and naval assets as well as cyber weapons for information warfare would also shape the battlefield in potentially unpredictable ways, not to mention any surprise capabilities that either side could throw into the mix to nullify the opponent's technological advantage.
The problem for European nations' fourth-generation and “fourth-generation-plus” aircraft, which lack stealth capabilities, is the inability to get close enough to targets without getting shot down by sophisticated air defense weapons, according to Rand.
The key to making the best of the continent's aircraft mix is developing the fleets with greater interoperability in mind, the analysts argued. In that sense, non-stealthy combat planes, which typically can carry more weapons than the F-35, still have an important role to play after more advanced fighters clear any ground-based threats.
European nations are studying two versions of a sixth-generation weapon for air combat, namely the Tempest project (led by the U.K.) and the Future Combat Air System (led by France and Germany). Those aircraft ideas are slated to come online around 2040, which puts them outside of the scope of the Rand analysis.
Sur le même sujet
-
-
12 juin 2018 | International, Aérospatial, C4ISR
Tiger helos upgrade will replace verbal orders with digital ones
VERSAILLES, France ― Information technology firm Atos is in talks with Airbus Helicopters about installing its SICS battle management system on the Tiger Mk 3 attack helicopter, said Sylvain Gonnet, Atos project director. Atos developing the Scorpion Information Communication System, which will equip the French Army with the Bull battle management system intended to give a tactical overview, linking up platoon leaders to colonels. Atos expects to sign a contract with Airbus Helicopters this summer for a 12-month study to de-risk an installation of the Bull system on the Tiger. That study will help draw up a road map for equipping the attack helicopter with the system. Track our full coverage of Eurosatory here! SICS is designed to provide situation awareness, blue-force tracking and allow orders to be given by on-screen graphics rather than verbal orders, he said. Fitting SICS will be part of a midlife upgrade of the Tiger to the Mk 3 version. Belgium is closely tracking the SICS program. Officials there have signed a letter of intent on a €1.1 billion (U.S. $1.3 billion) acquisition of Griffon troop carriers and Jaguar reconnaissance and combat vehicles, which will be equipped with the battle management system. Atos signed in October 2016 a contract with an export client for its system. No further details were available. There is strong interest in battle management systems, with Britain and Germany looking to upgrade capabilities. Bull pitched its system to the U.K., which is looking to upgrade with the Morpheus tactical information and communication system. Other competitors in the market include Elbit Systems, Rheinmetall, Nexter and Danish company Systematic. Atos gave its presentation to the press May 16 ahead of the Eurosatory trade show, which runs June 11-15. The Tiger Mk 3 will be a midlife upgrade of the helicopter, which will be undertaken in cooperation with Germany. That modernization includes a new air-to-ground missile as well as linking up the helicopter more closely to the ground troops through the SICS. https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/eurosatory/2018/06/08/tiger-helos-upgrade-will-replace-verbal-orders-with-digital-ones/
-
28 avril 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité
What the Pentagon should (and should not) get in the next stimulus bill
By: Mackenzie Eaglen As Washington begins to draft another stimulus spending bill to combat coronavirus, the Pentagon needs a new plan to articulate its needs to lawmakers. Simply submitting unfunded lists whole cloth comes across as tone deaf and opportunistic. A better plan would be to focus on the health, safety and continuity of all the Pentagon's workforce: uniformed, civilian and contractor. Capitol Hill is (virtually) busy as ever these days, completing another injection of funds into the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act last week. Congress and the White House will now begin formulating a phase 4 bill. President Donald Trump and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have indicated they would both like to see domestic infrastructure spending inside. Negotiations are just beginning, but this bill will open the spending aperture compared to the CARES Act. For national defense, this legislation must focus on taking care of people and protecting jobs. Even as the U.S. military mobilizes to support the fight against COVID-19, the disease is hitting the Defense Department and its workforce much the same as the rest of America. The first order of business is for the Pentagon to ensure health and wellness for service members, their families, civilians and contractors by encouraging safe and flexible work policies. The Pentagon will need additional funding to pay for COVID-19 support deployments, mitigate the effects of stop-movement orders, increase the availability of personal protective equipment and sanitation, and expand its IT infrastructure for telework. Second, Congress and the Pentagon should provide financial assistance to the thousands of small businesses, subcontractors and suppliers to defense contractors building weapons, conducting maintenance or developing classified software. The defense-industrial base is built for maximum efficiency, not resiliency. Even seemingly minor production pauses of weeks are combining with broader quarantine restrictions to wreak havoc on program schedules. While the Pentagon has many tools at its disposal — accelerating awards and progress payments as well as lifting contracting restrictions — the acquisition team simply cannot respond to this crisis without more resources available. Absent additional liquidity, contractors face the impossible choice between letting workers go or facing the reality that they will have no jobs to return to. Small businesses and subcontractors are particularly vulnerable, as they have far less slack to respond to crises. Many live contract to contract, as indicated by a 2018 Department of Defense report on industrial base fragility. These small firms providing needed materials, labor and technology to companies designated as “essential” are struggling with COVID like everyone else. Their employees are either afraid to come to work out of fear of contraction and contagion, or they're sick with the virus. The vicious cycle — where people want to work but can't — means schedules slip. If there is no work, there is no revenue, which means layoffs. Already around the country, a major defense contractor had to shut down two plants; a shipbuilder is struggling to get employees to show up; another defense firm has laid off employees; and still others can't get to work because classified spaces are off limits. To ensure workforces remain intact, lawmakers need to move quickly to pay contractors who cannot work because of COVID-19 effects, as delays are now averaging three months. Fixing this is as simple as measuring the impact of COVID-19 on contracts and ensuring a reasonable payment for that delay, which will be billions of dollars, according to acquisition czar Ellen Lord. It's no different than legal remedies for “acts of God.” Also, the DoD can consider a subset of its unfunded priorities list to get projects on contract that are executable very quickly and inject liquidity into the defense contractor workforce. These unfunded priorities run the gamut, from weapons production to software development. Similarly, there are always “incremental” projects that can be accelerated, like facilities sustainment and depot maintenance. Using unfunded priorities to inject liquidity into the defense-industrial base isn't the ideal tool, but all options must be brought to bear to deal with this crisis. The majority of defense dollars allocated to the big prime contractors go back out the door to their suppliers and vendors — many of which are small businesses. While many of the easiest financial levers to pull involve getting contracts to primes, Congress and the Pentagon need to emphasize that this money — whether it be new contracts, accelerated contracts or increased progress payments — must be passed on to major suppliers and subcontractors. If the behemoths of defense industry don't share the wealth and take care of their supply chain, there won't be more money, contracts or authority for additional progress payments from Congress. Contractor leadership must take care of workers — including those of its vendors. Lastly, Congress can provide Defense Production Act Title III funding to directly target injections of cash to the emergent needs of small businesses and subcontractors, including many up-and-coming innovative firms and single-source suppliers. So far, DPA funding has been focused on contracting for additional personal protective equipment, but the DPA was equally built to protect the defense-industrial base. The industrial base was already hurt by the Budget Control Act, and it's been busy rebuilding under Trump, only to get whacked again by COVID-19. Employees need to know the work is there, their safety is a priority and their jobs are safe. If the Pentagon and primes don't take care of their suppliers and subcontractors, the defense-industrial base will contract again, losing crucial skills and talents permanently — and possibly seeing those companies bought up by China. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/04/27/what-the-pentagon-should-and-should-not-get-in-the-next-stimulus-bill/