Pentagon makes early pick for hypersonic interceptor developer

Sur le même sujet

• 

  17 septembre 2020 | International, Aérospatial

  Who is Secretly Building the USAF’s New Fighter?

  MARCUS WEISGERBER Officials are mum, so here's a roundup of clues. Among the big questions surrounding the secret U.S. Air Force fighter-jet demonstrator revealed this week is: who built it? Will Roper, the head of Air Force acquisition, declined to say much about the new plane, other than it has actually flown, that some of the plane's systems have been flight-tested, and that it was designed and built using digital engineering. So let's look at some clues, starting with a likely predecessor to the Next Generation Air Dominance project that produced the new demonstrator. In January 2015, Frank Kendall, then defense undersecretary for acquisition, technology and logistics, told the House Armed Services Committee about a DARPA-led project that was developing new planes and engine technology for the Air Force and Navy. “The intent is to develop prototypes for the next generation of air-dominance platforms — X-plane programs, if you will," Kendall said. Dubbed the Aerospace Innovation Initiative, the project aimed to “develop the technologies and address the risks associated with the air dominance platforms that will follow the F-35, as well as other advanced aeronautical challenges.” Roper wouldn't say whether the NGAD and AII projects are linked, but they sound quite similar. He instead said that he disclosed the plane's existence, in part, to encourage companies to invest more in digital engineering. "The obvious candidates for the NGAD prototype are Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman, though General Atomics might be a possible designer—but that's a long-shot," Byron Callan, an analyst with Capital Alpha Partners, wrote in a Tuesday note to clients. "Textron's Scorpion program had recently proven that in one year's time, it could take a new clean sheet design to flight, but we doubt it's been able to elevate this skill to combat aircraft." The plane's engine, Callan wrote, was built by either GE or Raytheon Technologies' Pratt & Whitney. Here's the case for why each of the following companies could have built the new NGAD fighter. Boeing The Chicago-based aerospace giant already knows a lot about digital engineering, having partnered with Sweden's Saab to design and build their T-7A training jet in less than a year, near-lightspeed by U.S. military standards. Air Force officials have gushed about the T-7A, which beat out two other planes, the Lockheed Martin T-50 and Leonardo T-100, that were already being used by foreign air forces. The Boeing plane has a mission computer that can run third-party software and apps, allowing for easy updates. It is also designed for quick assembly: it takes just 15 minutes to assemble the forward and aft fuselages, compared with some 24 hours to assemble a F/A-18 Super Hornet fuselage, according to Leanne Caret, the CEO of Boeing Defense. Northrop Grumman It often gets overlooked that Northrop owns Scaled Composites — the Burt Rutan-founded, XPrize-winning design shop behind SpaceShipOne, the first aircraft to carry private citizens into space. Like Boeing, Northrop's Scaled built a plane from scratch for the Air Force's pilot training jet contest, but in the end didn't submit a bid. Northrop has seen an uptick in classified Pentagon work in recent years. It's been presumed that a sizable portion of that cash has gone to build B-21 stealth bombers, whose existence has been disclosed but are being built in secret. It's conceivable that some of the classified cash flowing into the company's Aeronautical Systems business is for the NGAD test aircraft. Northrop is also building the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent, the new intercontinental ballistic missiles that will replace the Cold War Minuteman III, using the same digital design technology often touted by Roper. Lockheed Martin The company's Advanced Development Programs division — far better known as the Skunk Works — has long developed super-advanced, super-secret planes for the U.S. military, including the famed U-2 and SR-71 spy planes and the F-117 ground-attack jet. They also built the F-22 Raptor and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. “ADP seems pretty busy across a number of fronts, but also...looking at the Digital Century Series and also looking at where the services are going to go in terms of sixth-gen and next-gen aircraft,” said Michele Evans, who leads Lockheed Martin Aeronautics and its Skunk Works operation, last week. Evans also touted Stardrive, a Lockheed effort to incorporate more commercial technology and practices into its manufacturing. “Think of model-based systems engineering, think about factory of the future, software development in terms of containerization technologies like Kubernetes, and agile [software] and then even into sustainment in terms of how we use data analytics and AI,” she said. “I think the technologies are just going to provide tremendous opportunities to speed up the development in the delivery of platforms going forward.” Someone else The most intriguing possibility is that the new jet may not be the product of one of the defense giants at all. There is evidence that the digital-design tools that Roper touted are allowing smaller upstarts to enter markets once reserved for only a few established contractors. In July, for example, an Air Force solicitation for proposals for drones to accompany manned jets drew 18 entries. “It shows there's a lot of interest from very large [companies], which you would expect, to very small,” Gen. Arnold Bunch, the head of Air Force Materiel Command, said in a Wednesday videoconference call with reporters. “I actually believe as we do the digital campaign and we look at doing digital engineering, it will actually open the door to more people to be able to participate that may not have before.” https://www.defenseone.com/business/2020/09/who-secretly-building-usafs-new-fighter/168541/

• 

  15 juillet 2019 | International, Autre défense

  Army researchers building ‘smart’ landmines for future combat

  By: Todd South FREDERICKSBURG, Va. – Army leaders see a future battlefield with networked minefields a commander can see from across the globe through satellite communications and that can be scattered in minutes but also retrieved and reused when needed. The push is an effort to keep landmines of various types in the weapons portfolio while still meeting the agreements made to get out of the old school “dumb” landmine use. Smart mines being developed now are a way to replace some of the aging stocks in the “Family of Scatterable Mines” run by the Army's Program Manager Close Combat Systems. The program actually runs nearly half of all munitions from non-lethals to hand grenades to shoulder-fired rockets and counter explosives equipment. The portfolio, its challenges and what's happening now were laid out for attendees at the annual National Defense Industrial Association's Armament Systems Forum in June. Top of the priority lists are some simple munitions needs — more hand-grenade fuzes and better shoulder-fired weapons. But the big ticket items that need problem solving are how to use “terrain shaping obstacles,” or landmines, that can be delivered to close, middle and deep distances and then controlled to avoid the problems of scattering mines across war zones and then leaving them for an innocent passerby to trigger years or decades later. Small options such as the remote activation system used for current mine emplacements relies on radio frequency transmissions. But, as Pelino noted, in a near peer fight it's likely that adversaries will do RF jamming. The Army has a host of terrain-shaping obstacles, everything from the trusty standby Claymore mine which came online in the late 1950s and saw extensive use in the Vietnam War to the Gator system, which can be air dropped to take out everything from an individual soldier to a tank. They're also the anti-personnel area denial artillery munition, or ADAM, mine that can be launched using a 155mm round from artillery. Its cousin, the remote anti-armor munition, or RAAM, packs a bit more of a punch but also can be delivered from anything that fires a 155mm shell. Both are fired to the area of the threat and then roll out multiple mines that detonate when the appropriate level of vibration triggers them. Pelino described the Modular Pack Mine System, or MOPMS, like a minefield in a suitcase. Though coming in at 165 pounds, that's a very heavy suitcase. A single radio-control unit can run up to 15 MOPMS on the battlefield. They can also be hardwired to a controller. An upside to the MOPMS is it can be recovered and reused. On the lighter side is the M86 pursuit deterrent munition. It was designed for special operations forces to use when being pursued by an enemy. Think classic films where the character scatters nails or an oil slick to slow down their chaser, except with a lot more boom. Only instead of firing from a cannon, the soldier has to arm the device and deploy tripwires for bad guys to stumble upon. The Volcano mine system takes more of an industrial approach. Allowing a UH-60 Black Hawk to create a 1,000-foot minefield in less than a minute, Pelino said. The problem with all of those systems is they don't currently meet treaty obligations and many that had about a 20-year shelf life are pushing past 30 years now. Most will still be in stock at 2035, as the Army uses updates to keep them serviceable, Pelino said. The newer Spider System is one that allows soldiers to put in a porcupine-looking system that gives 360-degree coverage to deny enemy access to an area while also networking with other systems and a common controller. Future systems will look a lot more like Spider and a lot less like pressure plate mines of the World War II era or the venerable Claymore. The future minefield systems must have a 2 to 300km communications capability, an ability to be switched on and off, remotely modified self-destruct or deactivate mechanisms, self-report status so that users will know if they've been tampered with or if a mine went off. The Army also wants the mines to be able to not just blow up when something rumbles by but also detect, track and engage threat vehicles for everything from tanks to engineer equipment. Oh, and it must work in all terrain and weather conditions, be easily trained and employed, recoverable, reusable and affordable. The standard kit will include between half and a full brigade's worth of mines to block off areas for maneuver and prevent enemy flanking. https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2019/07/12/army-researchers-building-smart-landmines-for-future-combat/

• 

  9 juillet 2022 | International, Aérospatial

  L'Allemagne et la Suède se joignent à la future initiative européenne pour le développement d’un avion de transport européen de nouvelle génération

  DÉFENSE L'Allemagne et la Suède se joignent à la future initiative européenne pour le développement d'un avion de transport européen de nouvelle génération L'Allemagne et la Suède ont rejoint la France pour étudier le développement futur d'un avion de transport européen de nouvelle génération qui pourrait remplacer des types tels que le Lockheed C-130 Hercules et le CASA CN235. Selon un communiqué de presse de l'armée de l'Air et de l'Espace, les 3 pays ont signé un accord pour travailler sur la définition d'un futur cargo tactique de taille moyenne (FMTC), qui pourrait conduire au développement d'un nouvel avion de transport européen d'ici 2040. Le document a été signé lors d'un événement à Orléans, où l'armée de l'Air et de l'Espace et l'Agence Européenne de Défense ont organisé un séminaire sur le déploiement de la boussole stratégique de l'Union européenne dans le domaine aérien. Le FMTC est l'une des nombreuses initiatives de transport aérien étudiées dans le cadre de l'initiative de coopération structurée permanente (PESCO) de l'Union européenne visant à encourager une plus grande coopération en matière de marchés publics de Défense entre les États membres. Outre les 3 nations partenaires, d'autres pays pourraient encore se joindre au projet, selon les responsables. Un tel avion pourrait incorporer de nombreux éléments de l'A400M, tels que les moteurs, afin de réduire les coûts de développement de la plateforme et de bénéficier d'une approche familiale de la conception. La capacité de la future plateforme serait de 18 à 20 tonnes de fret, contre environ 35 tonnes pour l'A400M. Les futures études de faisabilité industrielle pourraient permettre de lancer le développement d'un tel avion en 2026-2027. Aviation Week du 7 juillet