The US Army sees a future of robots and AI. But what if budget cuts and leadership changes get in the way?

Sur le même sujet

• 

  7 avril 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Terrestre, C4ISR

  Think Tank Creates Informal Forum For Japan NGF Talks

  Japan's Next Generation Fighter (NGF) acquisition program is the focus of a new informal channel set up by a Washington think tank for Japanese, U.S., British and Australian officials to discuss requirements and expectations. The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) held the first meeting in January with 25-30 people. It included government officials, business executives, and think tanks from all four countries, said Patrick Buchan, director of the center's U.S. Alliances Project. Organized as a “Track 1.5” level working group in the language of diplomacy, it represents a middle ground between formal, government-to-government talks and back-channel diplomacy, Buchan said. It is a format that allows government officials to discuss issues privately, with Chatham House rules imposed to avoid public attribution, Buchan says. The chair of the working group is CSIS Vice President for Asia Michael Green. He organized it to help avoid the miscommunications and disappointments of the FS-X program, which led in the late-1980s and early 1990s to Japan's underperforming F-2 fleet, Buchan says. The FS-X collaboration was designed amidst escalating trade tensions in the late 1980s between Japan and the U.S., two otherwise strong Pacific allies. Likewise, the Trump administration's demand for a 400% increase in Japanese payments to the U.S. to subsidize the costs of the U.S. military presence has also created friction within the alliance. The difference between the two eras is that China's military modernization efforts over the past three decades has raised the stakes for the outcome of the NGF development process, Buchan says. Neither side can afford a result that leads to a combat system that falls short of Japan's expectations for capability. Understanding the difficulty of directly engaging Japanese government officials, CSIS conceived of the working group to offer Tokyo an informal channel for discussing the desired capabilities and industrial collaboration for the NGF, Buchan says. In the first meeting, Green posed 12 multiple-choice questions to the group. Each member secretly answered by clicking a button on an individual controller. CSIS plans to release the full list of questions and answers from the first working group later this spring, along with an analysis. One example provided by Buchan was a question about technical compatibility for the NGF. Other than the U.S., the group was asked which country in the Indo-Pacific region should the NGF be compatible with. The possible answers included Australia, India and South Korea. Eighty-three percent of the respondents said the NGF should be compatible with Australia's air force, Buchan says. https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/aircraft-propulsion/think-tank-creates-informal-forum-japan-ngf-talks

• 

  18 septembre 2019 | International, Aérospatial

  Hypersonic weapons could give the B-1 bomber a new lease on life

  By: Aaron Mehta NATIONAL HARBOR, Md. — It's been a rough stretch for the U.S. Air Force's fleet of 62 B-1B Lancer bombers, with a pair of fleet shutdowns over safety concerns and the confirmation of plans to start retiring the plane as the new B-21 comes online, even as the much older B-52 remains in service. But speaking at the Air Force Association's annual conference Monday, Gen. Timothy Ray, the head of Air Force Global Strike Command, seemed to throw his support behind keeping the B-1 around for quite some time. In fact, in Ray's mind, the B-1′s capabilities might expand. Several times throughout the speech, Ray emphasized that while the B-21 is slowly spinning up, he can't afford to lose any capability. Indeed, Ray seemed to posture toward keeping the B-1 over the long term, according to John Venable, a senior defense fellow at the Heritage Foundation and former F-16 command pilot. “One of the major takeaways [from the speech] is that the B-1 is not going to go away nearly as soon as people thought,” Venable said, “and that's a good thing.” Under the Air Force's stated goal of 386 squadrons, the service's force mix requirement is about 225 bombers. The service currently has 156, Ray said, and even with the B-21 coming online sometime in the 2020s, planned retirements to the B-1 and B-2 would keep the bomber force under 200. Ray's belief in the B-1 spans from two broad assessments. First, freed from the heavy workload of B-1s performing regular close-air support activities in Iraq and Afghanistan, the fleet will experience less wear and tear, and hence survive longer than projected. “We're just flying the airplane in a way we shouldn't have been flying it, and we did for far too long. The good news is we're resetting that entire team,” Ray said. “What we thought was a very sizable load of structural issues” ended up being a “fraction” of issues to deal with, he added. Those structural issues have become particularly visible in the last 16 months, with the entire B-1 fleet grounded twice for mechanical issues. In June 2018, the fleet was grounded for two weeks following the discovery of an issue with the Lancer's ejection seat; in March 2019, another ejection seat issue grounded the fleet for almost a month. Members of Congress have since expressed serious concerns about the B-1's readiness rates, a number that was just more than 50 percent in 2018. Ray expressed optimism about the mechanical issues, saying that any fallout from the ejection seat shutdowns will be completed by the end of October, which is “must faster” than the service predicted. The second reason Ray believes there's still life in the B-1? The idea that there are modifications to the Lancer that would add new capabilities relevant in an era of great power competition. In August, the Air Force held a demonstration of how the B-1 could be modified to incorporate four to eight new hypersonic weapons by shifting the bulkhead forward from a bomb bay on the aircraft, increasing the size inside the plane from 180 inches to 269 inches. That change allows the loading of a Conventional Rotary Launcher, the same system used inside the B-52, onto the B-1. According to an Air Force release, first reported by Military.com, the bulkhead change is temporary, giving the B-1 flexibility based on its mission. Overall, the internal bay could be expanded from 24 to 40 weapons, per the service. In addition, the testers proved new racks could be attached to hardpoints on the wings. “The conversation we're having now is how we take that bomb bay [and] put four potentially eight large hypersonic weapons on there,” Ray said. “Certainly, the ability to put more JASSM-ER [Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile Extended Range] or LRASM [Long Range Anti-Ship Missile] externally on the hardpoints as we open those up. So there's a lot more we can do.” Said Venable: “I think it's a great idea. Increasing our bomber force end strength, we're not going to get there just by buying B-21[s] and retiring the B-1s.” “Adding a new rotary [launcher that] he was talking about, just behind the bulkhead of the cockpit of the B-1, freeing up the pylons to actually manifest more longer-range weapons and give it a greater penetrating strike capability — those are great takeaways from this particular event,” the analyst added. https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/air-force-association/2019/09/17/global-strike-head-makes-case-of-b-1-survival/

• 

  19 novembre 2019 | International, Aérospatial

  The US Air Force is in no hurry to commit to a next-gen fighter design

  By: Sebastian Sprenger BERLIN — The U.S. Air Force is taking its time to settle on a next-generation fighter design, awaiting instead lessons learned from the F-35 jet and playing the field with promising technologies, according to a senior service official. Options being kicked around are still in the conceptual stage, as America's newest fighter, the fifth-generation F-35, is only now “coming off the line,” according to Lt. Gen. David Nahom, the Air Force's deputy chief of staff for plans and programs. “We're not in a hurry,” Nahom told Defense News on the sidelines of the International Fighter Conference, an air power-themed confab of industry and government officials held in Berlin, Germany. He noted that expected deliveries of the F-35 and the relatively young age of the F-22 fleet enables the service to be picky about moving forward with the envisioned Next Generation Air Dominance weapon. In short, the Air Force wants to keep its options open for as long as possible for a weapon whose combat punch will lie not in a single aircraft but rather in the amalgamation of hardware and software, an airborne concerto of data clouds, artificial intelligence, and boundless interconnectivity. “We don't want to get too stuck into a platform,” Nahom said. “It's a very different way to approach it.” Still, the service plans to lay the groundwork for boosting the domain of information and data — organizing it, analyzing it, sharing it — as a key element for future aerial warfare. To that end, officials will include a “significant investment in the digital backbone” in the next budget request, Nahom said. As the Air Force studies its options, service analysts have shied away from the term “sixth-generation” aircraft as a successor to the F-35 because it's unclear what breakthrough technology will be created next. “What are the characteristics of sixth-generation? I don't know,” Nahom said. “Stealth is important,” he added, referring to one of the advertised features of the F-35. “But speed is important, too.” The service aims to develop a new capability quickly once the theoretical legwork is done. That is why there is a renewed emphasis now on engineering processes and algorithm development that Nahom said will have to unfold much faster than under previous aircraft programs. Air Force acquisition chief Will Roper has put down a marker to develop an aircraft within five years. “Based on what industry thinks they can do and what my team will tell me, we will need to set a cadence of how fast we think we build a new airplane from scratch. Right now, my estimate is five years. I may be wrong,” he told Defense News in an interview in September. The service's information-heavy tack on future aerial warfare echoes two European projects aimed at building a next-generation weapon: the British-led Tempest and the Franco-German-Spanish Future Combat Air System. Both programs also lean on the the premise that data clouds, driven by artificial intelligence, can turn flying pieces of metal into breakthrough weaponry. In the case of the continental program, an envisioned “combat cloud” will be “the ocean between the islands of the platforms,” French Maj. Gen. Jean-Pascal Breton said at the conference. But Nahom noted a difference in the American way of thinking when it comes to piercing contested airspace — a key skill required of all future warplanes. While the Europeans seem to perceive the task as popping dispersed bubbles of ever-improving air defense systems, the U.S. view is that any airspace may be contested at any given time. That means a next-generation aircraft will be constantly engaged in the mission of punching its way through enemy defenses, like finding the holes in a never-ending series of Swiss cheese, Nahom said. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2019/11/18/the-us-air-force-is-in-no-hurry-to-commit-to-a-next-gen-fighter-design/