Finland's top leaders press for rapid NATO membership

Sur le même sujet

• 

  11 décembre 2019 | International, Terrestre

  Analysis: NATO's defence budget formula is flawed — and Canada isn't going to meet its target

  Trump is angry that a number of NATO nations haven't met an agreement, reached five years ago, to spend two per cent of their annual Gross Domestic Product on defence DAVID PUGLIESE, OTTAWA CITIZEN Another NATO summit brings another chance for U.S. President Donald Trump to browbeat America's allies for not spending enough on defence. Trump is angry that a number of NATO nations haven't met an agreement, reached five years ago, to spend two per cent of their annual Gross Domestic Product on defence. But that GDP yardstick has been rendered almost meaningless this year as the tiny nation of Bulgaria has joined the U.S. super power as being one of NATO's top military spenders. Bulgaria's GDP is so small that by purchasing eight F-16 fighter jets in a one-time outlay of $1.5 billion, the country will now be spending 3.25 per cent of its economic output on its military. Only the U.S., which spends 3.4 per cent of GDP on defence, is higher. Using the GDP measurement means that Estonia, which has one of the smallest navies in the world with four ships, has reached the NATO gold standard of two per cent. Canada, which spends more than 20 times the amount in actual dollars on its military, is viewed as a NATO deadbeat. For that reason, both Conservative and Liberal governments have pushed back on the GDP measurement, which was agreed to by NATO nations at a summit in Wales in 2014. Prime Minister Stephen Harper, arguably the most supportive leader of the Canadian military that the country had seen in decades, dismissed the notion of reaching that two per cent target, even though Canada signed on to the goal. At the Wales summit, Harper's staff pointed out that reaching the two per cent mark would have required the military's budget to almost double, something that was not fiscally or politically possible. Harper himself had come under fire from defence analysts who pointed out that under his government, the percentage of GDP spent on defence reached almost an all-time low of around 1 per cent. But Harper countered that it's the amount of actual spending and capability of a country's military that matters, not the GDP measurement. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was essentially using the same argument Tuesday when he met with Trump at the NATO summit. “I think it's important to look at what is actually being done,” with defence dollars, Trudeau said. Canada only spends about 1.3 per cent of GDP on defence. But tabulate the defence dollars actually being spent on the military and Canada ranks an impressive sixth among the 29 NATO nations. The Liberal government's defence policy has promised even more money in the future. Military spending is set to increase from the current $21.8 billion to $32.7 billion in 2026-2027. Trudeau also noted in his meeting with Trump on Tuesday the key role Canada is playing in NATO operations in both Latvia and Iraq. Germany has taken a similar approach to the one used by Canada's Conservative and Liberal governments. It believes the amount of money actually being spent on military forces is more important than measuring it as a percentage of the GDP. Germany has also pointed out it is the second largest provider of troops for NATO operations. Trump is expected to once again criticize Germany for its level of defence spending. But the country does not seem to be in a hurry to make the two per cent goal. Germany currently spends about 1.4 per cent or around $64 billion annually. Earlier this year it told NATO it would reach 1.5 per cent of GDP by 2024. The other issue facing the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces related to the two per cent goal is one of capacity. Even if the defence budget was boosted to meet two per cent, the department simply doesn't have the ability to spend that amount of money. Around half the defence budget is for salaries and while the senior military leadership would welcome an increase in the ranks the problem they face is that young Canadians aren't exactly rushing out to join the forces. The military could spend more money on acquiring additional equipment. But a lack of trained procurement staff has been an obstacle standing in the way of even getting approved programs underway. Trudeau's explanation Tuesday about Canada's military spending being on a steady increase seemed to placate Trump, at least for now. The U.S. president responded that he views Canada as “slightly delinquent” when it comes to defence spending. “But they'll be okay,” he told journalists. “I have confidence. They'll get there quickly, I think.” https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/analysis-natos-defence-budget-formula-is-flawed-and-canada-isnt-going-to-meet-its-target

• 

  29 août 2023 | International, Terrestre, Sécurité

  Rheinmetall welcomes German-Australian letter of cooperation for procurement of over 100 Boxer combat vehicles for German Army

  The German Boxer vehicles will be built, utilizing production capacity at Rheinmetall’s state-of-the-art MILVEHCOE at Redbank in South East Queensland, alongside the Boxer CRV being produced for the Australian Defence Force.

• 

  24 avril 2020 | International, Aérospatial

  The Pentagon has cut the number of serious F-35 technical flaws in half

  By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — The U.S. Defense Department is slowly but surely whittling down the number of F-35 technical problems, with the fighter jet program's most serious issues decreasing from 13 to seven over the past year. In June 2019, Defense News published an investigation delving into the details of 13 previously unreported category 1 deficiencies — the designation given to major flaws that impact safety or mission effectiveness. Following the report, five of those 13 category 1 problems have been “closed,” meaning they were eliminated or sufficiently corrected. Five were downgraded to a lower level of deficiency after actions were taken to help mitigate negative effects, and three issues remain open and unsolved, according to the F-35 program executive office. Four additional CAT 1 problems have also since been added to the list, raising the total CAT 1 deficiencies to seven. The program office declined to provide additional details about those issues for classification reasons, but stated that software updates should allow all of them to be closed by the end of 2020. “The F-35 Lightning II Joint Program Office is keenly aware of these existing F-35-related category 1 deficiencies and is focused on developing and implementing solutions for these issues as quickly as possible,” the program office said in response to questions from Defense News. “F-35 operator safety is the F-35 JPO's highest priority.” In a statement to Defense News, F-35 manufacturer Lockheed Martin confirmed the number of open category 1 deficiencies. However, the company declined to provide further information about the path to fix current issues or how earlier issues had been ameliorated. “We are actively addressing the deficiencies and expect all to be downgraded or closed this year,” the company said. While the overall reduction in deficiencies is a promising trend, it is also important to track how problems are solved and how quickly fixes are pushed to the rest of the fleet, said Dan Grazier, an analyst with the independent watchdog group Project on Government Oversight. “I'm not surprised that they are continuing to find issues. This is why we are supposed to be testing weapon systems before we buy a whole bunch of them. I am a little surprised that we are finding CAT 1 deficiencies at this point during operational testing,” Grazier said. “I think that speaks to the level of complexity with this program that it's taken us this long to get to this point, and even after all the testing that has been done and the time and money that has gone into this that we're still finding category 1 issues," he added. "It shows that the program wasn't born in the right place. It was way too ambitious from the very beginning.” Aside from four classified problems, there remain three open category 1 deficiencies in need of a fix. There are myriad reasons for that, the program office stated. “Reasons for delayed issue closure vary according to the complexity of the solution and the availability of test assets needed to verify the solution,” the JPO said. “The U.S. services fund the F-35 program to address a prioritized set of DRs [deficiency reports], while at the same time, develop new capabilities. It is likely that some low-priority DRs will never be resolved because of their minor impact on F-35 fleet operations does not justify the cost of resolution." The F-35 program office provided some details on the path forward for resolving these technical flaws, but noted that many details regarding those plans remain classified: Spikes in the F-35 cockpit's cabin pressure have been known to cause barotrauma, or extreme ear and sinus pain. This problem was documented when two Air Force pilots, flying older versions of the F-35A conventional-takeoff-and-landing model, experienced ear and sinus pain that they described as “excruciating, causing loss of in-flight situational awareness, with effects lasting for months,” according to documents obtained by Defense News. The physiological event is known by the medical term barotrauma. The F-35 Joint Program Office believes barotrauma in the jet is caused when sensors on the outer mold line of the aircraft detect “rapidly changing static pressures” that, in turn, drive very quick changes of the cockpit pressure regulator valve. Lockheed Martin has tested a fix that proved to be successful in a laboratory setting, Lockheed program head Greg Ulmer said last year. But flight testing of that improvement has not occurred, slowing the pace of a solution. The F-35 program office now says flight testing of a new cockpit pressure regulation system is planned for mid-2020. If all goes well, the deficiency should be completely eliminated in 2021. On nights with little starlight, the night vision camera sometimes displays green striations that make it difficult for all F-35 variants to see the horizon or to land on ships. On nights where there is little ambient light, horizontal green lines sometimes appear on the night vision camera feed, obscuring the horizon and making landing on a ship more dangerous. The problem is different than the notorious “green glow” issue, caused when the F-35 helmet-mounted display's LED lights produce a greenish luminescence that inhibits a pilot's ability to land on an aircraft carrier on nights with very little light. At one point, both Lockheed and the government's program office believed both problems could be solved by the F-35 Generation III helmet that the U.S. military began fielding last year. Although the program office no longer considers the “green glow” problem a deficiency, it appears that the new helmet did not completely solve the night vision camera issue. The program office told Defense News that it intends to develop software improvements and test them in flight later this year, but the deficiency will not be considered “closed” until at least 2021. The sea search mode of the F-35's radar only illuminates a small slice of the sea's surface. Unlike the other problems, which are the result of the contractor not meeting technical specifications or the jet not working as planned, this deficiency is on the books even though the jet's Northrop Grumman-made AN/APG-81 active electronically scanned array radar fulfills its requirements. Currently, the radar can only illuminate what is directly in front of it when in sea search mode. That performance is not good enough for the Navy, which wants to be able to search a wider area than is currently possible. Although this problem can be fixed with software modifications and an upgrade to the radar's processing power, it will continue to be on the books for some time. According to the program office, “[the] U.S. services agreed to plan for an improved radar mode, which will require the Technology Refresh-1 avionics update, for software release in [calendar year] 2024.” ‘A line in the sand' Although Defense Department and military leaders have criticized the F-35 program for high operations and sustainment costs, the operational community has rallied around the performance of the jet, praising its advanced computing capability that allows the aircraft to mesh together data from different sensors and provide a more complete picture of enemy threats. Brig. Gen. David Abba, who leads the Air Force's F-35 integration office, said in March that he was comfortable with the path forward to correct open deficiencies, downplaying the impact of those issues on daily operations. “Is it important to hold folks' feet to the fire and make sure that we're delivering on the capabilities that we need? Yes,” he said. But, he added, it's also difficult to balance the need to meet a stated technical requirement against the reality of a fielded technology that may already be performing well in daily operations. “That's the crux of the acquisition and the delivery problem that we have,” Abba said. “When we say ‘I need this to work exactly like this,' I'm drawing a line in the sand. If I'm a half degree on one side of that line versus the other, is it really that different? That's where the art comes in.” “We've got to kind of get over ourselves a little bit and acknowledge that we never field perfect weapon systems,” he continued. “I don't want to diminish the fact that it's critical that we get after open DRs, but every weapon system in the United States Air Force — and frankly around the planet — has open deficiencies. What matters is the severity of those deficiencies and ensuring that we have a robust process between government and industry to triage those and deal with them appropriately.” Aaron Mehta and David B. Larter contributed to this report. https://www.defensenews.com/smr/hidden-troubles-f35/2020/04/24/the-pentagon-has-cut-the-number-of-serious-f-35-technical-flaws-in-half/