Israel unveils new Barak tank with AI, sensors and cameras

Sur le même sujet

• 

  17 juin 2019 | International, Autre défense

  Here’s how many nuclear warheads exist, and which countries own them

  By: Kelsey Reichmann WASHINGTON — The number of warheads has decreased over the past year, even as countries continue to modernize their nuclear forces, according to an annual assessment of global nuclear arms. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute released the SIPRI Yearbook 2019 on the current state of armaments, disarmament and international security. The report found that 13,865 warheads in existence at the start of 2019 were owned by nine nations: the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France, China, India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea. The year before hosted an arsenal of 14,465 warheads. “A key finding is that despite an overall decrease in the number of nuclear warheads in 2018, all nuclear weapon-possessing states continue to modernize their nuclear arsenals,” Jan Eliasson, SIPRI Governing Board chair ambassador and former deputy secretary-general of the United Nations, said in a news release. The U.S. and Russia were the only nations that decreased their warhead inventory, by 265 and 350 respectively, according to the report. The U.K., China, Pakistan, North Korea and possibly Israel all increased their number of warheads, SIPRI found. India and France saw no changes to the size of their arsenals. One big cause of the decrease in arsenal size, according to SIPRI, is the implementation of the New START Treaty between the U.S. and Russia, meant to reduce and set limits on ballistic missiles. The two nations produce more than 90 percent of the world's nuclear arms. The U.S. and Russia announced in 2018 that they had met the limits of the New START Treaty. But if an extension is not implemented, the treaty will expire in 2021. What's the United States up to? The U.S. is in the process of modernizing its nuclear arsenal per the Trump administration 2018 Nuclear Posture Review, which put forth measures to continue a modernization program started by the Obama administration. However, the NPR moves away from reducing nuclear weapons and instead sets a plan to develop new versions while and modifying others. The U.S. hopes to achieve its goals by expanding nuclear options to include low-yield nuclear weapons, which will expand capabilities associated with submarine-launched ballistic missiles. This would add to a U.S. arsenal that already contains 1,000 gravity bombs and air-launched cruise missiles with low-yield warhead options, according to the SIPRI report. The NPR claims these new capabilities are necessary without evidence that the existing arsenal is insufficient. The SIPRI report notes that America's focus on its nonstrategic nuclear arsenal could push other nations in that same direction. Where does Russia stand? “Russia's decisions about the size and composition of its non-strategic nuclear arsenal appear to be driven by the USA's superiority in conventional forces and not by the US non-strategic nuclear arsenal or by weapons yield," according to the SIPRI report. "Instead, pursuit of a new [submarine-launched cruise missile] to ‘provide a needed non-strategic regional presence' in Europe and Asia could — especially when combined with the parallel expansion of US long-range conventional strike capabilities — strengthen Russia's reliance on non-strategic nuclear weapons and potentially could even trigger Chinese interest in developing such a capability,” the report adds. SIPRI data shows Russia has about 4,330 nuclear warheads; approximately 1,830 of them are categorized as nonstrategic. In 2018, Russia continued long-range operations over the Arctic, Atlantic and Pacific oceans. And in December, it also sent to Venezuela two Tu-160 planes, which are part of its long-range aviation command fleet. Russia also fired air-launched cruise missiles from a Tu-160 bomber over northern Russia in November, which caught attention because the number of cruise missiles launched. Meanwhile, in China, India and Pakistan ... China has an estimated 290 nuclear warheads. Though China is working to expand its nuclear forces, the report notes, it has said it's committed to a no-first-use policy. However, the report added that China has taken steps to improve its retaliation response. Rivals India and Pakistan each provide little information about the size of their nuclear arsenals. However, they have made separate statements about missile tests. India has an estimated 130-140 warheads, and Pakistan has an estimated 150-160 warheads. Both nations are estimated to have increased their arsenal by 10 to 20 warheads in the last year. North Korea has provided little transparency about it nuclear weapons capabilities, besides announcing missile tests afterward. It's estimated the country has 20-30 warheads, which would be an increase of 10-20 warheads from a 2018 estimate. The SIPRI report cites a lack of transparency from most nations in regard to nuclear stockpiles. The U.S., the U.K. and France have disclosed some information about their respective arsenals. Information from other nations is mainly based on missile tests and the supply of military fissile materials. https://www.defensenews.com/global/2019/06/16/heres-how-many-nuclear-warheads-exist-and-which-countries-own-them/

• 

  3 décembre 2021 | International, Aérospatial

  Les critères européens de l'ESG mettent la pression sur les entreprises européennes de défense

  Les entreprises européennes du secteur de la défense font face à des difficultés venues des investisseurs mettant en avant leur « responsabilité sociale ». Ces derniers exigent notamment de ces entreprises une plus grande transparence dans la fabrication et la vente d'armes, dans le cadre de la montée en puissance des critères ESG (environnemental, social et de gouvernance). L'ASD (l'association pour "Aeronautics, Space, Defence and Security Industries" en Europe) a écrit à la Commission européenne, soulignant les contradictions entre la volonté de l'UE de renforcer ses capacités en matière de défense et les projets de propositions sur les critères ESG. Déjà, certaines banques et investisseurs coupent les liens avec l'industrie, a déclaré Alessandro Profumo, président de l'ASD et directeur général du groupe de défense italien Leonardo. Plusieurs grandes entreprises de défense européennes, dont le français Thales et le britannique BAE Systems, ont intensifié leurs efforts pour expliquer ce qu'elles font et souligner leurs contributions aux économies et à la sécurité nationale. D'autres cadres européens avertissent qu'un écart d'évaluation est en train de se creuser avec les États-Unis, où les industries de défense sont plus largement acceptées. En considérant l'industrie de la défense comme socialement nuisible, l'UE pourrait mettre en péril sa propre sécurité. Financial Times du 1er décembre

• 

  10 novembre 2020 | International, C4ISR

  Mixed-reality systems can bring soldier feedback into development earlier than ever before. Here’s how the US Army is using it.

  Nathan Strout ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND, Md. — The U.S. Army's Combat Capabilities Development Command has made clear it wants to introduce soldier feedback earlier in the design process, ensuring that new technologies are meeting users' needs. “Within the CCDC, the need to get soldier feedback, to make sure that we're building the appropriate technologies and actually getting after the users' needs is critical,” said Richard Nabors, acting principal deputy for systems and modeling at the command's C5ISR Center (Command, Control, Computers, Communications, Cyber, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance). “There's a concerted effort within the C5ISR Center to do more prototyping not just at the final system level ... but to do it at the component level before the system of systems is put together,” he added. But how can the service accomplish that with systems still in development? One answer: virtual reality. The Army's CCDC is testing this approach with its new artificial intelligence-powered tank concept: the Advanced Targeting and Lethality Aided System, or ATLAS. While tank operations are almost entirely manual affairs, ATLAS aims to automate the threat detection and targeting components of a gunner's job, greatly increasing the speed of end-to-end engagements. Using machine-learning algorithms and a mounted infrared sensor, ATLAS automatically detects threats and sends targeting solutions to a touch-screen display operated by the gunner. By touching an image of the target, ATLAS automatically slews the tank's gun to the threat and recommends the appropriate ammunition and response type. If everything appears correct, the gunner can simply pull the trigger to fire at the threat. The process takes just seconds, and the gunner can immediately move on to the next threat by touching the next target on the display. ATLAS could revolutionize the way tank crews operate — at least in theory. But to understand how the system works with real people involved and whether this is a tool gunners want, CCDC needed to test it with soldiers. The Army has set up an ATLAS prototype at Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland, and it hopes to conduct a live-fire exercise soon with targets in a field. However, to collect useful feedback, CCDC is giving soldiers a more robust experience with the system that involves multiple engagements and varying levels of data quality. To do this, the command has built a mixed-reality environment. “It gives us the opportunity ... to get the soldiers in front of this system prior to it being here as a soldier touchpoint or using the live system so we get that initial feedback to provide back to the program, to get that soldier-centric design, to get their opinions on the system, be that from how the GUI is designed to some of the ways that the system would operate,” explained Christopher May, deputy director of the C5ISR Center's Modeling and Simulation Division. The virtual world In the new virtual prototyping environment — itself a prototype — users are placed in a 3D world that mimics the gunner station while using a physical controller and display that is a carbon copy of the current ATLAS design. The CCDC team can then feed simulated battlefield data into the system for soldiers to respond to as if they were actually using ATLAS. Like most virtual reality systems, the outside looks less impressive than the rendered universe that exists on the inside. Sitting down at the gunner's seat, the user's vision is enveloped by a trifold of tall blue walls, cutting the individual off from the real world. Directly in front of the chair is a recreation of ATLAS' touch-screen display and a 3D-printed copy of the controller. Putting on the virtual reality headset, the user is immersed in a 3D rendering of the ATLAS prototype's gunner station, but with some real-world elements. “We're leveraging multiple technologies to put this together. So as the operator looks around ... he has the ability to see the hand grips. He also has the ability to see his own hands,” May said. All in all, the mixed-reality environment creates the distinct impression that the user is in the gunner's chair during a real-life engagement. And that's the whole point. It's important to note the virtual reality system is not meant to test the quality of the AI system. While the system populates the virtual battlefield with targets the same way ATLAS would, it doesn't use the targeting algorithm. “We're not using the actual algorithm,” May said. “We're controlling how the algorithm performs.” Switching up the scenarios Another advantage to the mixed-reality environment: The Army can experiment with ATLAS in different vehicles. CCDC leaders were clear that ATLAS is meant to be a vehicle-agnostic platform. If the Army decides it wants ATLAS installed on a combat vehicle rather than a tank — like the current prototype — the CCDC team could recreate that vehicle within the simulated environment, giving users the opportunity to see how ATLAS would look on that platform. “We can switch that out. That's a 3D representation,” May said. “This could obviously be an existing tactical vehicle or a future tactical vehicle as part of the virtual prototype.” But is the virtual reality component really necessary to the experience? After all, the interactions with the ATLAS surrogate take place entirely through the touch screen and the controller, and a soldier could get an idea of how the system works without ever putting on the headset. May said that, according to feedback he's received, the virtual reality component adds that extra level of realism for the soldier. “They thought it added to their experience,” May said. “We've run through a version of this without the mixed reality — so they're just using the touch screens and the grips — and they thought the mixed reality added that realism to really get them immersed into the experience.” “We've had over [40 soldiers] leveraging the system that we have here to provide those early insights and then also to give us some quantitative data on how the soldier is performing,” he added. “So we're looking from a user evaluation perspective: Again, how does the [aided target recognition] system influence the soldier both positively, potentially and negatively? And then what is the qualitative user feedback just of the system itself?” In other words, the team is assessing how soldiers react to the simulated battlefield they are being fed through the mixed reality system. Not only is the team observing how soldiers operate when the data is perfect; it also wants to see how soldiers are impacted when fed less accurate data. Soldiers are also interviewed after using the system to get a sense of their general impressions. May said users are asked questions such as “How do you see this impacting the way that you currently do your operations?” or “What changes would you make based off your use of it?” The virtual prototyping environment is an outgrowth of CCDC's desire to push soldier interactions earlier in the development process, and it could eventually be used for other systems in development. “We're hoping that this is kind of an initial proof of concept that other programs can kind of leverage to enhance their programs as well,” May said. “This is a little bit of a pilot, but I think we can expect that across the C5ISR Center and other activities to spend and work a lot more in this virtual environment,” added Nabors. “It's a great mechanism for getting soldier feedback [and] provides us an opportunity to insert new capabilities where possible.” https://www.c4isrnet.com/artificial-intelligence/2020/11/09/mixed-reality-systems-can-bring-soldier-feedback-into-development-earlier-than-ever-before-heres-how-the-us-army-is-using-it/