26 mai 2022 | International, Aérospatial

Le premier vol du B-21 Raider repoussé en 2023

L'armée de l'Air américaine a annoncé le 20 mai que le premier vol du bombardier stratégique furtif B-21 Raider, développé par Northrop Grumman, est reporté à 2023. L'US Air Force a précisé que ce changement n'impacterait en rien les coûts, prévisions et performances du programme. Ce nouvel avion doit remplacer les bombardiers B-1B et B-2 en service. L'US Air Force prévoit de dépenser près de 20 Md$ pour la production du B-21 Raider au cours du plan de défense des années futures (Future Years Defense Program, FYDP), qui s'étend de l'exercice 2023 à l'exercice 2027, et 12 Md$ supplémentaires pour la recherche et le développement du programme lors de la même période, soit un total de 32 Md$ au cours du FYDP, précise Air Force Magazine.

Air & Cosmos du 24 mai et Air Force Magazine du 21 mai

Sur le même sujet

  • Has the US Navy thought this new frigate through? New report raises questions.

    10 juillet 2018 | International, Naval

    Has the US Navy thought this new frigate through? New report raises questions.

    By: David B. Larter WASHINGTON ― The U.S. Navy is rapidly moving toward procuring the first hull in its new class of frigate in 2020, but a new report is raising questions about whether the Navy has done detailed analysis about what it needs out of the ship before barging ahead. The Navy may not have done an adequate job of analyzing gaps and capabilities shortfalls before it set itself on a fast-track to buying the so-called FFG(X) as an adaptation from a parent design, said influential Navy analyst Ron O'Rourke in a new Congressional Research Service report. In essence, the CRS report questions whether the Navy looked at what capabilities the service already has in the fleet, what capabilities it's missing and whether the FFG(X) is the optimal solution to address any identified shortfalls. O'Rourke suggests Congress push the Navy on “whether procuring a new class of FFGs is the best or most promising general approach for addressing the identified capability gaps and mission needs, and whether the Navy has performed a formal, rigorous analysis of this issue, as opposed to relying solely on subjective judgments of Navy or [Defense Department] leaders.” ““Subjective judgments, though helpful, can overlook counter-intuitive results regarding the best or most promising general approach,” the report reads. “Potential alternative general approaches for addressing identified capability gaps and mission needs in this instance include (to cite a few possibilities) modified LCSs, FFs, destroyers, aircraft, unmanned vehicles, or some combination of these platforms.” The Navy is looking to adapt its FFG(X) from an existing design such as Fincantieri's FREMM, one of the two existing littoral combat ships or the Coast Guard's national security cutter as a means of getting updated capabilities into a small surface combatant and into the fleet quickly. A better approach, O'Rourke suggests, would be to make a formal, rigorous analysis of alternatives to its current course. Failure to do so has led to a series of setbacks with the Navy's current small surface combatant program, the LCS. “The Navy did not perform a formal, rigorous analysis of this kind prior to announcing the start of the LCS program in November 2001, and this can be viewed as a root cause of much of the debate and controversy that attended the LCS program, and of the program's ultimate restructurings in February 2014 and December 2015,” O'Rourke writes. O'Rourke further suggests the Navy is relying too much on subjective opinions of Navy and Defense Department leaders, instead of a legitimate analysis. And indeed, the Navy has made rapid acquisition of the new ship the hallmark of the program. “Subjective judgments can be helpful, particularly in terms of capturing knowledge and experience that is not easily reduced to numbers, in taking advantage of the ‘wisdom of the crowd,‘ and in coming to conclusions and making decisions quickly,” O'Rourke argues. “On the other hand, a process that relies heavily on subjective judgments can be vulnerable to group-think, can overlook counter-intuitive results regarding capability gaps and mission needs, and, depending on the leaders involved, can emphasize those leaders' understanding of the Navy's needs.” Read the full report here. https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2018/07/09/has-the-us-navy-thought-this-new-frigate-through-new-report-raises-questions/

  • The Army AI task force takes on two ‘key’ projects

    12 juin 2020 | International, Sécurité

    The Army AI task force takes on two ‘key’ projects

    Andrew Eversden The Army's artificial intelligence task force is working on two key projects, including one that would allow unmanned vehicles in the air to communicate with autonomous vehicles on the ground, after securing new funding, a service official said June 10. Gen. Mike Murray, commander of Army Futures Command, said during a June 10 webinar hosted by the Association of the United States Army that the task force has moved forward on the projects through its partnership with Carnegie Mellon University, launched in late 2018 . First, the team is working on programs dedicated to unmanned-unmanned teaming, or developing the ability of air and ground unmanned vehicles to talk to one other. The other effort underway is on a DevSecOps environment to develop future algorithms to work with other Army systems, Murray said. He did not offer further detail. The task force force has fewer than 15 people, Murray said, and fiscal 2021 will be the first year that it receives appropriated funds from Congress. Much of the work the task force has done so far as been building the team. In response to an audience question, Murray said that the task force is not yet working on defending against adversarial machine learning, but added that leaders recognize that's an area the team will need to focus on. “We're going to have to work on how do we defend our algorithms and really, how do we defend our training data that we're using for our algorithms," Murray said. In order to train effective artificial intelligence, the team needs significant amounts of data. One of the first projects for the task force was collecting data to develop advanced target recognition capabilities. For example, Murray said, being able to identify different types of combat vehicles. When the work started, the training data for target recognition didn't exist. “If you're training an algorithm to recognize cats, you can get on the internet and pull up hundreds of thousands of pictures of cats,” Murray said. “You can't do that for a T-72 [a Russian tank]. You can get a bunch of pictures, but are they at the right angles, lighting conditions, vehicle sitting camouflaged to vehicle sitting open desert?” Murray also said he recognizes the Army needs to train more soldiers in data science and artificial intelligence. He told reporters in late May that the Army and CMU have created a masters program in data science that will begin in the fall. He also said that the “software factory,” a six- to 12-week course to teach soldiers basic software skills. That factory will be based in Austin, where Futures Command is located, and will work with industry's local tech industry. “We have got to get this talent identified I'm convinced we have it in our formations,” Murray said. https://www.c4isrnet.com/artificial-intelligence/2020/06/10/the-army-ai-task-force-takes-on-two-key-projects/

  • Finland’s Patria weighs making combat vehicles in Ukraine

    5 septembre 2023 | International, Terrestre

    Finland’s Patria weighs making combat vehicles in Ukraine

    Some European companies have their eyes on building a production footprint in Ukraine to equip Kyiv's forces for the long run.

Toutes les nouvelles