Serbia looks to join Spanish surveillance drone program

Sur le même sujet

• 

  3 mars 2021 | International, Aérospatial

  SCAF, faut-il persévérer dans l’erreur ?

  CHRONIQUE. "Une réflexion sur la pérennité de la coopération bilatérale franc...

• 

  4 décembre 2020 | International, Aérospatial

  The US Air Force wants to buy a big robot to help with bomb disposal

  By: Valerie Insinna and Jen Judson UPDATE — This story has been updated to add comment from L3Harris on its participation in the competition. WASHINGTON — A year after the U.S. Army awarded a contract to build a heavy-duty robot able to dispose of bombs and other explosives, the Air Force is looking for its own system — and it wants to see what's on the market before committing to purchasing what the Army buys. The Air Force in October released a solicitation for a large explosive ordnance disposal robot, a commercial off-the-shelf system equipped with a maneuverable arm and a camera system that can function in all terrain types, environments and weather conditions. An Air Force spokesman declined to confirm how many companies submitted bids for the program, which were due Nov. 20. One competitor has already come forward: FLIR, which is set to rake in as much as $109 million building its Kobra robot for the Army's Common Robotic System-Heavy program. The company began full-rate production of Kobra last month and is confident the Air Force will follow the Army's example by choosing the same system. “As the chosen provider for the Army's Common Robotic System-Heavy (CRS-H) program, FLIR believes its extensively tested and proven unmanned ground system meets the Air Force needs in the large EOD robot category, while enabling commonality of equipment with other services' EOD forces,” said Tom Frost, who runs FLIR's unmanned ground systems business. QinetiQ, which lost out to FLIR in the CRS-H competition, did not respond to a query about whether it had bid on the Air Force program. An L3Harris spokesperson confirmed to Defense News that it had submitted its T7 EOD robot to the Air Force competition. L3Harris said it wanted to be chosen for the CRS-H program in 2018. The company unveiled the robot at the Association of the US Army's annual conference in 2016 letting show attendees take a crack at operating the arm on the robot. The controller looks like the back end of a gun making it easy to hold, and is hooked to sensors that transfer information to the robotic arm on the T7. The United Kingdom is a customer of the T7 for EOD missions. At times, the Air Force has joined Army robot programs without needing to hold a competition. But in the case of larger EOD robots, the two services have differing requirements that have led the Air Force to seek out its own system instead of jumping into the CRS-H program, said S. Chase Cooper, a contracting officer who is managing the EOD robot solicitation on behalf of the Air Force's 772nd Enterprise Sourcing Squadron “The major difference is that the Army's mission is primarily to operate ‘outside the wire' ” — that is, outside of a secure military installation — “where the Air Force's mission is primarily ‘inside the wire.' These are two entirely different environments,” he said in a statement to Defense News. Cooper also pointed to additional considerations such as the size and weight of the system. Most Air Force EOD missions occur after bombs or other improvised explosive devices are found at a base or installation. When that happens, teams load robots and other gear into a Base Response Vehicle or Bomb Squad Emergency Response Vehicle, drive out to the location of the explosive device, and safely dispose of the explosive. Whatever robot the Air Force chooses must be small enough to fit inside those vehicles, Cooper said. That includes passing through a 32-inch-wide door opening and parking into a space 91 inches long and 63 inches high. The Air Force's requirement for weight, which is set at a maximum of 1,000 pounds, is less stringent than the Army's 700-pound limit. The Air Force also called for a system with a minimum 800-meter, line-of-sight radio range, and a 3-hour runtime that will allow it complete the majority of EOD missions. Cooper noted that the Air Force's decision to pursue an open competition does not preclude the FLIR robot from being chosen by the service. “It is unknown at this time if that system would meet our requirements,” Cooper said. “Through our contracting process, we are evaluating all of the proposed large robot systems against the Air Force's requirement so we can make sure the system we purchase is the best one for our airmen.” The Air Force has a history of both collaborating with the Army on EOD robots and going its own way. For its medium-sized unmanned ground vehicle, the Air Force opted to use the Army's existing contract under the Man Transportable Robotic System Increment II program for FLIR's Centaur UGV, which is also being purchased by the Navy and Marine Corps. But while QinetiQ beat out FLIR in the Army's competition for CRS-Individual — a man-packable robot that is less than 25 pounds — the Air Force ended up pursuing a separate contract to meet its own unique needs for small unmanned ground vehicles. https://www.defensenews.com/air/2020/12/03/the-air-force-wants-to-buy-a-big-robot-to-help-with-bomb-disposal/

• 

  17 décembre 2018 | International, Aérospatial

  Budget watchdog warns this fighter could cost three times that of the F-35

  By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — A next-generation air superiority jet for the U.S. Air Force, known by the service as Penetrating Counter Air, could cost about $300 million in 2018 dollars per plane, the Congressional Budget Office states in a new study. At that price, PCA would be more than three times that of the average F-35A jet, which is set at about $94 million to capture both the expense of early production lots and the decline in cost as the production rate increases, according the report, which predicts the cost of replacing the Air Force's aircraft inventory from now until 2050. This sum, while not an official cost estimate from the Pentagon, represents the first time a government entity has weighed in on the potential price tag for PCA. The CBO estimates the Air Force will need 414 PCA aircraft to replace existing F-15C/Ds and F-22s, the Air Force's current fighters geared toward air-to-air combat. It also surmises that the first aircraft will enter service in 2030, based on the service's stated desire to begin fielding PCA around that time frame. The reason for the whopping price tag? Part of it comes down to the cost of new technology. “The PCA aircraft would probably have a greater range and payload, as well as improved stealth and sensor capabilities, than today's F-22; those characteristics would help it operate in the presence of the high-end air defenses that DoD believes China, Russia, and other potential adversaries may have in the future,” the CBO states. The other reason comes down to history. The Air Force doesn't have a great track record when it comes to producing stealth aircraft at the low costs initially envisioned by leadership. Both the B-2 and F-22 programs were truncated in part due to the high price per plane — which in turn contributed to the production rate never accelerating to the point where unit costs begin to decrease. The early years of the F-35 program were also marred by a series of cost overruns that eventually prompted the Pentagon to restructure it. “Containing costs for the PCA aircraft may be similarly difficult,” the report states. The Air Force has said little about PCA since the release of the Air Superiority 2030 flight plan in 2016, which stated a need for a new fighter jet that would be networked into a family of systems of other air, space, cyber and electronic warfare technologies. “The replacement may not be a single platform,” Gen. Dave Goldfein, the Air Force's chief of staff, told Defense News earlier this year. “It may be two or three different kinds of capabilities and systems. And so as we look at air superiority in the future, ensuring that we're advancing to stay ahead of the adversary, we're looking at all those options.” Although Air Force leadership won't say exactly what it's doing to develop PCA or when a new jet may be coming online, it's clearly making investments. In the fiscal 2019 budget, the service requested $504 million for “next-generation air dominance,” its portfolio of future fighter technologies and weapons. The Air Force expects to ramp up funding to $1.4 billion in FY20, hitting a high in FY22 with a projected $3.1 billion in spending. According to the CBO's analysis, Air Force procurement of new aircraft could peak at about $26 billion in 2033, as the service buys both the F-35 and PCA. Those two fighters, together with the B-21 bomber, are set to be the largest drivers of cost as procurement reaches its height in the mid-2030s. “Although the Air Force could probably modify both retirement plans and replacement schedules to smooth out the 2033 peak, the average annual costs of procuring new aircraft would still be higher than in the recent past: $15 billion in the 2020s, $23 billion in the 2030s, and $15 billion in the 2040s,” the report states. Dealing with an upcoming bow wave CBO's estimates included 35 platforms that will be replacing legacy systems, with six programs making up more than 85 percent of the projected procurement costs cited throughout the report: the F-35, PCA, the KC-46A, the B-21, the C-130J cargo plane as well as the yet-unannounced C-17 replacement. The report envisions a future where the Air Force is allowed to retire all of its legacy fighter and attack aircraft — the A-10, the F-15, the F-16 and even the F-22 — in favor of three aircraft: the F-35, PCA and a light attack aircraft configured to take on low-threat missions. The Air Force has yet to decide whether to buy a light-attack aircraft or how extensive its purchase may be, although the service is expected to put out a request for proposals by the end of the month. “Funding for new fighter aircraft makes up about half of the total projected costs of procuring new aircraft,” the CBO states, with the F-35 set to be the most expensive program through the 2020s until PCA takes its place in the early 2030s. The Air Force could decrease costs in a couple of ways, although all of them come with significant drawbacks. For one, it could extend the lives of its legacy fighter and attack aircraft, and delay programs like PCA. However, the CBO notes that “obtaining replacement parts can be both difficult and expensive, and a refurbished fleet may not provide as many available and mission-capable aircraft as a new fleet.” If the service wants to increase the availability of its inventory without paying the high price associated with developing a new stealth fighter, it could retire its legacy F-15s and F-16s and buy new ones. That option is probably more expensive, but would result in aircraft that are more reliable. The Air Force could also defer the PCA program while allowing some of its legacy aircraft to be retired, the CBO posits. However, Air Force leadership contend that the service is already too small, with Secretary Heather Wilson arguing that the number of operational squadrons needs to increase from 312 to 386 — a goal that necessitates buying more aircraft. https://www.defensenews.com/air/2018/12/14/budget-watchdogs-warn-of-expensive-price-tag-for-next-air-force-fighter/