Le SIAé livre son premier exemplaire du Dassault ATL2 modernisé au standard 6

Sur le même sujet

• 

  24 avril 2024 | International, Aérospatial

  Airbus says it accepts request by Canadian union for conciliation

• 

  9 septembre 2019 | International, Aérospatial

  Jumping into algorithmic warfare: US Army aviation tightens kill chain with networked architecture

  By: Jen Judson NAVAL AIR WEAPONS STATION CHINA LAKE, Calif. — In the skies above China Lake, California, from the back of an MH-47 Chinook cargo helicopter, an operator with a tablet takes control of a Gray Eagle drone and tasks it with firing a small, precision-glide munition at an enemy target located on the ground. But at the last second, a higher level threat is detected and the munition is rapidly redirected toward a different threat, eliminating it within seconds. This was made possible through the architecture, automation, autonomy and interfaces capability, or A3I, built by the Army's Future Vertical Lift Cross-Functional Team under Army Futures Command. The demonstration showed the ability to nimbly pass control between operators of unmanned systems and munitions through a networked architecture of systems also receiving and filtering real-time, pertinent information to aid in operational decision-making. “It was our first jump into algorithmic warfare,” Brig. Gen. Wally Rugen, who is in charge of the Army's FVL modernization effort, told Defense News following the demonstration. “We definitely didn't jump into the deep end of the pool, but we jumped in and, again, we are into pursuing that as far as we can take it to help soldiers be lethal.” The Aug. 26 demonstration sought to tighten the kill chain and allow for more advanced teaming between air assets and troops on the ground using a resilient network. “When you talk about our kill chain, we are trying to take seconds out of our kill chain,” Rugen said. “We feel like we understand the reverse kill chain — the enemy coming to get us. Our kill chain is going to get them, and we want our decision-making to be as precise and as expeditious as possible,” using automation and autonomy, he added. AI3 was developed over the course of nine months and culminated in the demonstration at China Lake. "Going from a concept, and in a matter of months putting it into an experiment: That was probably the most impressive thing, particularly if you look back at the history of how we do these,” James McPherson, the official performing the duties of the undersecretary of the Army, told Defense News. McPherson attended the demonstration to emphasize the importance to senior Army leadership of modernization efforts within the service. The FVL effort in particular includes ensuring manned, unmanned, munition and other air-launched effects are all seamlessly networked together to fight in advanced formations in a congested environment, such as an urban area, and that they are prepared to fight across multiple domains. Using an interface called Arbitrator, the service networked together a variety of targeting identification and rapid automated processing, exploitation and distribution, or PED, capabilities as well as real-time weather information and several other features and capabilities to help operators of unmanned systems penetrate, in the case of the demonstration, an urban environment. AI3 in action During the demo, one of the systems integrated into the network tied to a ground sensor detected a possible threat on the ground. Seeing the threat detected in the system, a helicopter pilot then gained control of an extended-range Gray Eagle and tasked it to perform reconnaissance of the possible target. Using the UAS, the pilot identified the threat as an enemy surface-to-air missile system. The pilot then ordered the UAS to fire a Dynetics GBU-69 small glide munition to defeat the target, marking the first time the munition had been fired from a Gray Eagle. But as the munition closed in on the target, the system picks up on another threat deemed more important for elimination. The information for this decision came from the integrated PED systems that use machine-learning algorithms to accurately identify items of interest. Another operator then redirected the munition during its final seconds of flight to hit the new, more pressing threat. Why does the Army need A31 capability? To build the system, the government took the lead integration role, Chief Warrant Officer 5 Cory Anderson, the UAS branch chief for Army Special Operations Aviation Command, said at the demonstration. This ensured the service's ability to get the right levels of interoperability between subsystems. But almost all of the capabilities tied into the government's black box came from small businesses and academia. Much of the initial development has come from the special operations side of the house. The demonstration was viewed from a tactical operations center, with screens lining the walls of a large air-conditioned trailer, but the system has a scalable control interface and can be remotely accessed from a cockpit or even a tablet used by a soldier on the ground. This breaks the Army free from having to use a ground control station, Anderson said, meaning the footprint and logistics tail can be drastically reduced. To put together the tactical operations center and ground control station, it took roughly seven C-17 planes to move heavy equipment into China Lake. “We can't sustain that,” Anderson said. “We believe we can get it down to a two C-17 load-out just by minimizing the generational requirements alone.” By integrating PED systems that use machine learning into A3I, the Army no longer requires a large number of people — roughly 30 at a time — to conduct PED from full-motion video. The Arbitrator system allows for operators to pass control of various systems back and forth at different levels of control, from just receiving information from a sensor or UAS to controlling a payload to the entire system. The system is also under development to improve its automation levels. The utility of passing control to a relevant operator not tied to a ground station means taking out the middle man that doesn't have the same advantageous access to the tactical edge another possible operator might have. Rugen said that if there's an operator on the ground close to the action, it's much easier to take control of systems rather than try to direct someone far away to the right location to get eyes on a possible point of interest or target in order to make an actionable decision. “What if the squad leader could just grab the sensor because we have the hierarchy?” Rugen noted. While the capability was developed and demonstrated by the FVL Cross-Functional Team, the system has applications for almost everything on the battlefield, from applications to long-range precision fires targeting capabilities to next-generation combat vehicle teaming to soldier systems. Both directors for the Long-Range Precision Fires and the Network cross-functional teams were present at the demonstration. While the unclassified version of the demo didn't show capability, the classified version addresses the architecture's capability to protect itself against threat-representative electronic attack. “We want to make sure we have a resilient network,” Rugen said. The next step is to move the Arbitrator system onto an airborne platform, which would completely eliminate the ground control station. That will be demonstrated in roughly a year. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2019/09/05/jumping-into-algorithmic-warfare-army-aviation-tightens-kill-chain-with-networked-architecture/

• 

  4 mai 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

  Defense budget brawl looms after pandemic

  BY REBECCA KHEEL - 05/03/20 01:30 PM EDT Defense budget cuts are looming as the coronavirus pandemic places pressure on the federal budget across various agencies. The Pentagon had already been expecting relatively flat budgets for the next few years due to economic constraints caused by the widening deficits in the country. But with the pandemic, the deficit is projected to explode after Congress passed trillions of dollars in coronavirus relief packages, with more aid bills expected. Defense budget analysts are predicting that will mean cuts to defense spending down the line. Meanwhile, Democrats say the crisis should result in a rethinking of national security that gives less money to the Pentagon and more to areas like public health. The chairman of the House Armed Services Committee said this past week it's hard to predict where the defense budget will head after the crisis abates, but suggested the entire federal budget will need to be re-examined. “The economics of this get much more complicated than they were before this, and it's logical to assume that we are going to have to reevaluate our entire budget, both revenue and expenditures,” Chairman Adam Smith (D-Wash.) said on a teleconference in response to a question from The Hill. “Beyond that, it would be pure speculation as to what's gonna happen.” Smith, a long time opponent of the nuclear budget, specifically highlighted nuclear modernization as an area for potential cuts, but said defense portfolios are “all on the table to figure out how to spend the money more wisely.” In the meantime, defense hawks, progressives and deficit hawks alike are honing their arguments as they brace for defense cuts. The defense budget battles are already starting to play out as Congress debates further coronavirus relief bills. The Pentagon has said it expects to request “billions” of dollars in the next bill to help contractors hit by the virus. That funding would follow the $10.5 billion the Pentagon got in the third coronavirus stimulus package for the Defense Production Act, defense health programs, and military deployments related to the crisis and other areas. Smith, though, said this past week he would not support more Pentagon funding in further coronavirus bills, saying the department can find unused funding in its existing $738 billion-plus budget. Smith's comments came about a week after dozens of progressive organizations led by Win Without War argued in a letter to Congress that “any arguments that the Pentagon cannot use existing resources to respond to the crisis should be met with considerable skepticism.” But the Pentagon maintained after Smith's comments it cannot dip into its existing budget for coronavirus relief. Ellen Lord, the Pentagon's top weapons buyer, said the department may be able to use some operations and maintenance funds for coronavirus needs, but added money still has to be available for “pretty significant needs” in readiness and modernization. “I am not sure that we have the fiscal flexibility to encompass all of the new demands we have and the inefficiencies that we are seeing and perhaps may see in the future,” Lord said at a briefing. “But I respect what Chairman Smith is saying, and we will obviously do our best.” Looking further ahead, Pentagon officials have indicated they are preparing to tighten their belts at the other end of the crisis. In a webinar with the Brookings Institution this past week, Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy recalled “compressed budgets” in the wake of recovery bills for the 2008 financial crisis, culminating in the 2011 Budget Control Act that Pentagon officials now blame for readiness shortfalls. The law set budget caps that resulted in sequestration, continuing resolutions or government shutdowns in several years. “These are challenges we're thinking about now as we look at the [Future Years Defense Program] and whether or not this will pressurize Army budgets in the [fiscal year] 23, 24 timeframe, which are very critical to us and our modernization efforts and increasing our talent management within the force," he said. “We are watching that very closely, and we know that is a challenge that is out in front of us.” Late last month, the Congressional Budget Office projected that Congress' rescue and stimulus efforts will cause the federal deficit to quadruple to $3.7 trillion, the largest by far in U.S. history. Defense budget experts say the ballooning deficit likely spells defense cuts in the future, citing trends after previous rising deficits and economic downturns such after the 2008 financial crisis. “What has historically happened is, when Congress and fiscal conservatives come out and get serious about reducing the debt and reducing spending, defense is almost always part of what they come up with for a solution,” Todd Harrison, director of defense budget analysis at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said in a webinar. “So, we could be looking at a deficit-driven defense drawdown coming in the next two or three years. At least history would suggest that that is a real possibility.” In the same webinar, American Enterprise Institute resident fellow Mackenzie Eaglen predicted the “budget comes down sooner rather than later.” “There probably will be a total relook even at the [National Defense Strategy] fundamentals and what mission is going to have to go in response to this,” she added. But defense hawks are arguing the Pentagon should not be used to pay other bills,, saying the country still faces threats from Russia and China. Fred Bartels, a senior policy analyst for defense budgeting at the conservative Heritage Foundation, said the defense budget needs to match the National Defense Strategy, which has not changed despite the pandemic. The strategy calls for the military to be ready for so-called great power competition with China and Russia. “What you're going to have is likely empty promises, and that's the worst possible outcome for the military,” Bartels said of a budget cut without a strategy change. “If your national strategy tells the world that you're going to do that but you don't follow through, it's going to be harder and harder to operate.” But the pandemic has intensified calls from progressive lawmakers to rethink what constitutes national security. Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) told The Hill the crisis shows the definition of national security needs be expanded. “Lawmakers must view issues like climate change, biosecurity, cybersecurity and this pandemic as serious and real national security threats facing our nation,” Khanna said in a statement to The Hill. “For too long, we were myopically focused and spending trillions on traditional national security issues like terrorism and ‘great power' politics. These new threats impact our health, safety, and economy, requiring new funds to address them.” https://thehill.com/policy/defense/495762-defense-budget-brawl-looms-after-pandemic