13 novembre 2019 | International, Aérospatial

Leonardo invests in ‘fully electric’ Skydweller drone

By: Tom Kington

ROME — Leonardo will be the leading investor in a new solar-powered drone capable of carrying an 800-pound payload and which will fly for the first time in 2021, the Italian defense company said Monday.

The Skydweller drone, initially developed by an American-Spanish startup involving Northrop Grumman experts, will be “the world's first fully electric unmanned aircraft capable of carrying large payloads with unlimited range and ultra-persistent endurance,” the firm said.

Skydweller will also be free from the U.S. International Traffic in Arms Regulations, with Leonardo acting as the “main industrial partner,” a spokesman said, as well as prime contractor for sales to Italy, the U.K., Poland and NATO. The system will comply with European export laws and will not be subject to ITAR, allowing “the aircraft to satisfy government and commercial needs around the world,” Leonardo said.

Skydweller is based on the Solar Impulse 2, a solar-powered aircraft developed by Swiss engineers that flew around the world in 17 flights during 2015 and 2016.

Developers see the Skydweller as pushing the limits for payloads for solar flight, while operating at medium altitudes — lower than the high altitudes for which such aircraft have usually been designed, and allowing onboard sensors and transmitters to operate at closer range to the ground.

Aimed at civil and military customers, the drone is expected to offer surveillance, communications and navigation capabilities, and be interoperable with existing air bases.

Development and construction of the new aircraft is to take place in Spain's Castilla-La Mancha region. Leonardo plans to create a dedicated engineering team following its entry into the program as an investor, the firm said.

The first phase of the program will involve converting the manned Solar Impulse 2 into an optionally piloted vehicle with autonomous flights planned for next year.

https://www.defensenews.com/unmanned/2019/11/12/leonardo-invests-in-fully-electric-skydweller-drone/

Sur le même sujet

  • Bradley Replacement: Army Risks Third Failure In A Row

    8 octobre 2019 | International, Terrestre

    Bradley Replacement: Army Risks Third Failure In A Row

    With the surprise disqualification of the Raytheon-Rheinmetall Lynx, the Army has effectively left itself with one competitor for the Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle, General Dynamics -- unless the Pentagon or Congress intervene. By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR. WASHINGTON: Experts fear the Army has undermined a top priority program, the Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle, by disqualifying one of the only two remaining competitors for not delivering its prototype on time. “I cannot believe that is the reason,” said a baffled Thomas Spoehr, a retired three-star who headed the Army's program analysis & evaluation office. There must be, he told me this morning, some more profound problem driving this decision: “Nobody wants to have this major program go forward with only one competitor.” The news was broken by our colleague Jen Judson on Friday and confirmed to us by several sources. The Army declined official comment. Manufacturer Rheinmetall could not physically ship their Lynx-41 prototype from Germany to the US — which is strange, since they've managed to do so before — by the October first deadline. While some Army officials were willing to offer them an extension, the recently created Army Futures Command refused. That leaves General Dynamics, offering an all-new design we describe below, as the sole competitor for the Engineering & Manufacturing Design (EMD) contract to be awarded early next year. A crucial caveat: Winning EMD does not guarantee General Dynamics will win the production contract, which will be awarded in 2023 in a competition open to all comers. But any 2023 contender would have to refine their design at their own expense, without the constant feedback from the Army that comes with being on the EMD contract. That's a hard risk for a board to justify, given GD's advantage. And without a second competitor, all the Army's eggs are in the basket of GD succeeding, with no backup. “I strongly suspect that [General Dynamics] has done a great job of tailoring a solution, developed over time through successes in other programs, for exactly what the US Army wants,” as expressed in roughly 100 detailed and rigid requirements, said George Mason scholar Jim Hasik. But, he said, that doesn't mean what the Army thinks it wants is the right solution, or that GD will deliver on budget and schedule. “I would prefer that two or three contractors were proceeding to some trials of truth at Aberdeen in some months,” Hasik told me. “I do not single out GDLS; I just expect lower likelihood of success in non-competitive contracting. Any given bid may have problems of which even the bidder does not know.” The timing of this news is particularly painful for the Army, because thousands of soldiers, contractors, and media will be heading to Washington for next-week's huge Association of the US Army conference. One of the highlights of last year's show was the Lynx prototype. Why? Disqualifying the Lynx doesn't make sense, said Spoehr, who as head of national defense studies at the Heritage Foundation has long urged the Army to replace its M2 Bradley troop carrier and other 1980s-vintage armored vehicle designs. “I have to believe the Army will take another look at this situation,” Spoehr said. Or, maybe not. The decision to disqualify the Rheinmetall-Raytheon team for missing the deadline is arguably, “the correct one when you consider schedule is the priority,” an industry source told me. But maybe schedule shouldn't be the priority, the source went on, because the current timeline — fielding the first combat-ready unit by 2026 — doesn't permit much innovation. “The vehicle they are asking for will not be significantly better than the current Bradley.” (General Dynamics disputes this hotly, not surprisingly, as we detail later in this story). “I think the Army is pretty short-sighted,” the industry source said. “Personally, I don't see how the program survives in future budgets.” Even before this news broke, skeptical Senate appropriators had already cut funding for Army Next Generation Combat Vehicles in their draft of the defense spending bill, although the House has not. But with the Hill so roiled by impeachment that it's unclear legislators will even be able to pass the annual defense bills — which were already headed for closed-door conferences in any case — we've not been able to get any but the most noncommittal comment from Congress. We'll update this story or write a sequel when we hear from the Hill. The underlying anxiety here is that the Army has tried and failed repeatedly to modernize its Reagan-era arsenal over the past 30 years — the problem Army Futures Command was created to fix. Armored fighting vehicle programs, above all replacements for the Bradley troop carrier, have been particularly fraught. The Future Combat Systems family of vehicles, which included a lightweight Bradley replacement, was canceled in 2009, while the Ground Combat Vehicle, a better-armored and correspondingly heavier Bradley replacement, was cancelled in 2014. The Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle is the Army's third swing at this ball. That puts tremendous pressure on Army Futures Command and General Dynamics to deliver. Their balancing act is to make something different and better enough it's worth replacing the Bradley instead of just upgrading it again, without taking on so much new technology that the program risks major delays and overruns. The Army's modernization director for Next Generation Combat Vehicles, Brig. Gen. Richard Ross Coffman, spoke to me Friday just before the news broke about Rheinmetall. While he didn't speak to the number of competitors, he did emphasize that a company that doesn't win an Engineering & Manufacturing Design contract can still compete for Low-Rate Initial Production. “The LRIP award is FY23,” Coffman said. “That's a free and open competition. So let's say you didn't have the time or didn't feel you had the money ... to compete starting on 1 October, you can further mature your product, you can test that product, and then enter back in to the competition in '23.” We Have A Winner (By Default)? Assuming General Dynamics does win the production contract in 2023, what will their vehicle look like? It will not resemble the Griffin III concept vehicle that vied with the Lynx on the floor of last year's Association of the US Army mega-conference, company officials told me. In fact, they said, the GD OMFV shares no major components with the ASCOD/Ajax lineage of combat vehicles, widely used in Europe, on whose proven chassis and automotive systems GD build its Griffin series, including its offering for the Army's Mobile Protected Firepower light tank. “The suspension is a totally new design. The engine and transmission are totally different. Drive train is different. Exhaust placement is different,” Keith Barclay, director of global strategy for General Dynamics Land Systems, said in an interview. (The core of the engine is the same as MPF, but not the configuration, cooling, or transmission). That's remarkable because Army leaders had said they were willing to go with a proven, pre-existing chassis to reduce risk, as long as the weapons and electronics were cutting-edge. As with many weapons programs, the Army plans to field OMFV in successively more advanced increments: Increment 1 will only have to meet minimum or “threshold” requirements, while Increment 2 will go after higher “objective” requirements. “One of the problems we had with previous ground vehicle programs was we always tried to reach for technology that wasn't mature,” Coffman told me. “Now we've set the objective to those technologies that are on the cusp of maturation, so that if it does mature ... we can achieve[it] in Increment 2.” Barclay and other GD execs told me this morning that the prototype they just delivered to the Army already meets some of the objective requirements for Increment 2, particularly for the gun and fire control. (They declined to offer more specifics). Meeting those requirements was what drove the all-new design. “It had to be designed from the inside out,” Barclay told me. “Modifying an existing platform would not work.” That said, Barclay went on, this is not new unproven tech. “These are very high Technological Readiness Level (TRL) components that have been through quite a bit of testing, and we've just packaged them and designed them... into a new configuration.” (Of course, “quite a bit of testing” isn't the same as actually being deployed on hundreds of vehicles in Spanish, Austrian, and — soon — British service, as was the case for many of the Griffin's components). While the GD OMFV's components aren't the same as those on the ASCOD/Ajax/Griffin series, they do build on that experience, Barclay said, as well as on decades of General Dynamics R&D for the cancelled FCS and GCV programs. What's New? So what are the innovations in the GD OMFV that make it a significant improvement over an upgraded Bradley? Most visible from the outside is the weapon, the one component the OMFV shares with the Griffin III prototype at AUSA last year. It's a new 50mm quick-firing cannon, largely developed by the Army's Armaments Center, which is many times more powerful than the 25mm on the Bradley or the 30mm weapons on many Russian vehicles. Whereas the Bradley gunner and commander sit in the turret, the OMFV's turret is unmanned, remote-controlled from a well-protected and well-connected crew compartment in the hull. In fact, from the crew's perspective inside the vehicle, the most visible difference will probably be how much better their visibility is. Traditional armored vehicles rely on narrow viewports and periscopic sights, making them half-blind behemoths on the battlefield. But massive investments by the automotive industry — from backup cameras to self-driving cars — have driven down the cost and size of sensors. GD boasts their OMFV design offers “360 degree situational awareness” from cameras all around the vehicle. The sensor feeds are visible from screens at not only the crew stations but in the passenger area, so the infantry can know what kind of situation they may have to clamber out into. Currently, the vehicle is configured for three crew and five infantry soldiers, the same as the Bradley and the Army's minimum requirement for OMFV. (The seats are designed to buffer blasts from mines and roadside bombs). But all eight seats are together in the hull, rather than having some in the turret, and each crew station can control any function, rather than each being specially hard-wired for the commander, gunner, and driver respectively. So GD expects that, as automation technology improves, it'll be possible to go down to just two crewmembers, freeing up a seat for a sixth passenger. That ability to upgrade electronics is perhaps the single most important, if subtle, improvement over the Bradley. Designed in the 1970s and repeatedly upgraded since, the Bradley has repeatedly run into the limits of its electrical system. Troops in Iraq often had to turn equipment on and off because they couldn't run all of it at once. The Army is now increasing the Bradley's power, and they're even retrofitting it with an Active Protection System that uses electricity-hungry radars to detect and shoot down incoming anti-tank missiles. But the OMFV will have Active Protection as standard equipment, rather than tacked on. And the all-new design lets GD build in the power, wiring, and — most crucial — the standardized interfaces (aka a Modular Open Systems Architecture) to make future electronic upgrades much easier, from anti-missile jammers to reconnaissance mini-drones to AI-assisted targeting systems. “We have looked to the future about what power requirements will be,” Barclay told me. Their vehicle, he said, has “electrical power, both high voltage and low voltage, that will allow myriad capabilities that you could not put onto an existing combat vehicle today in the Army's inventory.” https://breakingdefense.com/2019/10/bradley-replacement-army-risks-third-failure-in-a-row

  • Congress injects millions of dollars to advance next-gen combat vehicle technology

    26 décembre 2019 | International, Terrestre

    Congress injects millions of dollars to advance next-gen combat vehicle technology

    By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — While essentially killing the U.S. Army's plan to competitively acquire a replacement for the Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle, Congress in its fiscal 2020 defense spending package is injecting more than $100 million to fund the advancement of next-generation combat vehicle technology and is allocated another couple hundred million dollars for technology that will benefit related efforts. The second top modernization priority is the Army's next-generation combat vehicle, and the service's first major move toward modernizing its combat vehicle fleet was to replace the Bradley. But that hasn't gone according to plan after the Army received only one bid from General Dynamics Land Systems in its optionally manned fighting vehicle, or OMFV, competition to replace the Bradley in October. While the Army hasn't said how it plans to proceed, Congress cut $172.8 million from the service's budget request for OMFV, making it appear impossible to fund a competitive prototyping effort. While the Army considers its next steps to replace the Bradley fleet, it's not stopping other technology development efforts to improve its current and future combat vehicle fleets. And congressional appropriators are adding $145 million into next-generation combat vehicle technology development funds on top of the Army's request for $379 million. Under NGCV technology development, Congress is peppering funding into prototyping energy-smart autonomous ground systems, highly electrified vehicles and autonomous vehicle mobility accounts. More funding is being applied to additive metals, manufacturing, structural thermoplastics and advanced materials development to make vehicles more survivable on the the battlefield. Additional funding is included for protection from rocket-propelled grenades and improvised explosive devices, and money will go toward modeling and simulation efforts. Under advanced technology development for NGCV, Congress is adding funding for additive manufacturing to include using it to develop jointless hull technology, hydrogen fuel cells and an ATE5.2 engine. The Army will also get more money to develop carbon fiber and graphite foam technology as well as advanced high strength and lightweight steels. The service will also fund combat-vehicle weight-reduction efforts, additive manufacturing of critical components and advanced water-harvesting technology. Congressional appropriators also added funding for Humvee technology development to include augmented reality systems, a health usage monitoring system, autonomy, torque monitoring and automotive enhancements. More funding was added for NGCV virtual and physical prototyping, too. While not specifically allocated toward NGCV technology development, Congress also has added $246.4 million in ground technology development funding that could apply to future vehicles. That funding includes more work on additive manufacturing to include cold spray technology, materials research including polymers for lightweight armor, protection against the elements and threats, and alternative power development. More plus-ups include funding for sensors for underground detection and also urban subterranean mapping technology as well as unmanned aircraft system-mounted hostile threat detection. While the Army's plan to field a Bradley replacement may be in flux, the service is also looking further into the future at what could ultimately replace its M1 Abrams tank, for example. The technology development work being done within the service now will help paint a picture of what that future vehicle could look like as well as replacements for other combat vehicles in the fleet. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2019/12/23/congress-injects-millions-to-advance-next-gen-combat-vehicle-technology/

  • New Production Contracts for UH-60s, HH-60s, and P-8s

    13 mars 2020 | International, Aérospatial

    New Production Contracts for UH-60s, HH-60s, and P-8s

    by David Donald Sikorsky Aircraft received a contract modification on March 10 worth $525.3 million for 40 UH-60M Black Hawks. The batch comprises 38 being procured for the U.S. Army as Lot 44 of the service's MY IX multi-year procurement program. The other two represent the exercising of an option for two Foreign Military Sales aircraft for an unidentified customer. Managed by the Army Contracting Command at Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, the work is due to be performed by the Lockheed Martin-owned company by the end of June 2022. The five-year MY IX program, the ninth such order covering H-60 helicopters for the Army, was awarded to Sikorsky in June 2017. Specifying 257 UH-60 medium-lift helicopters and HH-60M medevac versions, the initial deal was worth $3.8 billion, with options for up to 103 additional helicopters that would ultimately bring the value to $5.2 billion. At the end of February, the H-60 production line received another boost when the Department of Defense ordered 12 more HH-60W combat rescue helicopters for the U.S. Air Force. The Lot 2 batch is the second low-rate initial production tranche to be ordered, with a value of more than $500 million. The program of record covers 113 HH-60Ws to replace the aging HH-60G Pave Hawk. Initially known as the “Rescue Hawk,” the HH-60W has now received its official Air Force name of Jolly Green II. Secretary of the Air Force Barbara Barrett announced the name at the Air Force Association (AFA) Air Warfare Symposium held in Orlando in late February. At the time of the order, Sikorsky had flown seven HH-60Ws, of which two are with the Air Force trials unit at Duke Field, Eglin AFB, Florida. The initial goal is to meet Required Assets Available (RAA) criteria by the end of 2020. In another DOD deal, announced on March 6, Boeing was awarded an $800 million contract by Naval Air Systems Command to procure long-lead materials associated with Lot 11 production of P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft. This batch comprises 18 aircraft, of which eight are for the U.S. Navy. The remainder comprises six aircraft for the Republic of Korea Navy (ROKN) and four for the Royal New Zealand Air Force (RNZAF). South Korea decided in June 2018 to order six Poseidons as a replacement for the Lockheed P-3CK Orions that serve with the ROKN's 615 Squadron at Jeju air base, while New Zealand announced its intention to buy the P-8 in the following month. In RNZAF service the P-8 is expected to serve with No. 5 Squadron at Whenuapai, which currently flies P-3K Orions. Both nations placed their orders for P-8As in March 2019. https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2020-03-12/new-production-contracts-uh-60s-hh-60s-and-p-8s

Toutes les nouvelles