30 janvier 2019 | International, Terrestre

Raytheon/Lockheed Martin Javelin Joint Venture Awarded Contract For 2,100 F-Model Missiles, Marking Initial Full-Rate Production

ORLANDO, Fla., Jan. 30, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- The Javelin Joint Venture was awarded a production contract for 2,100 F-Model (FGM-148F) missiles, following a successful and rigorous system qualification test program that included 21 successful flight tests. The contract launches the initial full-rate production agreement for the Javelin F-Model missile, replacing the Javelin FGM-148E (Block I).

The Javelin FGM-148F missile features an advanced multipurpose warhead (MPWH) as part of the man portable, fire-and-forget Javelin missile system. The MPWH incorporates the latest generation shaped charged technology to defeat present and future advanced armored threats while adding a fragmenting steel warhead case to significantly improve lethality against soft targets and light armored vehicles. The Javelin F-Model round deliveries are planned for early 2020 and will be available for international allies, with U.S. government permission.

There are also funded efforts underway to develop a higher performance Lightweight Command Launch Unit (CLU) and FGM-148G Model missile that will dramatically improve system performance while reducing weight and lowering system cost.

First deployed in 1996, Javelin is the world's most versatile and lethal one-man-portable and platform-employed anti-tank and multi-target precision weapon system. To date, more than 45,000 missiles and 12,000 CLUs have been produced. The Javelin weapon system has experienced numerous technology insertions since its initial fielding to stay ahead of advancing threats.

Javelin, which is produced by a joint venture between Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, has been used extensively and to great advantage in combat operations in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Over 5,000 engagements have been successfully conducted by U.S. and coalition forces. Current U.S. allies that have Javelin in inventory include France, Taiwan, Jordan, Qatar, Turkey, Lithuania, Czech Republic, Indonesia, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway, Oman, Ukraine, Georgia, Australia, Estonia, UAE and the United Kingdom. The Javelin Joint Venture is an award-winning enterprise recognized in 2015 by the Office of the Secretary of Defense for its outstanding achievements in providing operational support to warfighters with the highest level of mission success and tactical operational readiness.

About Lockheed Martin
Headquartered in Bethesda, Maryland, Lockheed Martin is a global security and aerospace company that employs approximately 105,000 people worldwide and is principally engaged in the research, design, development, manufacture, integration and sustainment of advanced technology systems, products and services.

SOURCE Lockheed Martin

https://news.lockheedmartin.com/2019-01-30-Raytheon-Lockheed-Martin-Javelin-Joint-Venture-Awarded-Contract-for-2-100-F-Model-Missiles-Marking-Initial-Full-Rate-Production

Sur le même sujet

  • With all eyes on F-35, AAR Corp. looks to ‘clean up’ on F-16 maintenance

    25 juin 2019 | International, Aérospatial

    With all eyes on F-35, AAR Corp. looks to ‘clean up’ on F-16 maintenance

    By: Jill Aitoro LE BOURGET, France — As a number of companies chase maintenance work for the F-35 fighter jet, one firm is planning to clean up on the F-16. AAR Corp., a provider of global aftermarket aviation services, won a seven-year contract with the Royal Danish Air Force to perform maintenance, repair and overhaul, or MRO, of Pratt & Whitney F100-220 engine components on the General Dynamics F-16 jet. That win, which came earlier this year, is the latest contract in a long-term relationship supporting the Danish Air Force and air forces across Europe with MRO services from the company's repair facility in Amsterdam. That facility supports about $500 million in business, much of it tied to the F-16. But the win also fits well into a grander ambition of the company, said Brian Sartain, senior vice president of repair and engineering services at AAR. “Everybody is running after F-35 capability,” he said. “But the Danish Air Force is still going to have a lot of F-16s for [the] foreseeable future, and there are still a lot of F-16s being flown around the world.” Sartain pointed to “fairly high-publicized” F-16 maintenance requirements coming down the pike for the U.S. Air Force, which reported a 65-70 percent mission-capable rate for F-16s in 2017. AAR has a facility in Duluth, Minnesota, which is located across the airfield from Duluth Air National Guard Base — home to the 148th Fighter Wing and its F-16C Fighting Falcon aircraft. “Our facility is a perfect place to do F-16 maintenance. We have a lot of capacity,” Sartain said. “We're three tiers down in the F-35 component chain in the way those are being bid. We're not interested. So, while others are running after the F-35, we're cleaning up on the F-16s, and we're happy to do that.” Beyond its F-16 work, AAR supports airframe maintenance for the P-8A fleet for the U.S. Navy, Australia and Foreign Military Sales customers. AAR and Boeing were each awarded seven-year indefinite delivery, indefinite-quantity contracts from Naval Air Systems Command in February 2018, competing each year on workshare. While Boeing performed the majority of work the first year, AAR was recently awarded the larger slice for 2019. “Frankly, we're moving to majority share because our performance has been better,” Sartain said. “Most program competitors will need to sub tier to another company and then stack profit on top of profit. For government, it's a better value for us to be a prime, and for us it's a great opportunity to be a prime.” AAR supports the P-8 work from its Indianapolis facility, where at any given time four P-8s are in the hanger, with two steady lines of maintenance. The location is also used to support maintenance of Southwest Airlines 737 aircraft, which share the same airframe as the P-8. It's gone from about 20 percent military and 80 percent commercial maintenance to an even split. “Southwest asks that airplanes are returned in about 21 days. For the P-8, the Navy allows 60 for turnaround,” Sartain said. “The airplane comes in, we have a small crew of 30-40 that hold secret clearances and lock in a room the top-secret equipment, and then I can flex mechanics from Southwest to take advantage of that experience." https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/paris-air-show/2019/06/21/with-all-eyes-on-f-35-aar-looks-to-clean-up-on-f-16-maintenance/

  • The Pentagon can now buy US-made small drones from these five companies

    21 août 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

    The Pentagon can now buy US-made small drones from these five companies

    By: Charles V. Peña The first COVID-19 clusters appeared in Italy in late February, and by early March the Italian authorities issued a decree to install strict public health measures, including social distancing first in the affected regions and then nationwide. Soon afterward, Spain, France and many other European countries instituted similar public health measures. Without debating the efficacy of those measures, the important takeaway is that when faced with what was viewed as a clear and present danger, European countries acted in their own self-interest without having to depend on the U.S. to counter the threat posed by COVID-19. They need to take that same approach for their own security and responsibilities under NATO. It is not a question of resources or capabilities — it is largely a matter of political will. The low hanging fruit for our European NATO allies is to meet their pledge of spending 2 percent of their gross domestic product on defense. Currently nine countries meet that threshold: the United States (3.42 percent), Bulgaria (3.25 percent), Greece (2.28 percent), the United Kingdom (2.14 percent), Estonia (2.14 percent), Romania (2.04 percent), Lithuania (2.03 percent), Latvia (2.01 percent) and Poland (2 percent). Noticeably absent are Germany (1.38 percent), France (1.84 percent) and Italy (1.22 percent) — the fourth, seventh and eighth largest economies in the world. These are wealthy countries that can afford to make the necessary investment. Indeed, the combined GDP of NATO Europe is nearly on par with the U.S. — about $17.5 trillion versus about $20 trillion. Yet, the U.S. spends more than double on defense than our European NATO allies. Other than political will, there is no real reason that European NATO countries cannot spend 2 percent of their GDP for their own defense. Yet, even though Germany previously pledged to meet its 2 percent obligation, Berlin is proposing a new metric based on a country's defense needs — perhaps because U.S. President Donald Trump has stated that he wants European allies to spend 4 percent of their GDP on defense (a metric even the U.S. does not meet). Beyond spending, there is the question of what threat NATO should counter. Originally created in 1949, NATO was intended to counter the Soviet military threat and communist expansion. At the height of the Cold War, the Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact allies had some 4 million troops and 60,000 main battle tanks deployed against Western Europe — and threatened invasion via the North German Plain, Hof Corridor and Fulda Gap. But today's Russian Federation is not the Soviet Union. Nonetheless, NATO's European countries have the resources to counter a Russian military threat (although it's worth noting that NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg recently said: “We don't see any imminent threat against any NATO ally.”) NATO Europe's combined GDP is 10 times larger than Russia's — more than $17 trillion versus $1.7 trillion. And current defense spending is also in Europe's favor by more than 4-to-1 ($287 billion versus $65 billion). Again, there is no practical reason why NATO Europe cannot make the necessary investments to provide for its security. It is more a question of political will. Moreover, if NATO is concerned about Russia as a potential threat, it should think twice about continuing to expand the alliance eastward onto Russia's doorstep. Rather than providing increased security, it may do more to provoke the Russian bear. Part of the problem is that NATO has largely strayed from its original purpose of collective defense against the Soviet Union (and now Russia). According to the NATO website, the organization is “an active and leading contributor to peace and security on the international stage” that “promotes democratic values and is committed to the peaceful resolution of disputes” with “approximately 20,000 military personnel ... engaged in NATO operations and missions around the world.” If Russia is deemed a threat to Europe and NATO, then the European members of NATO need to take primary responsibility for defending themselves against that threat — and they should view that threat widely to include Russian cyberthreats as well as misinformation and disinformation campaigns meant to undermine elections. That doesn't mean a U.S. withdrawal from NATO. But it is long past the post-World War II era when European countries were struggling to regain their footing and needed America to be the bulwark of its defense. Europe as a whole is today an economic powerhouse — second only to the United States. NATO Europe can and should do more to provide for its own security rather than depending on the U.S. to act as the front line of its defense. All that needs to happen is for those countries to be as serious as they were with COVID-19 and take the same approach to national security as they did when the pandemic began. Charles V. Peña is a senior fellow with Defense Priorities. He has experience supporting the U.S. departments of Defense and Homeland Security. He previously served as the director of defense for policy studies at the Cato Institute, and he is author of “Winning the Un—War: A New Strategy for the War on Terrorism.” https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/08/20/money-and-missions-nato-should-learn-from-europes-pandemic-response/

  • Germany sets up European defense agenda with a waning US footprint in mind

    16 juillet 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

    Germany sets up European defense agenda with a waning US footprint in mind

    By: Sebastian Sprenger COLOGNE, Germany — The European Union should prepare for the possibility of a gradual disengagement by the United States from the continent, even if Democratic challenger Joe Biden beats President Donald Trump in the November election, according to Germany's defense minister. Speaking before the European parliament on Tuesday, Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer said she believes only the “tone” in trans-Atlantic relations would change following a Biden win. The reorientation of America's foreign policy toward China as a global rival would remain a key driving force in Washington, possibly at the expense of Europe, she said. “If that is the case, it means we Europeans must become able to act more so than is the case today,“ she said in testimony meant to lay out Germany's defense agenda during a six-month turn at the helm of the European Council of the EU that began July 1. To be sure, Kramp-Karrenbauer stressed that Europe remains dependent on U.S. and NATO support, and that there's no sign of that equation changing anytime soon. German leaders have consistently held up the trans-Atlantic alliance as a cornerstone of their geopolitical calculus, even as Trump took shots at Berlin for the its lackluster defense spending. But the defense minister's assessment that nothing other than the style of discourse would change with Trump's exit — he is trailing Biden in recent polls — may be a sign that Germans suspect bigger forces at play on the other side of the Atlantic. In that light, the Defence Ministry's defense agenda for the EU reads as something of a toolkit to avoid getting caught flat-footed. Creating a “strategic compass“ for the bloc, as Kramp-Karrenbauer called it, would be a key step in ensuring all member states back a common foreign and defense policy. An EU-wide threat assessment is the first step in that process, overseen by the EU Intelligence and Situation Centre and supported by member nations‘ intelligence services, she said. The assessment is slated to be “far along“ and will ideally be finished by the end of the year, when Germany hands the presidency baton to Slovenia, Kramp-Karrenbauer said. Also needed is a bloc-wide “operational understanding“ for whenever there is actual fighting to be done, according to the defense minister. Even peacekeeping and training missions, which tend to dominate the EU mission roster, always come with more kinetic, force-protection elements, for example, and there should be a process in place for setting up those types of operations, she argued. “You could approach it with the idea that this would fall to the same few countries in Europe, or you could develop a method as part of the strategic compass that this would become a matter for all members,“ Kramp-Karrenbauer said. West Africa could be a first test case of waning U.S. concerns about European interests. An American counterterrorism mission there has been crucial in supporting a U.N. peacekeeping force of EU and African troops. European leaders consider the region a hotbed for terrorism, fearing the possibility of fighters making their way to Europe. But the mission is controversial in the United States, and an American withdrawal could be in the offing at some point, Kramp-Karrenbauer said. “That is a scenario that we could find ourselves confronted with in the future.“ There is also the question of a withdrawal of almost 10,000 U.S. forces from Germany, the details of which are still somewhat shrouded in mystery. Hashed out by Trump and a small circle of White House advisers, military leaders are still figuring out the details for implementing the decision, Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy said in a phone call with reporters Wednesday. McCarthy said he discussed the matter with U.S. Air Force Gen. Tod Wolters, NATO's top general for Europe, earlier that day. But he had little to share about the process, saying only that Pentagon officials would release more details in the coming weeks. The “repositioning,“ as McCarthy called the move, is controversial among defense analysts on both sides of the Atlantic because it could simultaneously hurt America's and Europe's defense posture. Germany is a hub for U.S. troop training and logistics that would be difficult to quickly recreate elsewhere, the argument goes. The fact that military officials are only now doing the analytic legwork for a possible redeployment shows that no such examinations took place before Trump's announcement, retired Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges, a former commander of U.S. Army forces in Europe, told Defense News. Hodges said he was encouraged to see U.S. lawmakers question the decision, forcing a say on the issue by way of legislation. “Congressional support for NATO and for the German-U.S. relationship remains very strong,“ he said. Meanwhile, opinions differ on how much of a change a Biden presidency would bring to the trans-Atlantic alliance. “If you look at everything that Joe Biden has said, you certainly get the impression that he is interested in restoring alliances, including in Europe,“ said Jeffrey Rathke, president of the American Institute for Contemporary German Studies at Johns Hopkins University. “Of course there would be a different tone,“ he added. “But the substance would be different as well.“ For now, the German Defence Ministry's apparent trajectory of planning for a future where U.S. commitment may be iffy at best can bring more good than harm, he argued. Fears of an increasingly belligerent Russia and Trump's overt questioning of international alliances as key to keeping the peace have driven a wave of increased defense spending on the continent in recent years. “The things that Europe needs to do for its own security are precisely the things that improve the trans-Atlantic security relationship,“ Rathke said. When it comes to Washington's focus on China versus Europe, paying attention to different regions of the world should be possible simultaneously, he argued. “This is not an either-or situation. That's not how the United States should look at it.“ https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/07/15/germany-sets-up-a-european-defense-agenda-with-a-waning-us-footprint-in-mind/

Toutes les nouvelles