18 août 2020 | International, Naval

Top US Navy chief talks connecting tech, recovering from accidents


WASHINGTON — The U.S. Navy is on the brink of what could be a major shift in how it operates, but first the service's top officer wants a plan to both field technologies that have been lagging for years and develop a path forward to add new unmanned tech to the mainstream fleet.

Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Michael Gilday took on his latest role in August 2019 and has since been vocal about not just the need to field new tech, but also figuring out how it all fits together.

In an exclusive July 16 interview with Defense News, the CNO talked about developing and executing his plans, as well as what it will take for the Navy to recover from a series of high-profile accidents and scandals.

The interview has been edited for brevity and clarity.

Congress has been asking how the Navy plans to integrate unmanned surface vessels, and whether the service is prematurely committing to them.

We've got a family of unmanned systems we're working on. Undersea, we've got extra-large, large and medium unmanned underwater vehicles; on the surface we have small, medium and large unmanned surface vessels; and in the air we have a number of programs.

What I've asked the N9 [warfare systems directorate] to do is come to me with a campaign plan that ties all those together with objectives at the end. I've got a bunch of horses in the race, but at some point I have to put my money down on the thoroughbred that's going to take me across the finish line so I can make an investment in a platform I have high confidence in and that I can scale.

What I've found is that we didn't necessarily have the rigor that's required across a number of programs that would bring those together in a way that's driven toward objectives with milestones. If you took a look at [all the programs], where are there similarities and where are there differences? Where am I making progress in meeting conditions and meeting milestones that we can leverage in other experiments? At what point do I reach a decision point where I drop a program and double down on a program that I can accelerate?

Observers have questioned whether the Navy has a concrete idea of what it wants these unmanned surface vessels to do. What's the progress on that front?

The concept of operations that the fleet is working on right now will be delivered in the fall, and that talks conceptually about how we intend to employ unmanned in distributed maritime operations. The other piece of this is, what would a day-to-day laydown look like of unmanned forward?

The Navy has got to be forward: For obvious reasons we don't want the fight back here; the Navy exists to operate forward. That's where we need to be in numbers. And with unmanned, if you are not there at the right time, you are irrelevant.

There has to be a number of unmanned [systems] forward. I can't just decide to rally unmanned out of San Diego or in the Pacific northwest at a time when they'll be too late to need.

You've talked about a “Manhattan Project” to get a reliable network to deploy overseas that can bind together all these new platforms. Where are you with that?

That's a critical piece of this, and a really important point of discussion with respect to unmanned, whether that's in the air, on the sea or under the sea, is the Navy Tactical Grid. Coming into the job, the projections for the Navy Tactical Grid was for delivery in about 2035. I knew that was way, way too late.

We're investing in netted weapons, netted platforms, netted headquarters — but we don't have a net.

So, on a handshake with [then-Air Force Chief of Staff] Gen. [David] Goldfein, I said: “Look, I am all in, and my vision is that the Navy Tactical Grid would be the naval plug into JADC2 [Joint All-Domain Command and Control].”

So the Navy Tactical Grid is a very critical piece of the unmanned campaign plan because it becomes the main artery for controlling all those unmanned platforms. Without it, I have a bunch of unmanned that I shouldn't be building because I can't control it very well. I need to put a team of the best subject matter experts that I have on the Navy Tactical Grid to deliver it here within the next few years.

As part of its mark on the National Defense Authorization Act, both the House and the Senate made moves to slow down the development of the large unmanned surface vessel. They cited technical glitches with the Littoral Combat Ship program and the Ford class that have resulted in delays. Do you have concerns about slowing down that development, or is there merit to taking a slower, more iterative approach to fielding technologies?

First of all, I actually agree with Congress on this. It is frustrating when you get marks on “large unmanned surface vessel” because they are concerned with the command and control of the missile systems that we could potentially put on those platforms or other systems.

I go back to the campaign plan: The approach has to be deliberate. We have to make sure that the systems that are on those unmanned systems with respect to the [hull, mechanical and electrical system], that they are designed to requirement, and perform to requirement. And most importantly, are those requirements sound?

I go back to: Do I really need a littoral combat ship to go 40 knots? That's going to drive the entire design of the ship, not just the engineering plant but how it's built. That becomes a critical factor.

So if you take your eye off the ball with respect to requirements, you can find yourself drifting. That has to be deliberate.

With respect to the systems we are putting on unmanned vessels, I'd say we absolutely learned from LCS and Ford; those have to be proven systems that are prototyped and land-based tested before we start doubling down and going into production.

The littoral combat ships are quickly coming off the lines. Is the Navy prepared for them?

There are things in the near term that I have to deliver, that I'm putting heat on now, and one of them is LCS. One part is sustainability and reliability. We know enough about that platform and the problems that we have that plague us with regard to reliability and sustainability, and I need them resolved. That requires a campaign plan to get after it and have it reviewed by me frequently enough so that I can be sighted on it. Those platforms have been around since 2008 — we need to get on with it.

We've done five deployments since I've been on the job, we're going to ramp that up two and a half times over the next couple of years, but we have got to get after it. LCS for me is something, on my watch, I've got to get right.

I also have to deliver both the mine and anti-submarine warfare modules. These ships are probably going to [start going] away in the mid-2030s if the [future frigate] FFG(X) build goes as planned. But I need to wring as much as I can out of those ships as quickly as I can.

Have you seen any significant successes with the ship?

I do think we have it about right with manning. We were honest with ourselves that the original design wasn't going to do it. I really like the blue-and-gold construct because I get way more [operational availability] than I would with just the single crew.

So I can get these ships out there in numbers doing the low-end stuff in, let's say, 4th Fleet where I wouldn't need a DDG [destroyer]. The Navy deployed the LCS Detroit to South America — the 4th Fleet area of operations — last year on a counternarcotics mission, and it returned earlier this month. Those are the kinds of missions for which the LCS is perfectly suited. I can deploy these things with a [law enforcement detachment] and a signals intelligence capability, and I can do that on LCS with carry-on gear. It's the right kind of platform for that.

Also in 5th Fleet, those maritime security missions that we were heavily sighted on in the late 1990s and early 2000s: They still exist, I'd just prefer to do them with an LCS instead of a DDG if I can.

What other programs have caught your attention?

In unmanned, whether it's the MQ-4C Triton [long-range surveillance drone] or the MQ-25 Stingray [carrier-based tanker drone], I've got to put heat on those. We have to get them out there in numbers, operating with a high level of confidence, so we can leverage what we learn across the rest of the unmanned build.

In the wake of the Fat Leonard bribery scandal, the fatal accidents in 2017 and now the most recent fire onboard the amphibious assault ship Bonhomme Richard, there are questions about systemic issues in the Navy. What are your thoughts about that?

The Pentagon and Washington, D.C., drives you to focus on things. One of things [the late Air Force Col.] John Boyd talked about was that the priorities, even in a highly technical world, need to be on people, ideas and machines in that order. The issues we've faced in the Navy over the past few years all come back to people. They all come back to culture.

If I draw it to Fat Leonard or to the 2017 Comprehensive Review or the review we did with the SEALs, most of that is cultural. Ninety-five percent of it is people-focused. It really comes down to leadership. That is not lost on me. It is easy in this building not to pay attention to it, but it is on my mind, and at the fleet commander level those are the things we talk most about: people, training, attitude.

It's premature to judge the outcome of the investigation into Bonhomme Richard, but what questions do you have as you look at the scale of that disaster?

This is a very, very serious incident that I think will force the Navy to stand back and reevaluate itself. We've got to follow the facts. We've got to be honest with ourselves and we've got to get after it. My intention, once the investigations are done, is to make this available for the public to debate, including what we need to do to get after any systemic problems that we might have.

But one of things I did on the Sunday [after the fire broke out] was I read the report of the Miami fire back in 2012. That was the last mass conflagration in a shipyard environment that we had. There were a number of recommendations coming out of that incident.

One of the questions I have is: Did we fully and adequately implement those recommendations? Because that fire was probably the most recent similar mass conflagration we've had. We learned from that. When we completed the investigation, did we just leave it in the rearview mirror, or did we — no kidding — take it seriously?


Sur le même sujet

  • RTX awarded $400 million to deliver StormBreaker smart weapons to the U.S. Air Force

    6 janvier 2024 | International, Terrestre

    RTX awarded $400 million to deliver StormBreaker smart weapons to the U.S. Air Force

    StormBreaker is fielded on the F-15E Strike Eagle and F/A-18E/F SuperHornet with testing underway on all variants of the F-35

  • Curtiss-Wright awarded contracts valued in excess of US$220 million to support critical U.S. Naval Defence Platforms

    31 juillet 2020 | International, Naval

    Curtiss-Wright awarded contracts valued in excess of US$220 million to support critical U.S. Naval Defence Platforms

    Davidson, N.C.— July 28, 2020 - (BUSINESS WIRE)-- Curtiss-Wright Corporation (NYSE: CW) today announced that it has been awarded contracts valued in excess of $220 million to provide propulsion valves, pumps and advanced instrumentation and control systems for the U.S. Navy's Virginia-class nuclear powered attack submarine, Columbia-class submarine and Ford-class aircraft carrier programs. The awards were received from Bechtel Plant Machinery, Inc. (BPMI) and General Dynamics Electric Boat to support ship construction, spare parts and submarine back-fit procurements. “Curtiss-Wright is proud to have been awarded these important naval defense contracts, building upon our long-standing relationship with the U.S. Nuclear Navy and reflecting our ongoing support of these critical naval defense platforms, which continue to receive strong Congressional support,” said David C. Adams, Chairman and CEO of Curtiss-Wright Corporation. “We look forward to delivering the most advanced, reliable and vital technologies and remain well-positioned to benefit from the continued expansion of our U.S. naval fleet.” Curtiss-Wright is performing this work at its facilities in New York and Pennsylvania within the Company's Defense and Power Segments. Engineering and manufacturing has commenced and will continue through 2024. For over 60 years, Curtiss-Wright has ensured safe, reliable operations by supplying innovative, high-performance products for every nuclear submarine and aircraft carrier commissioned by the U.S. Navy. In addition, Curtiss-Wright technologies, such as power-dense motors and enhanced valve designs, enable more efficient operations, reduce manpower and cost, and increase safety. For more information on Curtiss-Wright's Defense Segment and Power Segment products for the U.S. Navy, please visit www.cwdefense.com or www.cw-ems.com, respectively. About Curtiss-Wright Corporation Curtiss-Wright Corporation (NYSE:CW) is a global innovative company that delivers highly engineered, critical function products and services to the commercial, industrial, defense and energy markets. Building on the heritage of Glenn Curtiss and the Wright brothers, Curtiss-Wright has a long tradition of providing reliable solutions through trusted customer relationships. The company employs approximately 8,900 people worldwide. For more information, visit www.curtisswright.com. This press release contains forward-looking statements made pursuant to the Safe Harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such statements, including statements relating to Curtiss-Wright Corporation's expectations of future performance of our pump and valve products, the continued relationship with an existing customer, the continued funding of these programs by the U.S. Navy, the successful implementation of our products into these naval defense programs, the overall success of these naval defense programs and future opportunities associated with these programs, are not considered historical facts and are considered forward-looking statements under the federal securities laws. Such forward-looking statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date hereof. Such risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to: a reduction in anticipated orders; an economic downturn; changes in competitive marketplace and/or customer requirements; a change in US and Foreign government spending; an inability to perform customer contracts at anticipated cost levels; and other factors that generally affect the business of aerospace, defense contracting, marine, electronics and industrial companies. Please refer to the Company's current SEC filings under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, for further information. View source version on businesswire.com: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20200728005570/en/ Jim Ryan (704) 869-4621 jim.ryan@curtisswright.com Source: Curtiss-Wright Corporation View source version on Curtiss-Wright Corporation: https://www.curtisswright.com/news/press-releases/news-release-details/2020/Curtiss-Wright-Awarded-Contracts-Valued-in-Excess-of-220-Million-to-Support-Critical-U.S.-Naval-Defense-Platforms/default.aspx

  • FLIR Wins U.S. Army Heavyweight Robot Contract Worth Up to $109M

    6 décembre 2019 | International, Terrestre

    FLIR Wins U.S. Army Heavyweight Robot Contract Worth Up to $109M

    Arlington, Va., December 4, 2019 - FLIR Systems, Inc. (NASDAQ: FLIR) announced that its Kobra™ robot has been chosen for the United States (U.S.) Army's Common Robotic System-Heavy (CRS-H) program. The five-year production contract to build upwards of 350 unmanned ground vehicles (UGVs) is worth up to $109 million. This press release features multimedia. View the full release here: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20191204005221/en/ The CRS-H program will give the Army a ‘program of record' to build and sustain a fleet of large UGVs for years to come. The CRS-H platform calls for a robot weighing up to 700 pounds. Army Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) units will use the system to perform a range of missions, such as disarming vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices (VBIEDs), unexploded ordnance, or related heavy-duty tasks. A variety of sensors and payloads also can be added to the UGV to support other missions. “We are pleased to be selected for the U.S. Army's CRS-H program and deliver lifesaving robotic technology to our soldiers,” said Jim Cannon, president and CEO at FLIR. “This award exemplifies why we acquired Endeavor Robotics earlier this year — to capture strategic programs of record that enable us to integrate advanced solutions for the warfighter, give us the fuel to grow our business, and strengthen our position as a leader in unmanned systems.” Over several months and two rounds of testing, the Army compared the FLIR Kobra with other vendor systems. Entrants were evaluated on robot reliability, maneuverability, and usability, among other factors before Kobra was selected as the winner. Previously, in 2017 the Army chose FLIR's legacy business, Endeavor Robotics, as its medium-sized UGV provider through the Man Transportable Robotic System Increment II (MTRS Inc II) contract. FLIR is delivering its Centaur™ UGV under this on-going program. “Our CRS-H platform will give soldiers a powerful, extremely mobile, yet highly transportable UGV, ready to deploy at a moment's notice to keep them out of harm's way,” said David Ray, president of the Government and Defense Business Unit at FLIR. “This win is a testament to our employees who've designed such an advanced, multi-mission UGV. We look forward to working with the Army to get this robot into the field and deployed with our warfighters.” FLIR Kobra delivers unmatched strength, power, and payload support in an easy-to-operate robot package. Kobra has a lift capacity of 330 lbs. (150 kg.) and can stretch up to eleven-and-a-half feet to access hard-to-reach places. Ready for indoor and outdoor use, Kobra maintains mobility on tough terrain and can overcome obstacles such as jersey barriers. The award covers a five-year production period with shipments beginning in the second quarter of 2020. For more on FLIR Systems' Unmanned Ground Systems platforms, visit www.flir.com/UIS/UGS. About FLIR Systems, Inc. Founded in 1978, FLIR Systems is a world-leading industrial technology company focused on intelligent sensing solutions for defense, industrial, and commercial applications. FLIR Systems' vision is to be “The World's Sixth Sense,” creating technologies to help professionals make more informed decisions that save lives and livelihoods. For more information, please visit www.flir.com and follow @flir.

Toutes les nouvelles