8 février 2021 | Local, Aérospatial, C4ISR, Sécurité

For CAE the future means expansion in cyber, space and more defense acquisitions

For CAE the future means expansion in cyber, space and more defense acquisitions

By:  

WASHINGTON — With defense budgets around the globe expected to fall, simulation and training firm CAE is moving to diversify its defense and security portfolio, with an emphasis on space and cyber capabilities.

Dan Gelston, who took over CAE’s defense and security business unit in August 2020, told Defense News that his team is also looking to partner with defense primes during the early stages of new competitions, a shift which could require CAE investing in research and engineering efforts.

Over the last two decades, CAE was “very focused” on traditional platforms, particularly planes and unmanned aerial vehicles, Gelston said. Now, he expects the future of the company to involve “a real focus on space and cyber, not only for that customer, but also for CAE. And those are areas that we need to augment our capabilities to make sure that we’re providing the best product, the best service to help our customers.”

The full interview will air as part of CAE’s OneWorld event Feb. 9.

CAE reported just over $1 billion in defense revenues in 2019, which made it the highest-ranked Canadian company on the annual Defense News Top 100 list. Currently, Gelston’s unit makes up about 40 percent of the company’s overall business, but he sees a chance to hit a “much larger” market going forward.

Gelston’s plan includes increasing the “security” part of the company’s “defense and security” portfolio by aggressively pursuing contracts for government agencies such as the Department of Homeland Security and Transportation Security Administration. This would competing for what he describes as a “multi-hundred-million dollar opportunity with TSA here in the next few months” for training security forces for airports.

“With space assets ability to target, with cyber assets ability to attack anywhere and everywhere, it’s not just the Pentagon, it’s critical infrastructure, it’s a lot of what we traditionally have separated into DHS. So that security element is crucial,” he said.

“We could really bring a lot of our research and development, our capabilities in machine learning and AI and virtual reality and augmented learning management systems” to DHS, which “you could categorize a little more of a traditional time phased approach to training.”

As the company seeks to expand into the non-defense security realm, Gelston said the company is keeping an eye out for potential merger and acquisition options, saying “I certainly would like to think in the next 18 to 24 months a property would come along, that’s particularly attractive to me.”

2020 was a rocky year for CAE, which was hit particularly hard given its ties to the commercial aviation space. But the company worked quickly to shave costs, and toward the end of the year issued a public offering, with the goal of raising roughly $2 billion Canadian ($1.56 bn American). The plan, as Gelston said, was to have enough “dry powder to make sure that we’re coming out leaning forward out of the COVID crisis. We don’t want to be hunkering down just trying to survive. We want to take advantage of this.”

While not discussing specifics, Gelston emphasized that “I’d love to get a little more robust training capability in the cyber realm… that’s an area that that I can certainly see augmenting with potential acquisition here in the next 18 to 24 months if the right property comes along, I think we would be positioned to potentially pursue that.”

Teaming with defense manufacturers

That focus on new areas doesn’t mean the company is turning away from traditional defense projects, but it does come with a greater focus on teaming up with prime contractors early in the process to offer the DoD and other customers a package solution from the start, as opposed to bidding on training and simulation contracts after a design has been selected.

He pointed to the surprise rapid test-flight of the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) demonstrator from last September as an example of how defense acquisition is speeding up.

“Our defense acquisition officials are really looking for skin in the game from industry” early on, he said. “We don’t have the time for the classic cost-plus development work, years and years and multiple phases” of a project.

“No company, even the big OEMs, have unlimited research and development budgets. No company, even Lockheed Martin, has unlimited engineering assets,” he continued. “So if I can partner with these OEMs on these major next generation platforms now and start co developing as they develop the platform, I’m codeveloping the training in the simulation experience, and sharing some of that burden, adding skin into the game for research and development engineering — It’s not just money, it’s also time, and time, arguably right now is our is our biggest enemy — I can really help those OEMs and give them a true discriminator in their offering.”

“And certainly at the end, that international or us customer is going to be much better off as they’ve got a fully baked, fully integrated training and simulation solution with that new platform.”

In addition to looking into NGAD, Gelston said the company plans to pursue nearer-term contracts related to the F-35 joint strike fighter, MQ-9B drone, and the Army’s Future Vertical Lift competition, while also continuing ongoing efforts like its C-130H business, which was awarded in 2018.

https://www.defensenews.com/training-sim/2021/02/08/for-cae-the-future-means-expansion-in-cyber-space-and-more-defense-acquisitions

Sur le même sujet

  • Fight the Information War Without Sacrificing Canadian Values

    29 octobre 2020 | Local, Terrestre

    Fight the Information War Without Sacrificing Canadian Values

    David Scanlon Defence Watch Guest Writer Recent news reports have shown the Canadian Armed Forces are struggling to define ethical boundaries as they expand their capability to meet the rising threats of the information age. A global information war is now being fought in a “grey zone” where malign state and non-state actors are trying to sow confusion and division across the international community. American professor of strategy and author Sean McFate writes that future military victories “will be won and lost in the information space, not on the physical battlefield.” But he warns that “some democracies may be tempted to sacrifice their values in the name of victory.” Recent mishaps by Canada’s military underscore this temptation. In April, the Ottawa Citizen published this headline: “Canadian Forces ‘information operations’ pandemic campaign quashed after details revealed to top general.” The article reported that the “IO” campaign was targeted at Canadians and “called for ‘shaping’ and ‘exploiting’ information” with the aim of maintaining civil order and ensuring “public compliance with suppression measures” during the coronavirus pandemic. A parallel effort involved the “data mining” of personal social media accounts in Ontario by a team assigned to military intelligence. The military shared data with the province, including findings that some of its citizens were unhappy about its response to the pandemic. Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan ordered a review of the information operations campaign and an investigation into the legality of the data-mining activities. Given the Canadian Armed Forces were tasked with helping the provinces of Quebec and Ontario deal with the cruel impact of the coronavirus in long-term care homes, it is disquieting that such a campaign would be contemplated, let alone put in writing. Chief of the defence staff General Jon Vance reportedly avowed that, “as long as he was in charge information operations tactics wouldn’t be used in a domestic situation, except in the case where an enemy had invaded the country.” Despite the defence chief’s promise, only six months later the armed forces were caught conducting a disinformation campaign on Canada’s Atlantic coast. Under the headline, “Canadian Soldiers Cry Wolf, Alarming Residents,” the New York Times reported that a military psychological training exercise had “gone wrong,” and that a “fake disinformation exercise had become a real one.” For reasons as yet unexplained, military personnel circulated a forged letter from the province of Nova Scotia warning certain residents to be wary of a wandering wolfpack, backed by loudspeakers blaring the sounds of growling wolves. It took some time for the armed forces to accept responsibility and apologize. Meanwhile, baffled local officials assured affected residents the province had not issued the letter and there were no wolves in the area. The defence minister rightly supports training the military “on how best to respond to foreign actors who use influence activities.” But to avoid further mistakes he ordered such training paused until an investigation into the wayward wolfpacks was concluded. Emma Briant, a US-based British academic and author who specializes in propaganda and political communication, told the New York Times she finds the recent incidents “appalling,” a “failure of governance,” a “failure to ensure restraint,” and a “failure to ensure ethics are built into training and planning operations.” “They seem to have introduced a policy of weaponization of influence, domestically,” Briant observes. Instead, she advises, Canada’s military needs to be building “a relationship of trust with the public.” The military’s pattern of ethical breaches appears to reveal an embedded operational mindset fixed on tactics, as opposed to a strategic one focussed on building public trust. British military historian Hew Strachan wrote that armed forces are attracted to the operational level of war, as opposed to the strategic. It allows them to “appropriate what they see as the acme of their professional competence,” enabling them to operate in “a politics free zone.” This may in part explain General Vance’s decision in 2015 to “operationalize” the military’s public affairs branch, which is responsible for public communication. The branch was seen as not delivering tangible “effects” in support of so-called “operations in the information environment.” By operationalizing a strategic function like public affairs, the military was in effect reducing it to an operational or tactical capability, like special operations forces or precision-guided missiles. Ostensibly, these can deliver precise, tangible “effects” under direct military control. Some of the perils of this new approach were exposed when a senior public affairs officer, Brig.-Gen Jay Janzen (then a colonel), began using his Twitter account to target journalists, commentators, and politicians. In April 2018, for instance, he sparked a heated Twitter exchange with opposition defence critic James Bezan. The defence committee had been debating a military deployment to Mali to help defeat cancerous African offshoots of ISIS and al-Qaeda.   Janzen tweeted that questions about the mission from opposition Members of Parliament were “nonsensical.” He even proposed “better” questions for opposition parties to ask. For a serving senior officer to publicly criticize elected officials was unprecedented. Government ministers must have been perplexed to see a high-ranking service member tweeting better debate questions to opposition MPs. Janzen’s tweets, which appear to have at least the tacit approval of his superiors, set an example for other service members. Another perplexing public information moment occurred last April when the Canadian military reported that a Canadian frigate patrolling off the Greek coast had “lost contact” with its Cyclone maritime helicopter. It was later revealed the helicopter was moments from landing on the ship when, as the CBC reported, “it went down in full view of horrified shipmates.” Tragically, all six aboard the Cyclone were killed in the crash. The military was widely criticized for misrepresenting the facts—contact was in fact never “lost” and officials failed to explain the miscommunication. Some practitioners of public affairs and information operations have been telling their military bosses that with scientific techniques like “target audience analysis” they can change people’s perceptions and behaviours with astounding precision. Canada’s defence department recently paid over a million dollars to Emic Consulting Limited (whose founder worked at the UK’s controversial and now defunct Strategic Communication Laboratories) to teach public affairs officers and others how to conduct “actor and audience analysis” and otherwise weaponize behavioural science. But is this training being misapplied? One aim of information operations is to change the perceptions and behaviours of target audiences using a range of influence techniques, including “psychological” and “deception” operations. As the defence chief alluded, such techniques should not be approved for use in Canada, other than in exceptional circumstances against clearly defined foes, such as terrorists. Military public affairs, by contrast, is about ensuring Canada’s armed forces follow federal communications policy, which calls for maintaining “public trust,” and directs that federal communications “must be objective, factual, non-partisan, clear, and written in plain language.” In a free and democratic society, public trust is a priceless strategic “effect.” As malign actors seek to create confusion and division, Canadians need trusted sources of information. Surveys consistently show that Canadians trust their military. Military leaders and their public affairs advisors must preserve this trust. As called for in defence policy, Canada’s armed forces do need the tools to wage information and cyber warfare. They are already facing such threats on missions overseas. But the armed forces also need the tools to communicate with Canadians and other friendly audiences in a timely, truthful, and accurate fashion. Transparency is a potent democratic deterrent against disinformation. Informed by the investigations into recent mishaps, the defence minister and chief of the defence staff should consider the following: o   To ensure that information operations have proper approvals and oversight, and are conducted ethically, robust policy, doctrine, and governance are essential. o   To ensure broad awareness of ethical considerations when conducting influence activities, related training and education needs to be incorporated at all rank levels. o   To explain their actions and help build public trust, the armed forces need to field uniformed spokespersons more often. (The military’s “chief spokesman” cited by the New York Times in the “wolves” story was a civilian.) o   To ensure coherent doctrine and effective implementation of information-related capabilities, a professional total force cadre of practitioners should be created. o   Military public affairs must be reinvigorated as a strategic capability that promotes transparency, provides unhindered advice to commanders at all levels, and ensures close coordination with the civilian communication arms of government. o   Policy and doctrine, along with leaders, operators, and information practitioners, must clearly differentiate between activities intended to inform Canadians, such as public affairs, and information operations designed to influence or deceive adversaries. Fighting disinformation is a serious whole-of-nation challenge. It requires an informed public, ethical and transparent government, an engaged private sector, a vigorous and valued free press, and armed forces that respect and reflect Canadian values. https://www.thechronicleherald.ca/news/canada/fight-the-information-war-without-sacrificing-canadian-values-513691/

  • PBO at a loss to explain why cost of new Canadian warship, currently at $77B, keeps rising | The Chronicle Herald

    10 mars 2021 | Local, Naval

    PBO at a loss to explain why cost of new Canadian warship, currently at $77B, keeps rising | The Chronicle Herald

    The selection of a vessel that doesn’t yet exist has contributed to the risk of building Canada’s new warship fleet, but the parliamentary budget officer acknowledges he’s at a loss on why the price tag keeps rising. Parliamentary budget officer

  • Major defence conferences in Ottawa to proceed despite virus; other military events cancelled

    13 mars 2020 | Local, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

    Major defence conferences in Ottawa to proceed despite virus; other military events cancelled

    By DAVID PUGLIESE, OTTAWA CITIZEN  Two major defence conferences in Ottawa will still be held despite fears raised by the novel coronavirus, including an event expected to bring 12,000 Canadian Forces members, federal government officials and security personnel from around the world together in one location in May. But two other military social functions in Ottawa and one conference, scheduled in the coming weeks, have either been postponed or cancelled because of the virus. The military equipment trade show, CANSEC 2020, expected to attract around 12,000 visitors to the EY Centre in Ottawa, will still proceed, according to the Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries, which organizes the event. Defence firms from around the world will display armaments and other products at the May 27-28 trade show. In the past, organizers have boasted CANSEC attracts thousands of Canadian government representatives and military personnel, as well as hundreds of VIPs, including generals, Canadian senators and cabinet ministers. In addition, delegations from around the world attend. The Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries, or CADSI, is also proceeding with the Canadian Armed Forces Outlook conference, April 7-9, in Ottawa which will feature the leadership of the army, navy and air force, along with other key military officers. But the coronavirus has taken its toll on other defence-related events. Canadian Army commander Lt. Gen. Wayne Eyre announced Wednesday he has decided to cancel the Army Ball, a military social event held each year in Gatineau. It was supposed to have taken place on April 4. Air force commander Lt.-Gen. Al Meinzinger announced he has postponed the inaugural Royal Canadian Air Force Ball, which was to have taken place in Ottawa on March 28. “I had to make this difficult decision in an effort to help reduce the risk of potential COVID-19 transmission within our veterans, personnel, families, and guests,” he wrote in a message. “This cautionary measure is being taken in the context of the evolving public health situation related to COVID-19.” The European Union delegation to Canada announced Tuesday its security and defence symposium planned for March 24 in Ottawa has been cancelled. “The rising number of COVID-19 infections globally and the hazards related to travelling have led to this decision,” it noted. “In order not to expose any panellists, guests or other collaborators to unnecessary risks, the EU DEL postpones the symposium until the conditions permit a safe and unhindered travel worldwide.” But CADSI president Christyn Cianfarani said there is an increased interest in both the Canadian Forces outlooks conference and CANSEC and at this point they are still scheduled to take place. “The health and safety of participants remains our top priority and we continue to monitor developments pertaining to coronavirus on a daily basis,” she said in a statement. “We are also following the guidelines put forward by the Government of Canada, Health Canada, and the World Health Organization to promote hygiene and prevent the spread of germs on-site.” She noted CADSI is following guidance from Ottawa Public Health. “Should anything regarding the event status change, we will share updates via email and social media,” she added. The coronavirus has already caused the cancellation or postponement of many conferences, sporting events and rock concerts. Norway on Wednesday cancelled a NATO Arctic exercise that was already underway with 15,000 troops from various nations. Norway’s defence ministry also announced that the country’s defence minister had cancelled all meetings and travel because he may have been exposed to the coronavirus. At the Pentagon, defence officials have begun what they are calling “social distancing” measures. On Monday, U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper’s regular meeting with senior staff, normally held face-to-face in a single room with 40 to 50 participants, was broken up into three rooms with video-teleconferencing among the rooms, according to the Pentagon’s chief spokesman, Jonathan Hoffman. He said Esper and the 15 to 20 people in his room, including Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, sat at least six feet apart, in line with health guidance. Canada’s Department of National Defence, however, is not following the Pentagon’s lead. Department spokeswoman Jessica Lamirande said the Canadian Forces and DND is still participating in CANSEC and the outlook conference being held by CADSI. “There is also no new direction on limiting in-person, work-related interactions,” she added. “However, CAF members and DND employees have been reminded not to attend work when they are sick, to exercise caution when in large crowds, and to seek immediate medical attention for flu-like symptoms.” “We continue to monitor and evaluate the situation,” Lamirande said. “As the issue evolves, guidance will continue to be evaluated and adjusted.” With files from The Associated Press https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/major-defence-conferences-in-ottawa-to-proceed-despite-virus-other-military-events-cancelled

Toutes les nouvelles