14 février 2024 | International, Terrestre
The weapon was shown alongside existing artillery products in a Norinco promotional video clip.
6 décembre 2023 | International, Aérospatial
France's Safran does not exclude a protest against Italy's decision to block part of its planned $1.8 billion purchase of the flight control systems business of Collins Aerospace , Chief Executive Olivier Andries said.
18 janvier 2019 | International, Aérospatial
By: Mike Yeo MELBOURNE, Australia — Japan has confirmed it will not use in-country final assembly facilities for its next lot of Lockheed Martin F-35 fighter jets. A spokesperson from the U.S. ally's Acquisition, Technology and Logistics Agency, or ATLA, told Defense News it will instead acquire aircraft imported from overseas for its upcoming fiscal 2019 contract. The ATLA spokesperson referred Defense News to Japan's Defense Ministry when asked why Japan will stop local assembly and checkout for its F-35s. The ministry has yet to respond to inquiries. However, the recent defense guidelines and five-year defense plan released by the Japan government in late December said the country wants to “acquire high-performance equipment at the most affordable prices possible” and “review or discontinue projects of low cost-effectiveness.” The Japanese government earlier that month approved the country's defense budget, which includes $612.35 million for the acquisition of six F-35As for the upcoming Japanese fiscal year that runs from April 1, 2019, to March 31, 2020. The budget additionally allocates $366.12 million for “other related expenses,” which include maintenance equipment tied to Japan's F-35 program. Japan has taken the local final assembly and checkout, or FACO, route since 2013 for the final assembly of F-35As it previously ordered. According to the ATLA spokesperson, the FACO facility, which is operated by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, will continue to carry out production work until FY22 to fulfill the F-35As contracted by Japan between FY15 and FY18. Japan has struggled to sustain its local industrial base, with recently released defense guidelines acknowledging it needs to overcome “challenges such as high costs due to low volume, high-mix production and lack of international competitiveness.” According to Japanese budget documents, the country agreed to purchase 24 of the F-35As, with each aircraft costing an average $144.2 million, although the cost per aircraft has been on a downward trend, with the FY18 batch costing $119.7 million each. (Both figures are based on current exchange rates and do not take into account currency conversion fluctuations.) In addition to the 42 F-35As, Japan has also indicated it intends to procure a further 105 F-35s, which will include 42 of the F-35B short-takeoff-and-vertical-landing variant. The defense plan has called for the acquisition of 45 F-35s over the next five years, of which 18 will be F-35Bs. https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2019/01/17/japan-to-cease-in-country-assembly-of-f-35-jets
1 octobre 2018 | International, Aérospatial
By: David Koenig, The Associated Press An aviation bill Congress is rushing to approve contains a little-noticed section that would give authorities the power to track, intercept and destroy drones they consider a security threat, without needing a judge's approval. Supporters say law enforcement needs this power to protect Americans from terrorists who are learning how to use drones as deadly weapons. They point to the Islamic State terrorist group's use of bomb-carrying drones on battlefields in Iraq, and warn that terrorists could go after civilian targets in the United States. Critics say the provision would give the government unchecked power to decide when drones are a threat. They say the government could use its newfound power to restrict drone-camera news coverage of protests or controversial government facilities, such as the new detention centers for young migrants. The provision is tucked in a huge bill that provides $1.7 billion in disaster relief and authorizes programs of the Federal Aviation Administration, which regulates drones. The House approved the measure Wednesday by a 398-23 vote, and the Senate is expected pass it on to President Donald Trump's desk in the coming days. The White House signaled support of the drone provision in July. Sen. Ron Johnson, a Wisconsin Republican, introduced the Preventing Emerging Threats Act this year. It would give the Homeland Security Department and the Justice Department power to develop and deploy a system to spot, track and shoot down drones, as unmanned aircraft are called. Officers would have the authority to hack a drone operator's signal and take control of the device. The bill was never considered on its own by the full Senate or the House. Instead, in private negotiations that ended last weekend, it was tucked into a "must-pass" piece of FAA legislation. Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen wrote in a recent op-ed that the threat of drone attacks "is outpacing our ability to respond." She said criminals use drones to smuggle drugs across the border, but worse, terrorists like the Islamic State are deploying them on the battlefield. "We need to acknowledge that our first and last chance to stop a malicious drone might be during its final approach to a target," she wrote. Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a statement this week that the measure "would finally give federal law enforcement the authority we need to counter the use of drones by drug traffickers, terrorists and criminals." The National Football League's top security executive recently endorsed the bill's intent but said it should go further by letting trained local police officers intercept drones. The official, Cathy Lanier, a former Washington, D.C., police chief, said the NFL is alarmed by an increase in drone flyovers at stadiums. Opponents including the American Civil Liberties Union argue that the proposal gives the government unchecked power to track and seize drones without regard for the privacy and free-speech rights of legitimate drone operators. It exempts the government agencies from certain laws, including limits on wiretapping. The bill provides no oversight or means to question a government decision about what is a "credible threat" and what is an "asset" or "facility" in need of protection when drones are nearby. News organizations are increasingly using drones. They deploy them to cover natural disasters like the recent flooding from Hurricane Florence and also controversies such as the Trump administration's construction of new camps for migrant children who were separated from their parents at the U.S.-Mexico border. "Being able to see footage of protests, the size of protests, being able to see facilities like those at the border is useful — those are newsworthy events," said India McKinney, a legislative analyst for the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Without a specific means to protect First Amendment rights — something not in the bill — "it's entirely feasible to think that the DOJ or DHS could just decide that a drone owned by a news organization provides a credible threat and then destroys the footage," she said. ___ David Koenig can be reached at http://twitter.com/airlinewriter https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2018/09/28/government-may-gain-new-power-to-track-drones-and-shoot-them-down