16 janvier 2020 | International, Aérospatial
By Yasmin Tadjdeh
The Pentagon will soon stand up a counter-unmanned aerial system office that will be headed by the Army, said the Defense Department's top weapons buyer Jan. 14.
Following the Dubai Air Show in November, Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment Ellen Lord visited numerous locations across the Middle East including U.S. military installations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
“The thing that was really top of everybody's mind were counter-UAS,” she said during a meeting with reporters hosted by George Washington University's Project for Media and National Security in Washington, D.C. “We see that small UAS are becoming a more popular weapon of choice ... [and] we need to be agile and pivot to that challenge.”
Pentagon leaders recently decided to designate the Army as the executive agent for counter-drone technologies, Lord said. The new office will be stood up in Arlington, Virginia, in the Crystal City neighborhood. It will be staffed by around 60 people.
“We are just finishing off on the policy that directs the activities,” she said.
The office will examine the many counter-UAS efforts across the Defense Department and come up with three to five systems that are best for the military writ large and make sure they are effectively leveraged, Lord said.
The Defense Department is bringing together a number of organizations, including the office of the director of operational test and evaluation and Defense Digital Service, to work on the effort.
Robert Behler, the head of DOT&E, has a group conducting independent tests and evaluation of currently fielded systems, Lord noted.
“Come April we will have that evaluation completed and written up. And that coincides [with] when we want to make some decisions about downselecting ... to the three to five systems that would be utilized,” she said.
The department is examining a variety of sensor modalities and defeat mechanisms.
“One size does not fit all,” Lord said. “You need a system with multiple sensors ... or defeat systems. And the key is really the command-and-control and then the communication across theater.”
The office aims to thwart both small and large adversary UAS, she added.
Countering rogue and enemy drones has long been an objective for the Defense Department, but recent high-profile events have thrown the technology into the spotlight. That includes an alleged Iranian attack on Saudi Aramaco facilities in September using unmanned aircraft.
“One of the challenges is that we know that the adversary is very agile and updates their [tactics, techniques and procedures] ... very quickly,” Lord said. “We are looking at a very nimble system where we can push patches in the same day, if you will, so that we again can stay ahead of" the threat.
The Pentagon is gung-go about tackling the issue, and senior leadership involvement and funding are increasing, she noted.
In terms of the industrial base, counter-UAS is one of the acquisition and sustainment office's four key focus areas, Lord said. Others include microelectronics, 5G networks and hypersonics.
The department plans to establish a hypersonics "war room."
“We just decided last week that we would stand up a hypersonics war room to begin to look at the defense industrial base and begin to have different companies [come] in,” Lord said.
The technology is the Pentagon's top research-and-development priority and it plans to buy large numbers of systems when they are mature enough to be fielded.
Last week, Secretary of the Army Ryan McCarthy said missile manufacturers and other suppliers need to do more to boost their hypersonics manufacturing capability.
“What we need to see is industry step up,” he said Jan. 10 during remarks at the Brookings Institution. “They've got to come forward and ... first and foremost, invest the time to work with our national lab network to understand how we've come forward with these technologies. But they're going to have to make investments to be able to produce these at scale.”
30 août 2023 | International, Aérospatial
Japan plans to upgrade 68 of its Mitsubishi-built F-15J Eagle interceptors with new radars, mission computers and a standoff land-attack capability.
22 octobre 2019 | International, Terrestre
By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — The Army has invited four teams to compete to build prototypes for its future light Robotic Combat Vehicle, according to an announcement on the National Advanced Mobility Consortium's website. Out of a large pool of white paper submissions, a Textron and Howe & Howe team, a team of Qinetiq North America and Pratt & Miller, HDT Global and Oshkosh were each issued a request for prototype proposal. The Army plans to procure a light, medium and heavy RCV as part of an effort to bring next-generation combat vehicle capability to the force by 2028. The RCV-Light competition is being managed by the NAMC. While the Army is the decision maker, the consortium is tasked to execute the competition and is also running the RCV-Medium effort. The Army is expected to award up to two contracts toward the end of the second quarter of this fiscal year to deliver four non-developmental RCV-L surrogate vehicles for government evaluation, testing and manned-unmanned teaming experimentation over the course of a year. The RCV-M effort is not far behind the RCV-L as white paper submissions are currently being evaluated for down-select. NAMC also executed a week-long RCV market research demonstration with the Army at Texas A&M's RELLIS campus in May in order to better inform requirements. Out of the companies chosen to move forward, only Oshkosh was not present at the event. At the Association of the U.S. Army's annual conference, Textron and Howe & Howe dramatically unveiled their RCV Ripsaw M5, which is based on Howe & Howe's deep history of building unmanned ground vehicles, but adds technology like scalable armor and suspension and drive options to cope with the challenges expected in the future fight. FLIR Systems is also part of the team, contributing advanced sensors. “Bringing together Howe & Howe, Textron Systems and FLIR Systems really represents a dream team,” Textron's CEO Lisa Atherton, said in a statement released at the show. “We formed this team based on our shared focus to serve this customer with disruptive ideas and proven experience, and we are dedicated to meeting and exceeding their requirements through the RCV program.” The team told Defense News before AUSA that it planned to submit a version of Ripsaw both for the light and medium variant of the Army's RCV. HDT brought its Hunter WOLF to AUSA, and Qinetiq North America announced its partnership with Pratt & Miller at the show. Qinetiq and Pratt & Miller plan to submit a variant of the Expeditionary Modular Autonomous Vehicle (EMAV) tailored for the Army's needs. The offering combines Qinetiq's modular open-architecture control systems with Pratt & Miller's advanced mobility platform. https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/ausa/2019/10/21/the-field-narrows-in-light-robotic-combat-vehicle-competition/
17 août 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité
By: Joe Gould 5:00 AM WASHINGTON ― Defense revenues of the top 100 defense companies in the world climbed for a fourth straight year, pushed upward by U.S. defense spending growth combined with strong foreign military sales. Fiscal 2019 defense revenues recorded in Defense News' Top 100 list totaled $524 billion, up about 7 percent from $488 billion in fiscal 2018, according to numbers compiled by Defense News as part of the annual Top 100 list. “The single most striking thing about these data is the year-over-year growth, the median of which is 7 percent,” said Atlantic Council Senior Fellow Steven Grundman. “For an industry generally regarded as mature, revenue growth that runs at two times global GDP is downright sporty.” The defense industry remained top heavy, as the top 10 firms accounted for 50 percent of total defense revenue on this year's list, and the top 25 companies accounted for about 75 percent of the total. Geographically, U.S. firms made up seven of the top 10, and 10 of the top 25. The combined defense revenue of the 41 U.S. firms in the Top 100 list comprised more than half of the total defense revenue. China this year had five firms in the top 15 companies versus six last year. Eight Chinese firms made the Top 100 list this year, with a combined $95 billion in defense revenue for FY19 ― which is $11.7 billion shy of the list's total for Europe and Turkey. The Aviation Industry Corporation of China, which appeared with other Chinese firms for the first time last year, fell from No. 5 to No. 6, though its defense revenue grew by a percentage point over last year. China South Industries Group Corporation fell from No. 11 to No. 18, as its revenue declined 26 percent, from about $12 billion to around $9 billion. China is unquestionably a defense giant in the Asia-Pacific region, dwarfing its nine neighbors (excluding Russia) on the list. Their 2019 defense revenues totaled $21 billion. The combined revenues of the Chinese firms marks the country as the rising superpower it's billed to be in political and strategic circles, said Daniel Gouré, a senior vice president with the Lexington Institute. “For all the discussions we have been having over the last weeks and months about China as a potential threat and challenges, they are building all kinds of blue-water ship classes that mirror the U.S. Navy,” he said. “For a country that was once thought of as a continental or near-shore power, it's amazing the stuff they're building, and its reflected in these companies.” From Europe and Turkey, a NATO ally, there were 35 firms across the list. The combined defense revenue there comprised roughly 20 percent of the Top 100 total. Seven Turkish firms made the list, with FNSS Savunma Sistemleri A.S., and Havelsan A.S. joining the list at No. 98 and No. 99 respectively. For Russia, some past participants declined to provide data this year for unknown reasons. The two that participated made it into the list: Almaz-Antey placed 17th, with $9.2 billion in defense revenue for 2019, and Tactical Missiles Corporation JSC placed 35th, with $3.5 billion in defense revenue. The annual Defense News Top 100 list relies for the most part on self-reporting from companies, many of whom provide estimates rather than definitive data for their defense percentages. That means that while the list is the industry standard, the numbers come with some variance. Heritage firms dominate Lockheed Martin was a lock for No. 1, for the 21st year in a row, with defense revenue that represents nearly 11 percent of the total. Its defense revenue jumped 12 percent between FY18 and FY19, from $51 billion to $57 billion ― with Boeing trailing at No. 2 at $34 billion in defense revenue for FY19. Within the top five, General Dynamics climbed back from No. 6 last year, passing both Raytheon and Northrop Grumman. Northrop fell from No. 3 to No. 4, likely based on a full-year accounting of its acquisition of Orbital ATK in 2017, said analyst Roman Schweizer, managing director of Cowen and Company. GD led Northrop by $912 million in defense revenue, with Raytheon (5th place) trailing Northrop by $1.2 billion in defense revenue. Ten companies increased their defense revenue by $1 billion or more, and Lockheed Martin led the pack with a $6 billion boost. The merger between L3 Technologies (18th place last year) and Harris Corp. (26th place last year) saw a new entry, L3Harris Technologies, take the No. 9 spot, with $13.9 billion in defense revenue ― just ahead of United Technologies Corp., which acquired Rockwell Collins in 2018 and whose merger with Raytheon should be reflected in next year's list. At the same time, the data doesn't support the argument that the defense industry is growing progressively more concentrated, according to Grundman. “The top-quartile of firms account for exactly three-quarters of the revenue both in 2018 and 2019,” he said. “Looking back at the data for 2013, the top quartile took 73 percent of the revenue, but that's not appreciably less than last year.” Still, despite the Pentagon's push to work with nontraditional suppliers, the top of this year's list, and the list overall, is almost like the automotive sector, it's so dominated by familiar names, said Byron Callan, an analyst with Capital Alpha Partners. “The interesting thing is just the relative stability of this,” Callan said. “For all of DoD's emphasis to get new entrants into the sector, and reach out to innovative suppliers, you just don't see it. When you compare it to the technology sector, we're all using things made by companies that weren't even household names 10 years ago. ... Where is the Tesla [of the defense sector]?” It's not out of the question that the list changes over the next five years, if the U.S. Department of Defense and foreign militaries make good on their promises to boost innovation, Callan said. For all the DoD's discussion of the growing role of software, artificial intelligence and machine learning, there's no company known for those things on the list, Gouré observed. Beyond General Dynamics, which completed its acquisition of IT services giant CSRA in 2018, “AI, software, IT aren't there because they're still subcontractors,” Gouré said. “Microsoft and Amazon Web Services, they aren't anywhere on the list.” That's not to say there isn't massive spending on all of the above, but it remains a subcomponent within companies, and therefore not captured on the list, Gouré said. “If we keep saying it's the kill chain, the network matters and the country with the best AI will win, are we not investing enough, are we doing the right thing?” Gouré wondered. “There are more questions than answers.” (Booz Allen Hamilton, No. 26 this year, did win an $800 million Pentagon artificial intelligence contract. But as that occurred in May 2020, it will likely impact future lists.) For now, the large, multiplatform firms dominate and should continue to do so, even if government defense spending declines, Gouré said. “These guys are showing it's good to have a finger in many pies.” Furthermore, the data tend to contradict the conventional wisdom that defense is an industry of mostly large-scale, pure-play firms, according to Grundman. “In fact, the median [defense] revenue of the top 100 is only $2 billion. And on average, only slightly more than half each firm's revenue ... derives from defense sales,” he said. Flat-budget future? The consensus among analysts is that government defense spending will level off amid the coronavirus pandemic, and its effects as well as the result of the upcoming U.S. presidential election in November will be reflected in future lists. “Successful years of investment spending growth appears to be ending, but outlays are still growing due to the surge in spending over the last three years. But they are starting to taper significantly after this year,” Schweizer said. Schweizer sees foreign spending softening, at least in the short term due to COVID-19, but he predicts defense budgets, backlogs, outlays and foreign military sales will hold together for at least 12-18 months to help defense firms weather the unprecedented damage visiting the commercial aerospace sector. The biggest risk is the U.S. budget trajectory, which is likely to be flat, at best, or decline in mid-single digits, at worst, over the next five years, Schweitzer added. He anticipates a drop of 3-5 percent, but with the Pentagon's eye on Russia and China, the department will likely make trade-offs to protect core modernization areas. As global growth rates slow, future lists may see some familiar companies grow leaner. “These companies are going to figure out what their growth businesses are so they can shrink to grow,” Callan said. “They all say they're well positioned [for slower defense spending], but what the hell does that mean? They can't all be right.” Other notable moves included Reston, Virginia-based engineering and construction company Bechtel, which fell to No. 47 from No. 31 last year; the firm's defense revenue declined 39 percent, from $3.7 billion to $2.3 billion. In France, Safran's defense revenue jumped from $1.6 billion in FY18 to $4.4 billion in FY19, bumping it from No. 56 to No. 28. However, the company told Defense News that it attributes the large rise to a difference in calculation for this year's list. Since 2015, the data from Safran were made up of Safran Electronics & Defense activities. This year, the firm changed its approach by adding the military activities of the group's other subsidiaries. Also in France, Dassault nearly doubled its revenue from $2.9 billion in FY18 to $5.7 billion in FY19 ― jumping from No. 38 to No. 22. Japan's Mitsubishi Heavy Industries vaulted back onto the list to No. 21, with $6.6 billion in defense revenue. However, it's worth noting that defense revenue numbers reflect awards made by the Japanese Ministry of Defense, which leads to more year-over-year volatility among Japanese firms. The three Israeli companies on this year's list — Elbit Systems, Israel Aerospace Industries and Rafael Advanced Defense Systems — moved up in the ranking. The sole South American company on the lsit, Embraer, also moved up, from No. 84 to No. 79. Meanwhile, the only non-U.S. North American company on this year's list — Canada's CAE — dropped four spots to No. 74, but its defense revenue grew by a percentage point. https://www.defensenews.com/top-100/2020/08/17/arms-trade-momentum-globalization-and-us-defense-spending-drive-defense-industry-growth