25 septembre 2024 | International, C4ISR, Sécurité
CISA Flags Critical Ivanti vTM Vulnerability Amid Active Exploitation Concerns
CISA adds Ivanti vTM flaw CVE-2024-7593 to Known Exploited Vulnerabilities list, urging swift remediation.
16 mai 2018 | International, Aérospatial
Le ministère de la Défense a réservé un accueil assez froid, voire distant, à la proposition de «partenariat approfondi et structurant» fondé sur l'avion de combat Rafale réitérée par la France à la Belgique.
Une délégation de membres du cabinet de la ministre française des Armées, Florence Parly, a eu l'occasion, pour la première fois en huit mois, de venir détailler auprès de ses homologues belges, l «offre française» de partenariat «approfondi et structurant» fondé sur l'avion de combat Rafale – hors de l'appel d'offres officiel lancé en mars 2017 pour l'achat de 34 chasseurs-bombardiers de nouvelle génération.
Cette rencontre a eu lieu «à la demande du Premier ministre» Charles Michel, qui souhaite disposer de tous les éléments nécessaires à une prochaine décision du gouvernement belge, a-t-on indiqué de sources gouvernementales.
Mais «on n'a rien entendu de nouveau par rapport à la lettre reçue (de Mme Parly, NDLR) le 6 septembre 2017. Il n'y a rien de plus concret», a expliqué la porte-parole du ministre belge de la Défense, Steven Vandeput, Laurence Mortier.
L'entourage de M. Vandeput (N-VA) a confirmé à l'agence Belga être intéressé par une éventuelle participation au programme de Système de combat aérien du futur (Scaf) européen, actuellement négocié entre la France et l'Allemagne, tout en étant ouvert à d'autres partenaires.
Sur base de l'analyse des deux offres considérées comme juridiquement valables après réponse à l'appel d'offres (en jargon, un «Request for Government Proposal» ou RfGP) lancé en mars 2017, et de la – très vague – offre française, l'équipe de programme doit faire une recommandation au ministre de la Défense. Les deux candidats qui ont remis des offres en bonne et due forme sont les États-Unis avec le F-35 Lightning II du groupe Lockheed Martin et l'Eurofighter Typhoon du consortium européen éponyme.
Le dossier complet, avec les aspects économiques, sera ensuite soumis au gouvernement fédéral.
La Défense espère toujours une décision finale avant le sommet de l'OTAN des 11 et 12 juillet prochains, pour permettre à la Belgique d'y faire – relativement – bonne figure en dépit de ses faibles dépenses en matière de défense.
25 septembre 2024 | International, C4ISR, Sécurité
CISA adds Ivanti vTM flaw CVE-2024-7593 to Known Exploited Vulnerabilities list, urging swift remediation.
29 juillet 2019 | International, Aérospatial
By Steve Trimble Beyond seven acknowledged projects aimed at developing long-range, maneuvering missiles with a top speed over Mach 5, the U.S. Defense Department is working in classified secrecy on at least two more hypersonic weapon programs, industry officials say. The mystery of the classified projects—including such details as their development or operational status and any gaps each fills in the Pentagon's unfolding hypersonic weapons architecture—remains unsolved. But a new clue embedded in the LinkedIn profile of a senior Defense Department hypersonic weapons expert may point to the answers. Seven U.S. hypersonic projects cover air-, land- and sea-based weapons Pentagon expert's online profile points to existence of two more programs Greg Sullivan, a well-regarded expert in the high-speed flight community, describes himself on the professional social media platform as an on-site supporter of air-breathing hypersonic weapons to the department's research and engineering arm. Sullivan's profile also cites his knowledge of “additional hypersonic programs,” which include a nearly comprehensive list of the Pentagon's acknowledged projects. Intriguingly, his original list also included two additional acronyms representing hypersonic programs: “HACM” and “HCCW.” Shortly after Aviation Week inquired to the Air Force Public Affairs office for details about HACM and HCCW, both acronyms were deleted from the LinkedIn page. The Air Force does not acknowledge the existence of any program named HACM or HCCW, and no reference to either acronym appears in the military's public documents, such as budget materials and press releases. Two sources say they have heard vague references to the existence of a hypersonic program called HACM, but had no details, including what the acronym means. The HCCW program was not known to any sources or analysts contacted by Aviation Week. The expert hypersonic community is an unusually tight-knit group, reflecting the technology's mostly experimental status for decades, until its recent rise as one of the Pentagon's top acquisition priorities. The existence of two new acronyms has prompted several speculative guesses. Richard Hallion, a former Air Force chief historian who specializes in the history of hypersonic technology, noted that the acronym HACM could be interpreted broadly to cover almost any type of hypersonic weapon, including scramjet-powered cruise missiles or air-launched boost-glide systems. “Well, the H is obviously [for] hypersonic,” says Hallion. “The rest suggests a mix of ‘A' for ‘Advanced' or ‘Air-Breathing' or ‘Air-Launched.' ‘C' for ‘Conventional' or ‘Capability' or ‘Concept,' [and] ‘M' for ‘Missile.'” The meaning of the HCCW acronym proves even more elusive. For Justin Bronk, a research fellow specializing in airpower at the Royal United Services Institute, one speculative interpretation conforms to his analytical view of a gap in the U.S. military's weapons arsenal. If the acronym stands for “Hypersonic Counter-Cruise Weapon,” Bronk says, HCCW could be a valuable interceptor specifically tailored against high-speed, air-breathing cruise missiles. Although the exact role and status of HACM and HCCW are unknown, industry officials have repeatedly said that at least two additional classified programs exist beyond the Defense Department's seven acknowledged programs. The public list leaves little room for gaps to be filled by new weapons, as they already span air-, land- and sea-launched options and include two different types of boost-glide systems—winged and biconic—and a scramjet-powered cruise missile. The plethora of planned hypersonic options are intended to serve tactical and strategic goals. On the tactical level, the Pentagon's war planners will gain a new option for striking mobile missile launchers and countering long-range attacks on the Navy's surface fleet by an adversary with hypersonic anti-ship missiles. The future U.S. inventory of hypersonic missiles also is intended to serve as a deterrent option short of a nuclear response, as adversaries such as China and Russia stock their arsenals with a range of new hypersonic weapons. The Air Force alone accounts for two of the acknowledged hypersonic weapon programs: a boost-glide system with a winged glide vehicle called the Air-launched Rapid Response Weapon (ARRW). Another called the Hypersonic Conventional Strike Weapon (HCSW) relies on a less-risky biconic glide vehicle. The ARRW, also known as the Lockheed Martin AGM-183A, is based on the Tactical Boost Glide (TBG) program, a risk-reduction effort funded by DARPA. The same winged glide vehicle also is being adapted for ground launch under DARPA's Operational Fires (OpFires) program. Raytheon says it is developing a more advanced winged glider under the TBG program, which could be fielded as a second-generation version of ARRW. HCSW, meanwhile, is the air-launched version of a biconic-shaped glider originally designed by Sandia National Laboratories. The Navy and Army are adapting the same original design for the sea-launched Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) system and the Army's ground-launched Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW). Finally, Raytheon and Lockheed are each designing different scramjet-powered missiles under DARPA's Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapon Concept (HAWC) program. Weaponized versions of HAWC are under study by the Air Force and Navy for air and sea launch. One possible gap in the weapons portfolio is the apparent lack of an operational follow-on program for HAWC, even though Air Force officials say the program is slightly ahead of DARPA's TBG program. The TBG demonstrator is intended to reduce risk for the operational ARRW system, but no such operational follow-on exists publicly for HAWC. Tom Bussing, vice president of advanced missile systems for Raytheon, acknowledged two hypersonic programs exist that he cannot speak about. “There are probably six different types of hypersonic programs that we have,” Bussing said in a recent interview. “Some are classified, so I can't speak [about] them because we are not at liberty to announce them.” But he named Raytheon's role in four hypersonic programs: TBG, HAWC, CPS and LRHW. DARPA has announced Raytheon's involvement as one of two weapon designers for TBG and HAWC, but neither the Navy nor the Army has explained Raytheon's role in CPS and LRHW. The Air Force has announced that Lockheed is the weapon system integrator for the HCSW variant, but no such role has been announced for the Army and Navy versions of the common glide vehicle. So far, Bussing can only acknowledge that Sandia remains the designer of the biconic glider for HCSW, CPS and LRHW. “That technology has been transitioned over to the CPS program and also to the Army's Long Range Hypersonic Weapon program,” Bussing said. “So we're involved in both, and we're working directly with Sandia.” The Defense Department has inserted $10.5 billion into a five-year budget plan released in March to develop and field the long list of offensive and defensive hypersonic weapon systems. But a detailed check of the budgets for unclassified programs reveals a significant surplus, which could be used to fund classified projects. The combined budget accounts for ARRW, HCSW, CPS and LRHW amount to $7.7 billion over the next five years. The Missile Defense Agency's $700 million planned investment in counter-hypersonics raises the five-year spending total to $8.36 billion. DARPA does not release a five-year budget, but proposed to spend $222 million in fiscal 2020 on TBG, HAWC and OpFires. That still leaves an unexplained gap of about $2.5 billion in planned spending by the Defense Department on hypersonic weapons over the next five years. https://aviationweek.com/missile-defense/clues-emerge-search-pentagon-s-classified-hypersonic-programs
11 juin 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité
By: Joe Gould WASHINGTON ― The Pentagon is facing billions of dollars in pandemic-related claims, which may force it to dip into modernization and readiness accounts if Congress doesn't backfill the money, the department's top acquisitions official said Wednesday. Testifying at the House Armed Services Committee, Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment Ellen Lord reaffirmed the Pentagon's commitment to request supplemental appropriations from Congress, beyond its fiscal 2021 budget of $740 billion. It's been seven weeks since Department of Defense officials first publicly disclosed a request was coming; that request is currently sitting with the White House Office of Management and Budget. The defense industry claims are expected to be covered by Section 3610 of the coronavirus relief package, among other provisions, Lord said. To give an idea of the scope, one of the major prime contractors told the DoD it and its suppliers could claim as much as $1 billion. Under Section 3610, the Pentagon and other agencies can reimburse suppliers for expenses to keep workers employed. Under other provisions, contractors can seek reimbursement for leave and DoD-directed purchases of personal protective equipment, cleaning, and costs associated with spacing out workers in factories. “The department does not have the funding to cover these costs,” Lord said, which she later said were “in the lower end” of “double-digit billions of dollars.” Lord affirmed the Defense Department would need Congress to pass supplemental appropriations beyond its fiscal 2021 budget during an exchange with HASC ranking member Mac Thornberry, R-Texas. “Otherwise these contractors are going to have to eat several billion dollars, which could well come at their employees' expense, which this was supposed to help to begin with,” Thornberry noted. “There's a choice there,” Lord said. “Whether we want to eat into readiness and modernization ― and slow down modernization or readiness on an ongoing basis ― or whether we want to remedy the situation in the next six months or so ... and continue to have the ready forces we need for our national security.” Though some House Democrats have expressed reservations about the size of the Pentagon's budget request, HASC Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee Chairman Joe Courtney, D-Conn., expressed support, saying: "The intent of Congress needs to be followed up on with an appropriation.” Courtney called on the DoD to provide Congress the data underlying its request, when the request actually arrives on Capitol Hill, saying it would foster conversation among lawmakers. The Pentagon has rough calculations, but contractors have not yet filed claims, Lord said, because Congress has not drafted an appropriations bill. She speculated the full extent of the issues will emerge over time. “I believe they are concerned that they'll get a one-time shot and want to make sure what the entire situation is,” she said. “We believe we understand the lower end of the number.” https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/06/10/defense-industrys-covid-costs-could-tank-dod-modernization-plans/