10 septembre 2023 | International, Terrestre
Argentina buys P-3 Orion maritime patrol aircraft from Norway
Three are fitted for maritime surveillance, anti-submarine and anti-surface missions, and one is designed for search and rescue operations.
7 avril 2020 | International, Terrestre
How are the US Army’s modernization plans faring under a pandemic?
By: Jen Judson
WASHINGTON — The Army commands in charge of acquisition and modernization are taking it day-by-day as the COVID-19 pandemic worsens in the United States, but so far see minimal impact to production lines and modernization efforts underway.
“The Army has been very carefully looking at our industrial base and our ability to maintain programs, both for continued readiness and continued modernization, and, in general, we are still remaining fairly close to being on track,” Bruce Jette, the Army's acquisition chief, told reports in an April 3 teleconference.
“That doesn't mean that individual programs or individual issues haven't arisen, but, at this point, we have, we think, in the long run, we can resolve any of the challenges we have at hand,” he added.
Jette said he has sent letters out to contracting officers, program managers and program executive officers as well as industry providing them guidance and insight “into how we want to work together as a team, through good constructive and continuous and transparent communications, make sure that we know what's going on in each other's camp well enough that we can respond quickly.”
One major point of concern is what might happen with sub-tier suppliers to the bigger prime contractors, Jette said, so the Army is doing what it can to understand challenges that these suppliers might be experiencing if they have to shut down production to keep employees safe and healthy should cases of coronavirus crop up.
“We are still working various individual issues,” Jette said. “I track, on a daily basis, about 21 pages... on suppliers down to those lower levels.” That list provides projection for 30, 60 and 90 days, but are updated all the time.
So far, Boeing is the only major defense contractor to shut down an Army production line, according to Jette. The company reported late in the evening on April 2 that it would have to halt its H-47 Chinook production line in Ridley Park, Pennsylvania, for 10 days to better prevent the spread of the coronavirus after some employees tested positive for the virus.
Jette said he didn't believe the work stopping at the Boeing plant would affect the delivery schedule for the H-47s to the force.
All other lines are delivering on schedule including the newest version of the Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle — the A4 — he said.
The fielding of the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle, Jette said, will be delivered at a “lower density,” but added, “it doesn't mean we won't catch up, it just means that we're slowing down.”
Jette also said testing would likely be difficult in the coming months due to “the density packing necessary in some cases and how that puts a lot of people at risk.”
The Joint Assault Bridge that was already delayed due to other issues was supposed to go into testing, but that will have to be rescheduled, Jette said.
“It became a concern about moving the unit, moving the equipment together, getting all the testers,” he said, “and again, I go back to this issue that sometimes military operations require you to be in very close quarters for extended periods of time and that kind of violates our desire to keep people social distancing at this point.”
The 2020 calendar year is also packed with major milestones for the Army's ambitious modernization plans. And as the country's citizens continue to self-isolate, avoid travel and work from home as much as possible, it becomes hard to conduct various tests or prototyping activities to move major programs along.
“It's a changing situation, it changes pretty much daily,” Gen. Mike Murray, the Army Futures Command commander, told reporters on the same call.
"It is very much a running estimate because it does change each and every day and we're not in control of this timeline, so in many ways, we are adjusting to the timeline to try to keep everything on track as best we
The Army is having to take a “slight pause” in some activities, Murray said, such as briefly stopping some testing at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland.
“It's not because of a system,” he said. “It's based upon the maintenance of the systems as you test them. ... All the vehicles we're testing have to, daily, go into the maintenance bay to be maintained and so the interaction and the proximity, we just have to work through some mitigation strategies, we should have that done very quickly.”
The Army's Interim Mobile Short-Range Air Defense System (IM-SHORAD) is one of the vehicles affected by the pause at APG. The system was undergoing automotive testing.
The Army's plan to get to a critical soldier touchpoint or evaluation of the Integrated Visual Augmentation System this summer may be interrupted, Murray said, based on how long social distancing will be needed.
“It's not Microsoft itself,” as the company is completely teleworking, but the IVAS deliveries could be affected by sub-suppliers, for example, he said.
But, according to Murray, even if the touchpoint is delayed, he said the Army would do what is possible to avoid delaying the first unit equipped and believes, at this time, that the service will stay on schedule for t he initial fielding.
The Army also has several major tests and evaluations coming up including a long-awaited Limited User Test (LUT) for its Integrated Air-and-Missile Defense Battle Command System (IBCS). A delay on the LUT would pile onto years of delays for the troubled program meant to serve as the brains of the Army's future air and missile defense system.
And the Army is planning on another flight test of Lockheed Martin's Precision Strike Munition (PrSM) later this month, which will deliver a new long-range precision fires capability to the battlefield. LRPF is the Army's number one modernization priority.
“We are working through mitigation strategies to keep both of those on track,” Murray said. “Every day we're readjusting and reevaluating whether we can physically do that or not.”
The IBCS LUT and the PrSM test involve an entire community of representatives coming together, he said, but “I'm not ready to say today that either one of those are slipping; those are closer in and we'll work them through to keep them on schedule as best we possibly can. And if the analysis proves that we can't, there's a lot of sequential things that happen in a program; we may have to look at some concurrency.”
Murray noted there are plenty of modernization programs that so far remain unaffected and likely will stay on track, such as Future Vertical Lift efforts to bring two future aircraft online in the mid 2030s, the Army's new network and initial work to restart the Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle program to replace the Bradley.
The Army and the Navy were also able to execute a major hypersonic missile test in March.
For now, Murray said, he is focused not on alternative strategies, but how to mitigate impact to current ones.
“I'm looking as far out as this fall just to make sure that we can get ahead of it with mitigation strategies," Murray said.
Sur le même sujet
-
-
18 juin 2019 | International, Aérospatial, Terrestre, C4ISR
The next key to the Army network: air-ground integration
By: Mark Pomerleau The Army wants greater network integration with its air and ground units and has started working with industry to make that process more seamless. Service leaders point to significant gaps in today's network architecture enabling aircraft to communicate with ground units and vice versa. But, they say, forces in the future will have to operate over significant distances and do so under a near constant jamming threat. “A lot of units and rifle squads in the 101st [Airborne Division] right now, that squad leader's radio in many cases can't interface with similar radios in adjacent units or the helicopter that just delivered him or her to an objective area. Or the helicopter that's providing close air support ... can't pass data with it,” Maj. Gen. Brian Winski, the division's commander, said in Nashville, Tennessee, May 30. “We need that capability for ground forces to be able to talk to their aviation partners and have that inextricable link that makes us so incredibly powerful. We also have to collectively figure out how we're going to communicate over significantly increased distances.” To solve these problems, Army leaders from the aviation and networking community gathered in Nashville, Tennessee at the end of May to hash out the challenges they face with industry and the operational community. The forum was a venue for members of the operational community to voice their concerns and provide examples of issues they faced while deployed. “This air to ground focus ... is the thing we've really got to crack the code on if we are going to penetrate deep into an [anti-Access/area denial] environment ... they've got to be able to communicate,” Maj. Gen. Peter Gallagher, director of the network cross functional team, said at the event. “Contested in space, contested in cyber, there are no easy answers to that wicked problem.” Gallagher stressed to the industry representatives that it's up to their engineers to “help us crack the code to making sure we have assured network transport in a contested environment, terrestrial, aerial and space.” Operating at long distances One of the first challenges officials described was ensuring network connectivity over hundreds of miles while facing a jamming threat. “No longer are we talking about operating at distances of 100 to 150 kilometers. We're about talking of operating at distance to 400 to 1,000-plus kilometers,” Al Abejon, chief of aviation architecture at the program executive office aviation, said. “Now the challenge is: how do you maintain that continuous mission command, [situational awareness] ... throughout that operational distance and oh, by the way, be able to survive the operational environments that are going to be changing at these distances at those air speeds. "All those rolled into one thing make up a considerable problem set.” Along with the newtwork, the Army has also listed future vertical lift aircraft as one of its six top modernization priorities. These future aircraft will be capable of teaming with unmanned systems, a concept the aviation community is calling advanced teaming. From an operational perspective, Winski said the 101st must be able to share information digitally between air and ground units in the Army and with joint and coalition partners to “violently and decisively exploit developing opportunities on the battlefield.” They'll also need to provide electronic and kinetic fires over the horizon, increase the linkages between intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance platforms and shooters, whether they are existing or future aircraft, future long range precision fires platforms or existing fires platforms. Gallagher told C4ISRNET that if beyond line of sight satellite communications are knocked out, alternative solutions could include high frequency solutions or mid-earth or low-earth orbit satellites rather than geosynchronous satellites. Abejon mentioned one option could be to link line of sight communications to the command and control aircraft that have beyond line of sight capability. Those aircraft can then move data forward while still maintaining connectivity to bases. Unmanned systems can also be used as range extension platforms. Common operating environment The Army is pursuing a common operating environment that will allow soldiers in a command post, ground vehicle, aircraft or on the ground to easily pass data back and forth, share information, communicate and look at the same map. Now, the aviation community is trying to change its mission command system and radios into a program called the Aviation Information System (AIS). This system will “centralize mission command on a single tool that connects war fighting function software and applications with [the] mission command network,” said Col. Ryan Coyle of the aviation enablers – requirements determination directorate. “Converging [the] mission command system and the network to support efficient data management but also rapid voice and data exchange are critical in order to optimize those cross domain effects.” This is similar to the Command Post Computing Environment, which will shrink stovepiped systems into applications on a common interface allowing all forces to have a common look and feel regardless of their location. The other part of a common suite of communications gear is having radios that can connect to ground and air forces. However, for air platforms, such as radios, waveforms or mission command systems, the air community must pass airworthiness standards to fly in domestic or international airspaces. “If we have a SINCGARS waveform in the bird and we have a SINCGARS waveform on the ground in a manpack radio or a leader radio, there is no reason we shouldn't be able to interoperate perfectly between those two systems,” said Jim Evangelos, standards branch deputy director of the Joint Tactical Networking Center. “One way to guarantee this interoperability is to have software defined radios on the ground, software defined radios in the bird operating the same version of the same software. That's a lot easier said than done. I totally get and understand the aviation challenges and you have to meet some very tough standards especially with airworthiness standards.” Overall, the top tactical network buyer for the Army says he wants one single network, though acknowledges there will be some exceptions. “My goal is one network. One tactical network,” Maj. Gen. Dave Bassett, program executive officer, command, control, communications-tactical, said. “There are going to be some exceptions. There are going to be some things the aviation platforms want to do in terms of [man-unmanned teaming] or sensor to shooter and other things where the networks that the common network isn't going to meet that requirement. We ought to manage those things as exceptions but that should not be the default.” To the extent possible, Bassett said, the Army should ensure the aviation community is part of the overall Army network using the waveforms and capabilities that are provided and common to all. The Army is currently soliciting white papers and will evaluate proposals to help solve these challenges. https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/2019/06/15/the-next-key-to-the-army-network-air-ground-integration/
-
23 mars 2020 | International, Aérospatial
130 House members want 24 percent more F-35s procured in FY21
By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — One hundred thirty members of the House of Representatives are asking key defense committees in Congress to increase the number of F-35 Joint Strike Fighters by 24 percent over the number requested by the Pentagon in fiscal 2021. “Our adversaries continue to advance surface-to-air missile systems and develop their own stealth fighters,” read the letter, released Wednesday. “It is essential that we continue to increase production of our nation's only 5th generation stealth fighter in order to ensure the United States maintains air dominance and to further reduce overall program costs.” The letter, addressed to the chairs of the Senate and House Armed Services committees and Appropriations Defense subcommittees, is authored by Reps. John Larson, D-Conn.; Marc. Veasey, D-Texas; Martha Roby, R-Ala.; and Michael Turner, R-Ohio — the four leaders of the bipartisan F-35 caucus. Last year, the four also joined forces to write a similar request, which garnered 103 signatories. The Defense Department's budget request asks for 79 F-35s, including 48 of the F-35A model used by the Air Force, 10 F-35Bs used by the Marines and 21 F-35C models used by the Navy. In the letter, the congressmen note that number is 19 less jets than Congress appropriated in FY20. However, that number creates “a capability gap that 4th Generation, or legacy, aircraft cannot fulfill,” the letter warned. “To reach the minimum 50% ratio of 5th Generation and 4th Generation fighters in the timeframe required to meet the threat, the U.S. must acquire F-35s in much larger quantities.” Instead, the members want a 24 percent increase in fighters procurement, going up to 98 total, including 12 more F-35As, two more F-35Bs and 26 more F-35Cs. Those numbers match the fighter increase listed by the Air Force in its unfunded requirements document sent to Congress earlier this year; the Navy requested only five more F-35C variants, while the Marines did not request more. The letter was first reported by Politico. In addition to the increase in planes bought, the members are seeking additional funding for “spare parts and depot level repair capability to meet the required availability rates and accelerate the stand-up of mandated, organic government repair capabilities.” Additionally, investments are sought for the program dedicated to the jet's reliability, maintainability and improvement, as well as a “long-term, outcome-based sustainment contract” that would guarantee performance metrics at a fixed price. The members then request the committees fully fund the budget request for the continuous capability development and delivery (C2D2) modernization effort and use existing funds to accelerate integration of the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile onto the jet. Earlier this year, the Pentagon's independent weapons tester called the current schedule for C2D2 “high risk” and said the program office is struggling to stay on schedule. “C2D2 is critical to meeting the evolving threat in the mid-2020s and into the 2030s. Full funding is needed for the delivery of new weapons and critical capabilities necessary to keep the F-35 ahead of our adversaries,” the members wrote. https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/03/19/130-house-members-want-24-percent-more-f-35s-procured-in-fy21/