Stealthy BLOODALCHEMY Malware Targeting ASEAN Government Networks

Sur le même sujet

• 

  27 avril 2020 | International, Aérospatial

  DoD Tries Again on Multi-Billion Missile Interceptor

  After a failed attempt to replace the current missile killers, the Pentagon wants to hurry and get the new technology online. By PAUL MCLEARY WASHINGTON: The Missile Defense Agency issued a long-awaited request for proposal today for its next-generation missile interceptor, eight months after the surprise cancellation of its multi-billion dollar attempt to replace the current, aging system. The Next Generation Interceptor program will replace the Redesigned Kill Vehicle effort, the Boeing and Raytheon project that failed to get off the ground. The new competition calls for contractors to submit bids by July 31, though it will be years before anything can be built and tested. MDA chief Vice Adm. Jon Hill said last month that he wants to field the new system as soon as possible, and a timeline of 2030, is “unacceptable from a warfighter view” and “unacceptable to me as a program manager.” But it's unclear when a system will be ready for testing. “We want to deliver the first round as soon as possible,” Hill continued. “That also means we can't take shortcuts in the design or in the requirements or in the flight testing regime, because if you want to go save time that is what most programs will do, so we can't afford that, but I will tell you that timeline will be driven by who we award to.” The RKV program was part of an ambitious technology effort helmed by Boeing — though Raytheon was building the Kill Vehicles — to replace the current Exo-Atmospheric Kill Vehicle. Both are ground-based interceptors designed to defend the US against long-range ballistic missile attacks. The companies won't have to pay back any of the billion-plus dollars the government awarded them to do the work, as Pentagon officials have said some of the effort can be salvaged and used on the new program. Problems had been mounting in the program's development for years. The Missile Defense Agency said back in 2016 it expected the first RKV flight test by 2019, with fielding in 2020. The last estimate, released with the fiscal 2020 budget request, pushed the fielding date back to 2025. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/04/dod-tries-again-on-multi-billion-missile-interceptor/

• 

  11 février 2019 | International, Aérospatial

  German F-35 decision sacrifices NATO capability for Franco-German industrial cooperation

  By: Hans Binnendijk and Jim Townsend While the German decision last week to remove the Lockheed Martin F-35 from consideration as a replacement for 90 aging Tornado fighters solidifies Franco-German industrial cooperation, it could come at the expense of making Germany's Luftwaffe a less capable air force until at least 2040, when a new advanced Franco-German fighter becomes available. The decision also places German domestic political considerations ahead of Germany's leadership role in NATO. This would be understandable for a nation that does not perceive a significant military threat from Russia, but it is disturbing for those who emphasize the need to maximize NATO's deterrent posture in the East. The decision should be reconsidered. After removing the F-35 (and also the older F-15) from consideration, Germany now has three choices. It can augment its planned 177 Eurofighter Typhoon fleet with up to 90 additional Typhoons adapted for suppression of enemy air defense and electronic warfare missions. That fleet of some 267 Typhoons would simplify servicing and training, but it could also ground the entire German fighter fleet should major structural problems appear in the aircraft. The Typhoon has had considerable readiness problems: Germany would be putting all of its fighter eggs in one basket. Germany could alternatively buy 90 Boeing F-18s (Super Hornets and Growlers), which is still under active German consideration. That decision would provide better air-to-ground and electronic-warfare capabilities for Germany than the additional Typhoons. But it would still leave Germany behind without a fifth-generation fighter as other allies move onto the future of air power. Or Germany could buy some mix of additional Typhoons and F-18s. Today, Germany flies no U.S.-built aircraft, and some observers are betting against the F-18 for that reason. These three remaining alternatives are all second best from the perspective of maximizing Germany's air power and its leadership among NATO air forces. Operationally, the F-35 is by far the best airplane in this mix. It has stealth and battle-management capabilities that are a generation ahead of the Typhoon or F-18. It is a force multiplier that enhances the capabilities of lesser allied aircraft. If the Luftwaffe needs to penetrate heavy air defenses in a future fight, their pilots would be more secure in the F-35. The Luftwaffe without F-35s would be hard-pressed to fight alone in a contested air environment. Currently eight NATO nations have agreed to purchase the F-35. Those nations will have highly interoperable fifth-generation aircraft. They will provide for the elite fighters in future NATO air-superiority and defense-suppression missions. Without the F-35, Germany will be absent from that elite group, and German pilots would probably be given only secondary missions. The F-35 also has advantages to perform Germany's NATO nuclear mission. The ability of the F-35 to penetrate and survive these missions is superior. The F-35 would have been nuclear-certified prior to delivery. Certification for the Typhoon and F-18s would take additional time, money and German political capital. The default position, therefore, might be further life extensions for the old Tornados and further degradation of NATO's nuclear deterrence. It is no wonder that the chief of the German Luftwaffe publicly declared his support for the F-35. He was silenced and retired early. So why did German political leaders make this decision? Money alone is not the answer. While the F-35 is a much better plane, its costs are coming down considerably to the point where they would be about as much as a Typhoon. The Typhoon would, of course, have local labor benefits. Nor is availability the answer. Lockheed has told the Germans that they could have their first F-35 three years after a contract is signed. The answer is more political and industrial. The Merkel government rules by grand coalition, with Social Democrats holding key positions in the Federal Foreign Office and the Finance Ministry. The Social Democrats tend to resist greater defense spending and have a more benign view of Russia's intentions. Many resist Germany's nuclear mission. And no one in the coalition wants to reward U.S. President Donald Trump. More important, France and Germany are drawing closer together on defense policy in the wake of Brexit and President Trump's criticisms of NATO. The recently signed Aachen Treaty committed the two nationsto new levels of cooperation in defense and foreign policy. A center piece of this reinforced Franco-German defense cooperation is an agreement reached last summer to jointly design and produce a next-generation fighter by 2040. Dassault and Airbus plan to leverage their current Rafale and Typhoon aircraft as a bridge to this new joint aircraft. Paris fears that a German purchase of the F-35, especially in large numbers, could undercut the need for the next-gen fighter and harm European capabilities to produce advanced fighters. They have let Berlin know this. A strong Franco-German engine at the heart of European defense is to be encouraged. But it should not come at the expense of optimal NATO air power and deterrence. Nor should it come at the expense of broader NATO solidarity. Germany should reconsider its F-35 decision and purchase at least enough F-35s to retain its leadership position in European air power and its familiarity with fifth-generation aircraft technology. Its European allies, who will also be negatively impacted, should weigh in. Failing this, a purchase of the F-18 would be a second-best option. Hans Binnendijk is a distinguished fellow at the Atlantic Council and formerly served as the U.S. National Security Council's senior director for defense policy. James Townsend is a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security and formerly served as deputy assistant secretary of defense for European and NATO policy. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2019/02/08/german-f-35-decision-sacrifices-nato-capability-for-franco-german-industrial-cooperation/

• 

  15 août 2019 | International, Aérospatial

  Small-satellites and Downstream Digital Transformation Accelerate Space Industry Evolution

  Global launch demand and cumulative launch opportunities of $102.52 billion from 2019-2030 will augment growth prospects, finds Frost & Sullivan LONDON, Aug. 14, 2019 /CNW/ -- New market entrants, platforms, services and business models are disrupting the global space industry. To serve an evolving market, value chain players are developing flexible, affordable, dedicated, competitive and complementary solutions for end customers to sustain significant growth opportunities. Frost & Sullivan forecasts the total revenue opportunities for the global satellite manufacturing market to soar past $366.06 billion with global launch demand for 12,766 satellites and cumulative launch opportunities of $102.52 billion for the period 2019 to 2030. "The space industry is rapidly evolving. Not only are satellite platforms becoming more agile and robust with the execution of software-based satellites, electric propulsion systems and spot beam offerings, but competition in the launch services market is lowering prices and new entrants with mega-constellation-based business models are poised to disrupt the connectivity and earth observation market," said Arun Kumar Sampathkumar, Industry Manager, Space at Frost & Sullivan. Currently, there is a clear gap between satellite launch demand and the supply of launch services with an average launch wait period of six months to two years for satellite operators. However, more than 40 global new participants are developing launch vehicles to bridge this gap. "In the small-satellite launch segment, the major unmet needs include on-demand launch, independent mission from the primary launch payload, and launch cost," noted Sampathkumar. "Due to the existing gap between supply and launch, the launch service market is price inelastic. However, with the entry of new vehicles and reusable capabilities, launch supply is likely to increase and will lead the market towards price sensitivity." Downstream data pressures have meant that communication satellites represent the fastest growing market segment, increasing demand for the manufacture of high-throughput and constellation communication satellites. Sampathkumar sees multiple incumbents and new participants looking to install their high-capacity communication satellites in Geostationary Earth Orbit (GEO), Medium Earth Orbit (MEO), and Low Earth Orbit (LEO) orbits. This will result in both new installation and recurring replacement mission demand for manufacturing communication satellites. Growth opportunities participants should tap into for future successes include: The manufacturing sector utilising COTS technologies, additive manufacturing, Industrial IoT (IIoT), and serial production with systems and satellite platform standardisation. The launch services sector focussing on infrastructure-as-a-service for dedicated launch service providers and vehicle reusability to reduce launch costs. Ground station services players developing a global network of ground stations that utilise automated aggregator platforms as well as standarise mission control processes and systems. Earth observation participants developing affordable standard platforms for value-added service providers. Satellite communication players focussing on network standardisation and integration, including terrestrial and capacities in LEO, MEO, and GEO. 'Consumerisation' of Space has taken a leap forward with end users demanding seamless connectivity, actionable geospatial intelligence, and advanced sensing capabilities to drive new business propositions and solutions. Disruptions impacting the ecosystem are driven by technology, manufacturing processes and business models from traditional players like SES, SpaceX and Airbus, and new space participants like RocketLab, EarthNow, OneWeb and SpireGlobal. Frost & Sullivan latest analysis, Global Space Industry Outlook, 2019 and Beyond explores key questions such as what drives the market? What are the critical shifts to watch? Which best practices are important to note? Who are the emerging players? The space industry within the scope of this study is segmented into satellite manufacturing, launch services, ground stations and satellite networks, and downstream applications including satellite communication, earth observation, navigation, scientific missions, and technology demonstration. Global Space Industry Outlook, 2019 and Beyond is the latest addition to Frost & Sullivan's Space research and analysis available through the Frost & Sullivan Leadership Council, which helps organisations identify a continuous flow of growth opportunities to succeed in an unpredictable future. https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/small-satellites-and-downstream-digital-transformation-accelerate-space-industry-evolution-802341560.html