NATO official warns EU force would be ‘unwise’

Sur le même sujet

• 

  14 avril 2022 | International, Aérospatial

  Emissions monitoring campaign kicks off over the Baltic Sea using specially equipped drones

  The European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) is a European Union agency charged with reducing the risk of maritime accidents, marine pollution from ships and the loss of human lives at sea by helping to enforce the pertinent EU legislation. It is headquartered in Lisbon.

• 

  28 avril 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR

  Army Rebuilds Artillery Arm For Large-Scale War

  The service's new AimPoint plan builds very different forces for Europe and the Pacific – but new high-level artillery HQs are central to both. By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR WASHINGTON: Call it the once and future king of battle. The Army's artillery branch, neglected over 20 years of hunting guerrillas, is being revived as the long-range striking arm for multi-domain warfare against Russia and China. That will affect everything from what missiles the service buys, to which officers get promoted, to how the service organizes itself for battle – a force structure outlined in a new Army Futures Command study called AimPoint. The biggest change? Having already created two experimental Multi-Domain Task Forces built around artillery brigades, the Army now plans to build new high-level headquarters called Theater Fires Commands to coordinate long-range missile warfare on a continent-wide scale. “That is a direct output of AimPoint,” said Lt. Gen. Eric Wesley, whose Futures & Concepts Center developed the force structure plan. While the Theater Fires Commands do not exist yet, he said, the service has already begun setting aside manpower in its Total Army Analysis process to staff them. In AimPoint's vision of the future, “the brigades largely look very similar to what you might see right now... except for your [increased] ability to connect to national assets” in space and cyberspace, Lt. Gen. Wesley told reporters last week in a wide-ranging discussion. (Read more here). The big changes, he said, will come at higher levels – division, corps, and theater command – that have largely played a supporting role in highly localized counterinsurgency operations, but which must take the lead in coordinating large-scale campaigns against well-armed nation-states. “If you look at echelons above brigade, what we're having to do is build out our capacity to fight large-scale, campaign-quality combat,” he said. “Those echelons we have mortgaged a bit in the last 20 or 30 years because our BCTs [Brigade Combat Teams] were so powerful relative to our opponent. [Today], because we are being contested in all domains and our two peer competitors are investing in their militaries, we have to build back some of that campaign quality at echelon, with the distinction being you've got to have information warfare, you've got to have cyber, you've got to have space access.” Once the shooting starts, however – and even before, when you're trying to deter the other side from shooting at all – you still need old-fashioned firepower, with a 21st century twist. Artillery has been a US Army strength since World War II, when its ability to quickly coordinate far-flung howitzer batteries to pour overwhelming fire on a chosen target was one of the few things the German Wehrmacht feared. But back then, and even throughout the Cold War, the limits of radio networks, artillery range and precision targeting meant artillery could only be decisive on the tactical level, supporting the face-to-face battle of infantry and tanks. Today, however, the precision-guided missiles that the US, Russia, and China are developing have such long ranges – hundreds or thousands of miles – that you need satellites to spot suitable targets and send back targeting data, plus superior cyber warriors to protect that communications network from hostile hackers. Bringing all those technologies together in the right organization with well-trained personnel, and artillery can make a decisive impact on theater-wide operations or even the strategic level. Dead Branch Resurrecting? But there's a problem. Over the three decades between the end of the Cold War and the reawakening to Russian and Chinese threats, the Army neglected its artillery branch. In 2002, the Army actually disbanded the artillery brigades in its divisions and dispersed their component battalions across its armor and infantry brigades. Then, in Afghanistan and Iraq, US firepower was so overwhelmingly superior, and air support was so readily available for even small patrols, that artillery troops rarely got to fire their guns, even in training, and were routinely retasked for other duties. By 2008, three artillery colonels co-wrote a paper that called their arm of service a “dead branch walking.” Meanwhile, Russian and Chinese howitzers, rocket launchers and surface-to-surface missiles came to not only outnumber but also outperform their aging US counterparts. That led Lt. Gen. Wesley's predecessor as the Army's chief futurist, Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, to tell Congress in 2016 that “we are outranged and outgunned.” The next year, in October 2017, the Army officially made Long-Range Precision Fires its No. 1 modernization priority. Now the Army is urgently developed new artillery systems, from rocket-boosted, precision-guided howitzer shells with a range of 40 miles, to 300-plus-mile tactical missiles, to hypersonic weapons that can fly thousands of miles at more than Mach 10. But technology alone is not enough. After two decades of its soldiers rarely getting to use artillery, the Army now needs experienced gunners to run its new high-level Fires Commands and make the most of its new long-range missiles. Sure, infantry and tank brigade commanders can call in strikes on the targets they see in front of them in a tactical fight. But it takes senior artillery officers and experienced, specialist staff to choose the most critical targets for an entire theater of war and to coordinate long-range strikes over hundreds of miles. While the Army recreated division-level artillery headquarters in 2014, it is now studying long-range fires commands at the corps and theater levels. What's more, the different theaters will require a different mix, not only of artillery systems, but of all the supporting players being developed as part of the Army's “Big Six”: Long-Range Precision Fires, Next Generation Combat Vehicles, Future Vertical Lift, Networks, , Air & Missile Defense (also an artillery branch mission), and Soldier Lethality gear. For Indo-Pacific Command, focused on the Chinese threat, the vast expanse of ocean means the Army must support the Navy. That means long-range artillery batteries – very long range, given the distances involved – based on friendly islands to control the surrounding sea lanes, forming unsinkable anvils for the Navy's highly mobile hammer. But, Wesley said, that also requires advanced air and missile defense systems to blunt the enemy's own long-range salvos, long-range high-speed aircraft to move ground forces from island to island and a sophisticated, secure network to coordinate it all. In Europe, by contrast, the distances are shorter – requiring a different mix of missiles – and ground combat is the central front, with small and largely landlocked seas on either flank. That makes armored ground vehicles and soldier gear, from new rifles to targeting goggles, much more important than in the Pacific. Those profound differences mean the Army cannot create a single universal unit with one set of equipment that can adapt to every situation, as the cancelled Future Combat Systems program once attempted. Even if a one-size-fits-all Army somehow made sense tactically, Wesley said, it wouldn't work out technologically. With rapid advances in computing affecting everything from targeting to logistics, there's no way to develop a new piece of equipment, mass-produce it and issue it to every brigade across the Army before something new and better comes along. Instead of “pure fleets” where every brigade has the same software, trucks, missiles, etc., organized in the same way, the Army must tailor its forces to the theater. For more from Lt. Gen. Wesley in his own words (edited for brevity and clarity), read on: Q: Historically, the Army has always wanted to standardize equipment, training, and organization as much as possible – after all, “G.I.” stands for “General Issue.” But Europe and the Pacific are very different. Do you need more of a mix of forces across the Army? A: The world and technology are moving too fast to believe I'm going to get Technology One in every single brigade [before Technology Two makes it obsolete]. We have to be more agile than that. Pure fleeting and even pure structuring is probably not an acceptable approach. Second, the reality is there are two pacing threats that we're looking at, and they're distinctly different, the geography is different, and so we have to consider different ways to approach those problems. You can expect that the force package we build for INDOPACOM will be distinct from the force package we build in Europe. Where there's commonality is in Multi-Domain Operations. MDO is a way of fighting, and I think you're going to see that way of fighting be consistent in both theaters, but the application of it will be different. What are those distinctions? In INDOPACOM, fires to help the Navy control sea lanes are indispensable. In Europe, the essence of the problem is the ability to conduct a very advanced ground maneuver effort. Those [Big Six] priorities that we identified are pretty consistent with what most of the data and analytics and the rigor of the experimentation we look at – those priorities are priorities for a reason. But if you look at the theaters, those priorities might look a little different. So in INDOPACOM, fires, air and missile defense, and the network are some of the really critical pieces, and Future Vertical Lift, I would argue. If you look to Europe, it's going to be long range fires, the network, next generation combat vehicles, and soldier lethality. Q: How are you designing that future force? A: Gen. Milley [the 39th Army Chief of Staff, from 2015 to 2019], asked us, in a perfect world, what that force looks like. [He] asked us to build a resource-unconstrained design that reflects the precepts and principles of multi-domain operations. That was affectionately called the White Board Force. CSA 40 [the new Chief of Staff, Gen. James McConville] and Gen. Murray, the AFC commander, asked us to do a resource-informed design. That's what is called the AimPoint. It tightens the shot group and it allows us to define our experimentation, analysis, and programming better. When you're resource-unconstrained, you can go out and buy a Maserati. When you're resource-informed, you might buy a Corvette. We just had to throttle back on some of the ambitious desires we were looking for. We're on a [trajectory] to 492,000 [active duty soldiers]: How would you organize that in order to achieve MDO? AimPoint is not a locked down design that everybody has to invest in and build towards now. It's really an architect's design, and now we have to get into the detailed engineering and blueprint of it. We need an enhanced posture forward in both INDOPACOM and in Europe – nothing like the 1980s, but larger than what we have now. That's obviously going to be informed by resource decisions, but already the Army [is reactivating] an additional corps headquarters with an operational command post forward [in Europe]. Q: How will the AimPoint Army be organized differently to fight? A: The brigades largely look very similar to what you might see right now, because you still have to shoot, move, and communicate. BCT [Brigade Combat Team] and below, what you see won't change a lot — except for your ability to connect to national assets. Why is that? Well, we're fighting multi-domain, which means access to cyber, access to space assets, in certain instances at the tactical level. You have to have the plugs to get connect to national assets. If you look at echelons above brigade, what we're having to do is build out our capacity to fight large-scale, campaign-quality combat. Those echelons we have mortgaged a bit in the last 20 or 30 years because our BCTs were so powerful relative to our opponent. [Today], because we are being contested in all domains and our two peer competitors are investing in their militaries, we have to build back some of that campaign quality at echelon, with the distinction being you've got to have information warfare, you've got to have cyber, you've got to have space access. So in each echelon you would have that capacity to fight all domains and integrate them. Each echelon has distinct problems that has to be solved in order to enable the force to get to a position of advantage. Sometimes that requires each echelon to have distinct capabilities. Competition [short of war] is the first joint problem that has to be solved. Frankly, a brigade commander cannot provide the resources, the solutions, and the decisions made, to compete with a peer competitor. That's got to be retained at the three- and four- star level. In the event of conflict, it requires long range fire to strike the Russian combined arms army or Chinese equivalent. Again, that BCT commander would not necessarily have either the assets or the authority to strike the targets we're talking about with long range fire. So you have to do that at a different echelon. There are problems that the BCT commander does not solve for the theater, and some of that needs to be done at echelon. Q: What kinds of higher-echelon capabilities from the Cold War era are being recreated, like corps level artillery formations? A: Building out the ability to integrate fires at echelon is really important to being able to fight at scale. When we went to modularity, with the BCT being the coin of the realm, we moved the artillery fires battalion [out of the division-level artillery brigade] into the BCT. Now what you're going to see is the need to return to some aspects of centralization of fires, with the ability to decentralize [as needed], which makes the problem even harder. So, how have we done that? Well, for example, you saw a couple of years ago that we went back into the [division-level] fires brigade. That might be further reinforced as we go forward. Then the theater fires command, as an example, that is a direct output of AimPoint. In the last TAA [Total Army Analysis] cycle, we started to [set aside] a wedge of structure that we can design against. So that does not exist [yet]. Q: What are you able to do in the near term? You already have one experimental Multi-Domain Task Force in the Pacific and another being stood up in Europe. A: We've got AimPoint, we've got this orientation to the future, but General McConville said, ‘hey, I want to get stuff out there now, because the customer needs it, and that is the capacity to penetrate with long range fires, with the ability to integrate all domains.' That is what a MDTF is, and we're building them right now, and we want to get them into each theater. As we deploy those, we're going to learn lessons on how they best connect with the joint force. You may see, for example, an MDTF subordinate to a theater fires command or subordinate to a corps fires element. Right now, they're individual [units] that are being built; we will experiment with them and learn how they plug in, but ultimately you're going to see that capability migrate to the [higher] echelons. Topics: army, Army AimPoint, army future, Army Futures Command, Army strategic fires, artillery, Big Six, China, europe, Gen. Eric Wesley, INDOPACOM, Long-Range Precision Fires, LRPF, Missiles, Pacific, Russia, strategy, Theater Fires Command https://breakingdefense.com/2020/04/army-rebuilds-artillery-arm-for-large-scale-war/

• 

  4 septembre 2019 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

  Contract Awards by US Department of Defense - September 3, 2019

  AIR FORCE Leidos Inc., Reston, Virginia, has been awarded a $445,361,476 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for Air Force National Capital Region information technology services. This contract provides a full range of classified and unclassified information technology services in the National Capital Region. Work will be performed in the National Capital Region to include Joint Base Andrews, Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling and the Pentagon, and is expected to be complete by Sept. 2, 2024. This award is the result of a competitive acquisition and three offers were received. Fiscal 2019 operations and maintenance funds in the amount of $7,522,000 are being obligated at the time of award. The Air Force, District of Washington Contracting, Joint Base Andrews, Maryland, is the contracting activity (FA7014-19-D-A005). GTA Containers Inc., South Bend, Indiana, has been awarded a $9,478,079 contract modification (P00004) to previously awarded FA8533-16-D-0001 for collapsible fuel tank production. The contract modification provides for the purchase of additional quantities of 34 10K collapsible fuel tanks; 171 50K collapsible fuel tanks; and 130 210K collapsible fuel tanks being produced under the basic contract. Total cumulative face value of the contract is $15,102,610. Work will be performed at South Bend, Indiana, and is expected to be completed by Jan. 31, 2021. Fiscal 2018 other procurement funds are being used and no funds are being obligated at the time of delivery order award. The Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Robins Air Force Base, Georgia, is the contracting activity. NAVY Science Applications International Corp., Reston, Virginia, is awarded a $69,929,520 firm-fixed-price, cost-plus-fixed-fee modification to previously-awarded contract N00024-16-C-6425 to exercise Option Year Three for the production of Mk 48 Mod 7 heavyweight torpedo afterbody/tailcone sections, production support material, spares, auto-electrical power source test sets, engineering support, other direct costs and hardware repair services. Work will be performed in Bedford, Indiana (50%); Marion, Massachusetts (29%); Middletown, Rhode Island (16%); and Indianapolis, Indiana (5%), and is expected to be completed by March 2021. Fiscal 2019 weapons procurement (Navy); fiscal 2019 research, development, test and evaluation (Navy); fiscal 2018 shipbuilding and conversion (Navy); and Foreign Military Sales funding in the amount of $69,929,520 will be obligated at time of award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, District of Columbia, is the contracting activity. Lockheed Martin, Rotary and Mission Systems, Moorestown, New Jersey, is awarded a $50,307,909 cost-plus-incentive-fee modification to previously awarded contract N00024-15-C-5151 to exercise options for ship integration and test of the Aegis Weapon System (AWS) for AWS Baselines through Advanced Capability Build 16. The contract provides for Aegis shipboard integration engineering, Aegis test team support, Aegis modernization team engineering support, Ballistic Missile Defense test team support, Aegis ashore support and AWS element assessments. This contract will cover the AWS ship integration and test efforts for nine new construction DDG 51 class ships and the major modernization of seven DDG 51 class ships. It will additionally cover the integrated combat system modifications and upgrades for all current ships with all AWS Baselines up to and including ACB 16. Work will be performed in Moorestown, New Jersey (49%); Deveselu, Romania (12%); Norfolk, Virginia (8%); San Diego, California (8%); Washington, District of Columbia (7%); Pascagoula, Mississippi (5%); Mayport, Florida (4%); Bath, Maine (3%); and various places each below one percent (4% cumulative), and is expected to be complete by September 2024. Fiscal 2014 shipbuilding and conversion (Navy); fiscal 2019 operation and maintenance (Navy); and fiscal 2019 other procurement (Navy) funds in the amount of $4,774,574 will be obligated at time of award and $1,452,864 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, District of Columbia, is the contracting activity. Ultra Electronics Ocean Systems, Braintree, Massachusetts, is awarded a $46,679,930 modification to previously awarded contract N00024-18-C-6405 to exercise Option Year One for the production of MK54 MOD 0 lightweight torpedo array kits. This option provides spares, production support material, and related engineering services, hardware support and maintenance of government-furnished equipment. This modification combines purchases for the Navy (23%); the government of Canada (46%); Netherlands (28%); and Norway (3%) under the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program. Work will be performed in Braintree, Massachusetts (70%); and Lititz, Pennsylvania (30%), and is expected to be completed by September 2022. FMS funding in the amount of $36,031,476; and fiscal 2019 weapons procurement (Navy) in the amount of $10,648,454 will be obligated at time of award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, District of Columbia, is the contracting activity (N00024-18-C-6405). General Atomics, San Diego, California, is awarded a $33,187,541 cost-plus-incentive-fee, indefinite-delivery/definite-quantity contract for up to two Bearing Support Structure (BSS) inseparable assemblies in support of the Columbia-class program. This contract is for a five-year ordering period and does not include options. Work will be performed in Tupelo, Mississippi, and is expected to be completed by August 2024. Fiscal 2019 National Sea-Based Deterrence Fund (NSBDF) funding in the amount of $12,497,115 will be obligated at time of award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured via the Federal Business Opportunities website, with three offers received. The Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock Division, West Bethesda, Maryland, is the contracting activity (N00167-19-D-0006). Homeland Security Solutions Inc., Hampton, Virginia, is awarded a $10,951,521 firm-fixed-priced modification to previously awarded contract M00264-19-C-0007 to exercise Option Year One. The work to be performed provides program management support, training, human resources services and non-guard security support services to the Marine Corps. Work will be performed in Camp Lejeune/New River, North Carolina (11%); Camp Pendleton, California (10%); Washington, District of Columbia (9%); Cherry Point, North Carolina (8%); Miramar, California (8%); Quantico, Virginia (8%); Camp Smith and Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii (7%); Beaufort/Parris Island, South Carolina (6%); Yuma, Arizona (5%); Barstow, California (5%); San Diego, California (5%); Albany, Georgia (5%); Okinawa, Japan (5%); Bridgeport, California (2%); Blount Island, Florida (2%); New Orleans, Louisiana (2%); and Iwakuni, Japan (2%), and is expected to be completed by September 2020. Fiscal 2019 operation and maintenance (Marine Corps) funds in the amount of $10,095,934 will be obligated at the time of award and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Marine Corps Installations, National Capitol Region - Regional Contracting Office, Marine Corps Base Quantico, Virginia, is the contracting activity. Progeny Systems Corp., Manassas, Virginia, is awarded a $10,688,154 modification to previously awarded contract N00024-18-C-6410 to exercise Option Year Two for the production of MK54 MOD 1 lightweight torpedo proof of design components, test equipment, associated production support material, spares, and engineering and hardware support services. This modification combines purchases for the Navy (99%); and the government of the United Kingdom (1%) under the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program. Work will be performed in Charleroi, Pennsylvania (70%); Salt Lake City, Utah (26%); and Manassas, Virginia (4%), and is expected to be completed by March 2022. Fiscal 2019 weapons procurement (Navy) funding in the amount of $10,680,514; and FMS funding in the amount of $32,306 will be obligated at time of award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, District of Columbia, is the contracting activity. DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY General Dynamics Land Systems Inc., Sterling Heights, Michigan, has been awarded an estimated $38,040,445 modification (P00039) to a three-year base contract (SPE7MX-16-D-0100) with two one-year option periods adding vehicle spare parts. This is a firm-fixed-price, indefinite-quantity contract. Locations of performance are Michigan and South Carolina, with an Aug. 11, 2020, performance completion date. Using military service is Army. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2019 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Land and Maritime, Columbus, Ohio. General Electric Co., Lynn, Massachusetts, has been awarded a maximum $8,845,490 firm-fixed-price delivery order (SPRPA1-19-F-QH08) against a five-year basic ordering agreement (FA8122-19-G-0001) for compressor casings. This was a sole-source acquisition using justification 10 U.S. Code 2304(c)(1), as stated in Federal Acquisition Regulation 6.302-1. This is a 47-month contract with no option periods. Location of performance is Massachusetts, with a July 31, 2023, performance completion date. Using military service is Navy. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2019 Navy working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Aviation, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. ARMY RTI Technologies LLC,* McEwen, Tennessee, was awarded an $18,601,016 firm-fixed-price contract for or the procurement of the M700 time blast fuse. Bids were solicited via the internet with one received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Sept. 2, 2024. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois, is the contracting activity (W52P1J-19-D-0086). CACI-ISS Inc., Chantilly, Virginia, was awarded a $10,172,707 modification (P00058) to contract W15QKN-15-C-0049 for the Integrated Personnel and Pay System. Work will be performed in Arlington, Virginia, with an estimated completion date of Nov. 30, 2019. Fiscal 2018 research, development, test and evaluation funds in the amount of $10,172,707 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Contracting Command, New Jersey, is the contracting activity. NW Construction Inc.,* Bozeman, Montana, was awarded a $7,656,775 firm-fixed-price contract for equalizer dam and dike modifications, construction, electrical, controls, and concrete. Bids were solicited via the internet with three received. Work will be performed in Fort Hall Indian Reservation, Idaho, with an estimated completion date of June 30, 2021. Fiscal 2019 Bureau of Indian Affairs construction funds in the amount of $7,656,775 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Albuquerque, New Mexico, is the contracting activity (W912PP-19-C-0022). CORRECTION: A $377,006,101 contract award to Southwest Range Services LLC, Las Cruces, New Mexico (W91151-19-C-0008), was announced Aug. 30, 2019, with an incorrect amount of obligated funds. The correct contract obligation amount is $231,230. All other information in the announcement is correct. U.S. TRANSPORTATION COMMAND International Auto Logistics LLC, Brunswick, Georgia, has been awarded a task order modification (P00024) on contract HTC711-14-D-R025 in the estimated amount of $14,950,112. This modification provides continued support of transportation and storage of Department of Defense-sponsored (DoD) shipments of privately owned vehicles belonging to military service members, and transportation of DoD-sponsored shipments of privately owned vehicles belonging to DoD civilian employees. Work will be performed at multiple locations within and outside the U.S. The option period of performance is Sept. 1, 2019, to Sept. 30, 2019. Fiscal 2019 transportation working capital funds were obligated. This modification brings the total cumulative face value of the contract to $942,359,138 from $927,409,026. U.S. Transportation Command, Directorate of Acquisition, Scott Air Force Base, Illinois, is the contracting activity. *Small Business https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contracts/Contract/Article/1950681/source/GovDelivery/