17 juillet 2020 | International, Aérospatial

Saab receives Carl-Gustaf order from U.S. Army

July 16, 2020 - Saab has received an order for Carl-Gustaf® ammunition and AT4 systems from the U.S. Army.

The order value is approximately USD 100 million (930 MSEK) and deliveries will take place in 2021.

The order was placed within an indefinite delivery and quantity agreement signed in 2019, enabling the customer to place orders for Carl-Gustaf ammunition and AT4 systems during a five-year period to a value of up to USD 445 million.

The AT4 systems and the Carl-Gustaf munitions in this order will be operated by the U.S. Army, Marine Corps, and Special Forces Command.

“The Saab family of shoulder-fired munitions provides the U.S. Armed Forces with effective capabilities against a wide area of targets. With these systems, soldiers and Marines gain reliable, easy-to-use technology optimized for complex environments and engagements,” says Erik Smith, President and CEO of Saab in the U.S.

Since 1987, Saab has delivered more than 600,000 AT4s, both directly and under license, to the U.S. Armed Forces. The Carl-Gustaf system has been a program of record in the U.S. since 2013 and in 2018 the U.S. Army announced it would acquire the latest version of the system – the Carl-Gustaf M4 (designated M3E1 in the U.S.) with a reduced weight of less than 15 pounds (7 kilos).

The order was booked in Q2 2020.

For further information, please contact:
Saab Press Centre,
+46 (0)734 180 018,
presscentre@saabgroup.com
www.saabgroup.com
Twitter: @Saab

Saab serves the global market with world-leading products, services and solutions within military defence and civil security. Saab has operations and employees on all continents around the world. Through innovative, collaborative and pragmatic thinking, Saab develops, adopts and improves new technology to meet customers' changing needs.

View source version on Saab: https://saabgroup.com/media/news-press/news/2020-07/saab-receives-carl-gustaf-order-from-u.-s.-army/

Sur le même sujet

  • Winning The Spectrum: Pentagon Unveils New Strategy

    19 mai 2020 | International, Sécurité

    Winning The Spectrum: Pentagon Unveils New Strategy

    By BRYAN CLARK and TIMOTHY WALTON on May 19, 2020 at 4:01 AM The Electromagnetic Spectrum is the key to waging electronic warfare, and EW is key to waging modern war. An enemy who can jam communications or GPS, mislead you (spoofing is the term of art) and stop your weapons from functioning (cyber attacks using radio waves). The US largely abandoned EW after the Cold War ended. Then the Russians made it very clear in their war against Ukraine just how effective EW could be and senior folks in the US military grew uneasy. They and Congress realized how much we had made ourselves vulnerable and the Hill ordered creation of a group to devise a strategy to restore American EW eminence. Bryan Clark and Tim Walton of the Hudson Institute preview the new strategy below — only at Breaking D Read on! The Editor. The electromagnetic spectrum is getting more popular and crowded every day. As Breaking D readers know, the DoD and FCC are battling over frequencies adjacent to those used by GPS, which the telecommunication company Ligado wants to use for its satellite-based 5G network. DoD worries that Ligado's transmissions will drown out the relatively weak signals that reach Earth from GPS satellites. Ligado fired what is only the first of what will be many salvos in the 5G spectrum battle. To achieve 5G's promised low latency and broadband speed telecommunication companies require wider swaths of spectrum compared to 4G–some of which they don't control. With high-frequency millimeter wave 5G towers only able to reach a few city blocks, telecom providers like Ligado are pursuing mid and low-band spectrum below 6 Ghz that enables greater coverage–but also puts them in conflict with FAA and military radars, radios, and GPS. The clamor for 5G spectrum comes as DoD is itself fielding a collection of new networks to support its concept of Joint All Domain Command and Control, or JADC2. The Army Integrated Tactical Network, Air Force Air Battle Management System, and Navy Integrated Fire Control combine existing datalinks and radios with emerging communications systems to connect all U.S. forces across a theater, placing new demands on spectrum. But the EM spectrum is also a global common like the air or sea. To prevent U.S. forces from operating effectively, the Chinese and Russian militaries spent the last 20 years modernizing their electronic warfare equipment, training new EW operators and technicians, and placing EW forces in every unit or formation. During the same period, DoD rested on its Cold War laurels and failed to invest in EW systems or training. DoD strategies developed in 2013 and 2017 addressed the growing challenges of managing and controlling the EM spectrum by directing services to develop better versions of current capabilities and concepts but failed to significantly close the gaps between the U.S. and adversary militaries. Congress, increasingly worried, mandated that DoD stand up an EM Spectrum Operations Cross-Functional Team and create a new strategy. That is nearing completion and may be DoD's last opportunity to gain an enduring advantage in the EM spectrum. New EM Spectrum Superiority Strategy Instead of incrementally improving existing EM systems and tactics in a doomed effort to solve capability shortfalls, the new EM Spectrum Superiority Strategy will emphasize how to undermine the strengths and exploit the weaknesses of adversaries in the EM spectrum. The strategies' initiatives will be targeted at fundamental asymmetries between U.S. and opposing militaries that can provide DoD leverage. A change in approach is desperately needed. The U.S. military didn't fall behind in EW and EM Spectrum Operations due to a lack of funding, as spending for both rose steadily since 2015, but because the additional dollars were not spent implementing a coherent strategy. Funding instead upgraded legacy systems to fill various capability gaps, not all of which were high priorities. Under today's plans, DoD will take decades to catch great power adversaries enjoying “home team” advantages and the luxury of focusing on only one potential opponent. Moreover, post-pandemic budget constraints will likely prevent increasing funding to plug capability gaps faster. The key asymmetry between the U.S. and opposing great power militaries is the simple facft that Chinese and Russian are close to likely areas of conflict. China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) and the Russian Armed Forces can place EW and sensor systems on their own territory or in nearby sea or airspace where they can rely on reliable and difficult-to-jam wired or line-of-sight EM communications. Leveraging their understanding of the environment, Chinese and Russian forces can employ passive, multistatic, and low-frequency EM sensors and pre-architected systems of systems and tactics to find and attack U.S. forces. The U.S. military must span the world. This requires a more expeditionary force and adaptable C2 process compared to the Chinese or Russians, and which can accommodate more contested communications, changing force packages, and the variety of local conditions. When communications are lost, junior leaders of U.S. forces would employ mission command, exploiting their initiative and judgement to improvise a course of action that follows the commander's intent. Giving The Enemy Something To Worry About The PLA's reliance on pre-planned, static systems of systems and tactics could be a liability against highly dynamic and unpredictable U.S. spectrum operations. The EM Spectrum Superiority Strategy should exploit this opportunity by adopting new operational concepts that emphasize maneuver and complexity. A maneuver-centric approach doesn't require across-the-board improvements to U.S. EM spectrum systems. To create complexity for opponents U.S. forces need capabilities for dynamic and automated spectrum sharing with commercial or military users guided by electronic support sensors and electromagnetic battle management, or EMBM, systems. To protect themselves from enemy attack, U.S. forces would rely on passive or multistatic sensing, complemented by LPI/LPD communications and electronic countermeasures. And U.S. electronic attacks would need the agility afforded by AI-enabled cognitive jammers that use photonics to move across wide ranges of spectrum. The ability of cognitive jammers or EMBM systems to understand the EM environment will depend on their access to information on threat, friendly, and civilian EM spectrum systems. Today, data and analysis from the Intelligence Community is slow to reach operators and slower still to be programmed into EW equipment. DoD will need to establish new frameworks for EM spectrum information sharing and build on its recent success in accelerating the reprogramming process by incorporating AI to a greater degree in deployed EW and EMBM systems. Capabilities for complex and unpredictable EM operations will be difficult to define for today's top-down requirements process, which seeks a point solution for a particular application and situation. DoD will need to identify potential new EM capabilities through comprehensive assessments of their mission impact in a variety scenarios using modeling and simulation or experimentation and mature them through new processes like the DoD Adaptive Acquisition Framework. The most challenging element of a new strategy will be preparing EW and EM spectrum operators for maneuver warfare. DoD's current ranges are unable to provide realistic EM operating environments for experimentation or training due to a lack of modern threat systems and concerns that adversaries can monitor U.S. EM emissions during live, open-air events. Rather than focusing on expensive range upgrades, DoD should shift its emphasis to virtual and constructive events, which would enable concept development, tactics innovation, and training against the most challenging threats at all security levels. The urgency to change DoD cannot continue pursuing EMS superiority through incremental, evolutionary improvements. This approach is too unfocused, will take too long to reach fruition, is potentially unaffordable, and cedes the initiative to America's adversaries. DoD should move in a new direction and focus EM capability development on implementing concepts for maneuver warfare that create adaptability for U.S. forces and complexity for adversaries. If the DoD does not mount a new more strategic and proactive approach to fighting in the EM spectrum, adversaries could be emboldened to continue their efforts to gain territory and influence at the expense of U.S. allies and partners. Demonstrating the ability to survive and fight in a contested and congested EM spectrum could help U.S. forces slow Chinese and Russian activities and give them something to worry about for a change. Bryan Clark is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute. Timothy Walton is a fellow at Hudson. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/05/winning-the-spectrum-pentagon-unveils-new-strategy/

  • Ukraine to buy 100 Rosomak armored vehicles from Poland

    3 avril 2023 | International, Terrestre

    Ukraine to buy 100 Rosomak armored vehicles from Poland

    Kyiv will pay for the rides with EU and US aid funds, according to Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki.

  • US Air Force nuclear, space programs take hit in border wall reprogramming

    14 mai 2019 | International, Aérospatial

    US Air Force nuclear, space programs take hit in border wall reprogramming

    By: Joe Gould , Aaron Mehta , and Valerie Insinna Correction: A previous version of this story contained an erroneous amount of reprogrammed money. The story has been updated to show the Pentagon reprogrammed $1.5 billion in FY19 funds. WASHINGTON — In the wake of the Pentagon reprogramming $1.5 billion in fiscal 2019 funds to support President Donald Trump's border wall with Mexico, only the U.S. Air Force appears to be losing money appropriated for equipment updates. The funding largely comes from personnel accounts in the Air Force, Navy and Army. But the Air Force is the only service to lose funding for hardware, including nuclear and conventional weapons, surveillance aircraft updates, and space programs. Overall, the Pentagon reprogrammed $818.465 million from FY19 defense appropriations, as well as $681.535 million from FY19 overseas contingency operations accounts, or OCO, to reach that $1.5 billion total. Lawmakers expressed concern that the use of military resources and manpower on the southern border will damage military readiness. However, acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan said last week that ongoing deployments to support the Defense Department aren't doing so. “We've seen no degradation to readiness,” he told Senate appropriators May 8 at a defense budget hearing. “In fact, in some cases, it's enhanced our readiness because the troops get to perform certain functions.” Congressional Democrats and some Republicans have objected to the administration's use of this mechanism for funding the president's border wall, arguing it bypasses Congress' constitutional power of the purse. For the second time in recent weeks, the Pentagon ignored decades of precedent and carried out the transfer of funds without first consulting with the Senate Appropriations Committee. Sen. Patrick Leahy, the Senate Appropriations Committee's top Democrat, led a letter to Shanahan on May 10 to object to the latest instance, saying it harms hurricane cleanup at Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida. “We are dismayed that the Department has chosen to prioritize a political campaign promise over the disaster relief needs of our service members, given the finite reprogramming authority available," the lawmakers wrote. They noted that Shanahan's decision to notify Congress of the reprogramming came a day after he testified before the subpanel that oversees defense spending, and they wrote that they welcomed his views on “how you intend to repair the damaged relationship between the defense oversight committees and the [Defense] Department.” The letter was also signed by the Senate Armed Services Committee's top Democrat, Sen. Jack Reed, as well as Democratic Sens. Dick Durbin, Brian Schatz, Tom Udall , Patty Murray, Chris Murphy, Tammy Baldwin, Dianne Feinstein and Jon Tester. The reprogramming could be a topic at Shanahan's future confirmation hearing for the full job of defense secretary. A date for that hearing has not been set. Why the Air Force? About half of the non-OCO $818 million sum the Defense Department wants to redirect to the border comes from Air Force accounts, with space and missile programs taking the biggest hit. In total, the Pentagon expects the service to shear $402 million off its FY19 budget. About $210 million would be cut from Air Force space programs, specifically the Evolved Expandable Launch Vehicle program, which funds the use of rockets that send satellites and other capabilities into space. According to the reprogramming document, one rocket launch has been canceled due to the “Space Test Program (STP)-4 satellite provider termination of the Robotic Servicing of Geosynchronous Satellites (RSGS) spacecraft,” which is no longer necessary under the National Security Strategy. The Air Force's program for modernizing its E-3 Sentry early warning aircraft — more commonly called AWACS — also could lose funding that it no longer needs in FY19. The program, "Diminishing Manufacturing Sources Replacement of Avionics for Global Operations and Navigation,” or DRAGON, updates the E-3's avionics and brings it into compliance with future air traffic control requirements. But it is moving too slowly to use all of the funds it was appropriated in FY19, so the administration aims to have $57 million diverted for border protection. DRAGON has been delayed for two reasons, according to the reprogramming request. First, “aircraft have been available for programmed depot maintenance” at a slower-than-planned rate, dragging out the modification schedule. Additionally, DRAGON integration can only occur after AWACS are upgraded to the Block 40/45 configuration, and not all aircraft have gone through that process. The Air Force sees AWACS as a key part of its initial version of the Advanced Battle Management System, a family of systems that will provide ground surveillance across the different military services. Instead of retiring seven E-3s in FY18, Gen. Mike Holmes, head of Air Combat Command, said those planes could be upgraded with new sensors and communications gear. However, DRAGON isn't the only modernization effort for the Sentry that is moving slower than expected. In November, Bloomberg reported that the service terminated a contract with Boeing to upgrade the AWAC's characteristic disc-shaped radar due to repeated delays. Other Air Force programs that will take a hit include a planned upgrade to the Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile and the air-launched cruise missile programs. A number of top defense officials previously said nuclear modernization is the top priority for the Pentagon, including Ellen Lord, the department's acquisition head, who on May 1 told Congress: “We have weapons that are decades over what was supposed to be their useful life. And we are out of time. We need to continue on the path we're on, or we are going to fall behind and not have the nuclear deterrence that we enjoy today.” The document reprograms $24.3 million, of the $124.5 million appropriated in FY19, from the Minuteman III Launch Control Block Upgrade program; the document claims funds are available due to a “slip in the production schedule for FY 2020.” Meanwhile, $29.6 million — more than half of the $47.6 million appropriated for the air-launched cruise missile programs in FY19 — will be reprogrammed. The explanation for that change: “Funds are available due to contract savings from reduced guided missile flight controller modification requirements; and due to lack of executable requirements for Support Equipment and Low Cost Mods in FY 2019.” The reprogramming of funds for the Hellfire missile is also notable, as the Pentagon has identified a lack of munitions stockpiles as a major issue to address in its budget request. As an example, the FY20 budget called for the maximum rate of production possible on Hellfire: $730.8 million for 9,000 of the weapons. The document states that funds are “available due to contract savings from all variants that provide precision kill capabilities. Savings are attributed to negotiated lower unit costs per missile system.” https://www.defensenews.com/smr/federal-budget/2019/05/13/us-air-force-nuclear-space-programs-take-hit-in-border-wall-reprogramming/

Toutes les nouvelles