Korean and Israeli firms eye partnership to arm helicopter with kamikaze drones

Sur le même sujet

• 

  3 juin 2020 | International, Aérospatial

  COVID-19 Infects Defense Industry With F-35 Production Slowdown

  Steve Trimble May 27, 2020 This was supposed to be a relatively easy year for Lockheed Martin's F-35 production. As 2020 began, the stealth fighter program's three-year growth spurt had subsided after annual deliveries more than doubled between 2017 and 2019. Lockheed planned to deliver 141 F-35s in 2020, only seven more than in 2019. But the F-35 supply chain is not immune from the global disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. After signaling during a first quarter earnings call in April that a production slowdown was likely, Lockheed confirmed the impact on May 19. The company issued a new forecast of 117-124 F-35 deliveries this year. If Lockheed is unable to recover in the second half, the slowdown would mark the first year-over-year decrease in F-35 deliveries since the program began. “However, we will accelerate production when we return to pre-COVID-19 conditions and could see this number decrease,” the company says. The company's new financial guidance reflects the lower F-35 delivery total, with net sales for the year falling to a range of $62.25-64 billion from $62.75-64.25 billion. Other large F-35 suppliers include Northrop Grumman (center fuselage, radar), Raytheon Technologies (engine, distributed aper-ture system) and BAE Systems (aft fuselage, electronic warfare suite). It was not immediately clear which customers and variants would be affected by the potential shortfall of 18-24 F-35 deliveries in 2020. The Defense Department is closely watching the F-35, its single-largest production system. So far, senior acquisition officials expect the overall impact of the novel coronavirus on weapon system production to be manageable. But the Pentagon leadership considers the military aircraft industry an exception. Although demand and domestic U.S. military spending remain intact, the military aviation supply chain's links to the collapsing commercial aircraft market is causing delays. “I think [military] aviation has had a more acute sensitivity to supplier disruptions, largely driven by the massive upheaval in the commercial aviation market,” said James Geurts, assistant secretary of the Navy for research, development and acquisition. “Many of the aerospace companies were blended between military and commercial, and with commercial just falling through the floor, their abilities to stay open and keep their workforce has been a little bit more challenged.” Another sector Geurts is watching is the market for command, control, communications and computers and intelligence (C4I). “We're trying to track all of it,” he says. “But the most immediate impact we've seen has been on aviation.” Lockheed's F-35 assembly line in Fort Worth was hit hard by the COVID outbreak in mid-April. One employee, Claude Daniels, died after reporting COVID-19-related symptoms to a supervisor. Another F-35 employee, who survived, broadcast a Facebook Live video from his hospital bed, pleading with his unionized co-workers to sanitize their workspaces even if it is not in their job description. The company's management has said that the F-35 assembly line adopted new protocols in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which included regularly sanitizing equipment and quarantining employees exposed by co-workers or others to the virus. The COVID-19 response is not the only pressure on the F-35's production system. Lockheed exceeded the overall delivery target by three aircraft in 2019, but slower production of the less mature F-35C airframe nearly caused the company to miss the annual goal. To compensate, Lockheed moved up deliveries of four F-35As originally scheduled for 2020 to the end of 2019, allowing the company to beat the delivery target by three aircraft instead of missing it by one. Before the impact of the virus, the F-35's global supply chain was already strained by the three-year production ramp-up from 2017 to 2019. Late part deliveries jumped to 10,000 in 2019 from 2,000 in 2017, according to a May report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO). Monthly parts shortages, meanwhile, leaped to 8,000 in July 2019 from 875 a year before, the GAO says. The shortages represent a fraction of the 300,000 parts in each F-35, but the trend offered a glimpse of the pressure on the supply chain to meet demand during the ramp-up. https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/supply-chain/covid-19-infects-defense-industry-f-35-production-slowdown

• 

  23 octobre 2020 | International, Terrestre

  Elbit, BAE Systems combining forces in US combat vehicle arena

  by Ashley Roque BAE Systems is remaining tight-lipped over whether it will compete in the US Army's revamped M2 Bradley Fighting Vehicle replacement competition, but told Janes a newly forged partnership with Elbit Systems could help it outfit such proposals with added capabilities. On 21 October, the two companies announced that they were teaming up to develop and integrate “advanced operational capabilities” for ground combat vehicles. This partnership could lead to Elbit Systems' crew automation, vehicle protection, and other defensive and offensive systems being included on BAE Systems existing and future combat vehicles. “BAE Systems customers, both domestic and international, are looking to modernise their vehicles and enhance their capabilities,” company spokeswoman Amanda Niswonger wrote in a subsequent email. “Forming this partnership will provide more agility in developing solutions that will meet our customers' requirements and timelines.” Niswonger did not directly address which legacy and future programmes this partnership is geared towards, but said “we are discussing the OMFV [Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle] draft RFP [request for proposal] internally and have yet to determine if it is the right programme for BAE Systems to compete for”. BAE Systems dropped out of the army's previous OMFV prototyping competition in 2019 citing programme “requirements” and the “acquisition schedule”. Since then, the army has scrapped the effort and relaunched a new one with seemingly less stringent requirements, though the service has not yet released the final RFP. https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/elbit-bae-systems-combining-forces-in-us-combat-vehicle-arena

• 

  10 juin 2020 | International, Naval, Sécurité

  White House Orders New Icebreaker Strategy For Coast Guard

  “I certainly hope the Pentagon is not going to come back after studying this again, saying there's no need," for more Arctic infrastructure, said Sen. Dan Sullivan. "The infrastructure is not fine. It doesn't exist. And we need it to exist.” By PAUL MCLEARYon June 09, 2020 at 5:37 PM WASHINGTON: The White House today ordered a major rethink of current plans for a new Coast Guard heavy icebreaker fleet, calling for the ability to launch drones, install intelligence-collection systems, and consider “defensive armament” to “defend against threats by near-peer competitors” and consider the “potential for nuclear-powered propulsion.” The call to consider new designs for at least three ships already slated to be built over the next half-decade is a sure sign of growing concern in Washington over Russian and Chinese advances in putting more heavy, nuclear-powered ships in the water while the US remains stuck with just two 40 year-old operational breakers. The Coast Guard already has plans for three new, non-nuclear icebreakers to be built by 2026, with several medium icebreakers to follow in later years. It's not clear if the White House is asking for a complete redesign of those ships, but the memo clearly indicates a desire to expand their capabilities significantly. The memo gives acting Homeland Security secretary Chad Wolf, in conjunction with the State and Defense departments, just 60 days to come up with a plan to run a study of how to build a new icebreaking fleet that consists of “at least” three heavy polar-class security cutters that are “operationally tested and fully deployable by Fiscal Year 2029.” The ships should be able to perform “the full range of national and economic security missions (including the facilitation of resource exploration and exploitation and undersea cable laying and maintenance),” the memo states, a clear nod to worries that both China and Russia are rushing to secure natural resources long trapped under the polar ice caps. The Pentagon and Navy are slated to take part in the snap 60-day assessment, which includes a demand for recommendations for least two new bases in the US, and at least two new international bases. At least one of those bases would likely be in Alaska, meeting a years-long demand from Alaska Senator Dan Sullivan, who is waiting for the Pentagon to finish a study on a potential strategic port in his state later this summer. Sullivan managed to get language in the 2020 defense authorization bill ordering the Pentagon to study new ports in Alaska, after years of the military saying there was no need. “At long last, the federal government has woken up to the fact that the Arctic is a region of great strategic competition,” the senator said in an emailed statement. “Unfortunately, our adversaries are well ahead of the United States when it comes to Arctic infrastructure.” Noting his efforts to bring the Pentagon's attention to these issues, he added, “this presidential memo will add weight to these efforts and will send a signal to our adversaries and those who are laying claim to the Arctic that the United States will not cede ground in this strategic location.” Pentagon officials have said privately that refurbishing existing ports in Alaska for military use would be expensive, and they're not fully convinced there is a need. Sullivan, aware of those arguments, added, “I certainly hope the Pentagon is not going to come back after studying this again, saying there's no need. The infrastructure is not fine. It doesn't exist. And we need it to exist.” One congressional staffer who is familiar with with the issue said part of the problem Arctic advocates have encountered is that “there is no clear official within the Department of Defense that handles Arctic issues,” and despite some efforts on Capitol Hill to create a new deputy assistant secretary of defense for the Arctic, military leaders see the region as “not as high a priority as some other things — the Department of Defense seems to be one of the last federal agencies in the country to understand the strategic importance and relevance of the Arctic.” While the Coast Guard already has an icebreaker plan in hand, this new White House push might scramble those if the executive branch demands significant changes to the class, the first of which is slated to begin construction in 2021. As Washington ponders the possibility of building nuclear-powered icebreakers, two Russian companies are already at work building the world's most powerful nuclear breaker, the first step in an ambitious new Arctic strategy Moscow hopes will open lucrative new shipping routes in the Arctic. The country currently operates 40 icebreakers along the Northern Sea Route in the high north. Moscow has also unveiled plans to build dozens of non-nuclear new icebreakers in the coming years, including at least 13 heavy icebreakers, nine of which would be nuclear-powered, if plans laid out by Russian President Vladimir Putin hold. For its part, China has already matched the US in the number of icebreakers it has in its fleet, though only one of the two was built domestically. Beijing has expressed a desire to float a nuclear-powered breaker at some point in the future, though plans remain unclear. The first ship, MV Xuelong, was built at a Ukrainian shipyard but has since been upgraded by Chinese shipyards. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/06/white-house-orders-new-icebreaker-strategy-for-coast-guard