9 juin 2024 | International, Aérospatial

Ukraine air defence downs 9 out of 13 Russian drones over four regions

Sur le même sujet

  • Lockheed Martin contracted for test equipment, special tooling for F-35s

    9 décembre 2019 | International, Aérospatial

    Lockheed Martin contracted for test equipment, special tooling for F-35s

    The company received a $153.4 million contract to procure test equipment and special tooling for current and future production of the F-35. ByChristen McCurdy Dec. 6 (UPI) -- Lockheed Martin has received a $153.4 million contract to procure test equipment and tooling for the F-35 Lightning II. The deal covers special tooling and special test equipment "required to meet current and future F-35 Lightning II low-rate initial production as well as full-rate production rates," the Department of Defense said Friday in a news release. The modification to a previous contract uses aircraft funds from fiscal 2018, 2019 and 2020 and combines purchasing funds of $55.8 million from the Air Force, $51.9 million from the Navy and and $22.2 million from the Marine Corps, as well as $17.6 million from non-U.S. Department of Defense partners and $5.8 million from foreign military sales funds. The full amount of the contract has been obligated to Lockheed at the time of the award, $39.9 million of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. Work on the contract will take place at a variety of locations inside and outside the United States, with the bulk of the work taking place in Rome, Italy, and Redondo Beach, Calif. Work is expected to be completed in December 2023. https://www.upi.com/Defense-News/2019/12/06/Lockheed-Martin-contracted-for-test-equipment-special-tooling-for-F-35s/1831575675959

  • Britain Spent So Much On Two Giant Aircraft Carriers, It Can’t Afford Planes Or Escorts

    30 juin 2020 | International, Aérospatial

    Britain Spent So Much On Two Giant Aircraft Carriers, It Can’t Afford Planes Or Escorts

    David Axe The United Kingdom is spending nearly $8 billion building two new large, conventionally-fueled aircraft carriers and equipping them with F-35B Lightning II stealth jump jets. HMS Queen Elizabeth is scheduled to deploy for the first time in 2021, ending a seven-year carrier gap that began in 2014 when the Royal Navy decommissioned the last of its three, Cold War-vintage light carriers. The U.K. military by then had already sold off the carriers' Harrier jump jets. Queen Elizabeth and her sister Prince of Wales are impressive vessels. More than 930 feet long and displacing around 70,000 tons, they are bigger and more modern than every other flattop in the world except the U.S. Navy's 11 nuclear-powered supercarriers. The carriers in theory are the steely core of a revitalized and reorganized Royal Navy. “Carrier strike provides the ability to launch fixed-wing aircraft from a ship to undertake a range of military tasks,” the U.K. National Audit Office explained in a June report. “It is central to the government's plans for the country's armed forces.” But there's a problem. Having blown billions of dollars building the ships, the U.K. government no longer can afford the aircraft, escorts and support ships that help the flattops deploy, protect them and give them striking power. Nor can the government afford to modify Queen Elizabeth or Prince of Wales to support amphibious landings, one of the early justifications for cutting existing ships—such as the assault ship HMS Ocean—in order to free up money for the carriers. The new British carrier force is hollow. And at least one analyst believes the Brits would have been better off without. The shortfalls are myriad, according to the NAO. The carriers' air wings at a minimum should include a dozen F-35Bs plus a dozen Merlin helicopters, some of which would carry the Lockheed Martin LMT-made Crowsnest early-warning radar in order to provide sensor coverage over the carrier group. Guess what. “The new Crowsnest system is 18 months late, which will affect carrier strike's capabilities in its first two years,” according to the NAO. “The [Ministry of Defense] did not oversee its contract with Lockheed Martin effectively and, despite earlier problems on the project, neither was aware of the sub-contractor's lack of progress until it was too late to meet the target delivery date.” “It subsequently concluded that the sub-contractor working on the project, Thales, failed to meet its contractual commitments to develop the equipment and had not provided sufficient information on the project's progress. The [ministry] and its industry partners have since implemented a recovery plan and enhanced monitoring arrangements. However, further delays mean that it does not expect to have full airborne radar capability until May 2023.” Meanwhile, the ministry also has been slow to buy F-35s. “From 2015, its intention has been to buy 138 Lightning II jets, which will sustain carrier strike operations to the 2060s. The [ministry] initially ordered 48 jets but has not yet committed to buying any more. In response to wider financial pressures, it will also receive seven of the 48 jets in 2025, a year later than planned.” A single Queen Elizabeth-class flattop could carry as many as 24 F-35s. But a total force of 48 F-35s probably wouldn't allow for a 24-plane air wing after taking into account training and maintenance needs. As a rule, usually no more than third of a particular fighter fleet can deploy at any given time. Equally vexing, the Royal Navy has laid up all but one of its solid support ships, which sail along with front-line vessels in order to keep them stocked with food, parts and weapons. The defense ministry “has long been aware that this will restrict the operational freedom of carrier strike but has not yet developed a solution,” the NAO warned. “In November 2019, the [ministry] stopped the competition to build three new support ships due to concerns about value for money. It believes this will delay the introduction of new ships by between 18 and 36 months, making it uncertain the first new ship will be operational before the existing support ship leaves service in 2028.” The list of shortfalls continues. A British carrier group at a minimum should include one frigate for anti-submarine protection plus a destroyer for air-defense. But the Royal Navy operates just 13 aging Type 23 frigates and six Type 45 destroyers. The former are slated to leave the fleet starting in 2023. Their replacement, the new Type 26, won't start joining the fleet until 2027. The navy expects to buy just eight Type 26s. At least five new Type 31 frigates will replace the balance of the Type 23 force, but the Type 31s lack major anti-submarine systems. All that is to say that, from the mid-2020s on, the carriers could be vulnerable to submarines. Don't expect some sudden cash windfall to save the Royal Navy from its carrier problems. If anything, the budgetary problems could get worse. The defense ministry already is cutting back on its investment in Queen Elizabeth and Prince of Wales. The government had planned to spend $75 million modifying one of the new flattops with extra accommodations in order for the ship to double as an amphibious assault ship. But according to the NAO, the ministry in March 2020 quietly dropped the amphibious requirement. The bitter irony for the navy is that it sacrificed the assault ship Ocean back in 2018 in order to free up money and manpower for the carriers and eventually claw back the lost amphibious capability by way of modifications to at least one of the newer ships. Now it appears the fleet gave up Ocean for nothing. So are the new flattops worth it? As costs rise and budgets shrink, the carriers gobble up a growing proportion of the Royal Navy's resources while at the same time falling far short of their operational potential owing to cuts at the margins of their capabilities. “Given that what the Royal Navy has become in return for its two carriers, and given how at present this investment has delivered a part-time carrier force with a small number of available fast jets, significant spares shortages, reduced escort fleet numbers and a lack of longer-term support ships or escort elements,” one commentator wrote, “then perhaps the answer to the question ‘was it all worth it' is ‘no, it was not worth the pain for the gain'—at least not in the short term.” https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2020/06/28/britain-spent-so-much-on-two-giant-aircraft-carriers-it-cant-afford-planes-or-escorts/#7988b615bcc7

  • A New Layer of Medical Preparedness to Combat Emerging Infectious Disease

    25 février 2019 | International, Autre défense

    A New Layer of Medical Preparedness to Combat Emerging Infectious Disease

    DARPA has selected five teams of researchers to support PREventing EMerging Pathogenic Threats (PREEMPT), a 3.5-year program first announced in January 2018 to reinforce traditional medical preparedness by containing viral infectious diseases in animal reservoirs and insect vectors before they can threaten humans. Through studies in secure laboratories and simulated natural environments, the PREEMPT researchers will model how viruses might evolve within animal populations, and assess the safety and efficacy of potential interventions. Autonomous Therapeutics, Inc., Institut Pasteur, Montana State University, The Pirbright Institute, and the University of California, Davis, lead the PREEMPT teams. “DARPA challenges the PREEMPT research community to look far left on the emerging threat timeline and identify opportunities to contain viruses before they ever endanger humans,” said Dr. Brad Ringeisen, the DARPA program manager for PREEMPT. “One of the chief limitations of how infectious disease modeling is currently conducted is that it forecasts the trajectory of an outbreak only after it is underway in people. The best that data can do is inform a public health response, which places the United States in a reactive mode. We require proactive options to keep our troops and the homeland safe from emerging infectious disease threats.” According to the World Health Organization (WHO), approximately 60 percent of emerging infectious diseases reported globally are zoonoses, meaning that they were initially diseases of animals and at some point became capable of infecting people. Zoonotic diseases are responsible for millions of human deaths every year, and the scope of the challenge is increasing due to the densification of livestock production, human encroachment into natural spaces, and upward trends in globalization, temperature, and population. Ebola is a high-profile example of a zoonotic disease. Despite being relatively difficult to spread — requiring direct contact with fluids from infected organisms — a string of outbreaks over the past five years has highlighted the threat it could present once established in densely populated areas. Researchers express even greater concern over the pandemic potential of new strains of the influenza virus and other airborne pathogens. Even in the United States and its territories, where viruses do not frequently emerge directly from animal reservoirs, vector-borne transmission of zoonoses such as West Nile virus disease is on the rise. The 2018 U.S. National Biodefense Strategy directs that it is essential to detect and contain such bio-threats, adopting a proactive posture to improve preparedness while also assessing and managing any biosecurity risks related to possible interventions. “The health of the American people depends on our ability to stem infectious disease outbreaks at their source, wherever and however they occur,” the document states. For the Department of Defense, that obligation extends to protection of deployed service members, who often operate in countries that are “hot spots” for emerging viruses yet lack robust public health infrastructure. The teams DARPA selected for PREEMPT comprise multidisciplinary researchers who bring expertise and field experience from around the world, some of whom represent institutions from nations at high risk from emerging infectious disease. Institutions participating as sub-contractors to DARPA receive funding from the lead organizations except as otherwise noted. The PREEMPT teams proposed to model specific diseases to assess the risk of spillover from animals into humans, identify key bottlenecks in the process as opportunities for intervention, and develop and assess novel, animal- or insect-focused interventions with built-in safety switches to prevent cross-species jump. The teams will collect samples from animal reservoirs in the field for analysis in secure, bio-contained facilities; some teams will also conduct analysis on existing banked samples and datasets. DARPA is not funding the release of PREEMPT interventions into the environment. Autonomous Therapeutics, Inc., under principal investigator Dr. Ariel Weinberger, leads a team made up of CSIRO Australian Animal Health Laboratory; Navy Medical Research Unit-2, funded directly by DARPA; University of California, Los Angeles; University of Chicago Medical School; and University of Texas Medical Branch. The team will study air-borne highly pathogenic avian influenza virus in birds and small mammals, and tick-borne Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus. The Center for Comparative Medicine and the One Health Institute at the University of California, Davis, under principal investigator Dr. Peter Barry and co-PI Dr. Brian Bird, respectively, lead a team made up of the Leibniz Institute for Experimental Virology; Mount Sinai School of Medicine; Rocky Mountain Laboratories of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), to be funded directly by DARPA; The Vaccine Group, Ltd., a spin-out of University of Plymouth; University of Glasgow; University of Idaho; and University of Western Australia. The team will examine Lassa virus spillover from rodents, and study Ebola virus in rhesus macaques. The Institut Pasteur, under principal investigator Dr. Carla Saleh, leads a team made up of Institut Pasteur International Network partners in Cambodia, Central African Republic, France, French Guiana, Madagascar, and Uruguay; Latham BioPharm Group; and Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. The team will study several mosquito-borne arboviruses, which refers broadly to animal or human viruses transmitted by insects, as well as mosquito-specific viruses that could interfere with arbovirus infection in the insect vector. Montana State University, under principal investigator Dr. Raina Plowright, leads a team made up of the Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies; Colorado State University; Cornell University; Griffith University; Johns Hopkins University; NIH's Rocky Mountain Laboratories, funded directly by DARPA; Pennsylvania State University; Texas Tech University; University of California, Berkeley; University of California, Los Angeles; and University of Cambridge. The team will study henipavirus spillover from bats. The henipavirus genus of viruses contains multiple biothreat agents as categorized by NIH and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The Pirbright Institute, under principal investigator Dr. Luke Alphey, leads a team made up of the University of Nottingham and the University of Tartu. The team seeks to disrupt mosquito transmission of flaviviruses, which include Dengue fever, West Nile, and Zika viruses. Modeling and quantification are as important as new experimental technologies in preventing cross-species jumps. The results from modeling will inform when, where, and at what levels such interventions could be applied to achieve the greatest health benefits. Interventions under consideration include animal- or insect-targeted vaccines, therapeutic interfering particles, gene editors, and indirect approaches informed by environmental and ecological factors that affect how viruses are spread — for instance, understanding the environmental stressors that drive bats into closer contact with humans and devising mitigating options to reduce the likelihood of that contact. The research teams' approaches each come with a unique set of potential benefits and challenges, and the teams are responsible for assessing and demonstrating to DARPA the safety, efficacy, stability, and controllability of their proposed interventions. In the future, these considerations could factor into decisions by the ultimate end users — communities, governments, and regulators — on which strategies to pursue to prevent new zoonoses. DARPA and the PREEMPT teams receive guidance from independent expert advisors in the ethical, legal, social, and regulatory aspects of the life sciences. These individuals include Dr. Claudia Emerson, director of the Institute on Ethics & Policy for Innovation at McMaster University; Dr. Matt Kasper, legislative liaison for the U.S. Navy's Bureau of Medicine and Surgery, and a former deputy director of field laboratory operations at the Naval Medical Research Center; and Dr. Steve Monroe, associate director for Laboratory Science and Safety at the CDC, and a former deputy director of the CDC's National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases. The teams also benefit from established relationships with local universities, communities, and governments based on prior or ongoing research. These relationships will facilitate initial field collection and help to familiarize stakeholders with PREEMPT technologies as they are being developed. DARPA is also beginning outreach to the WHO as a potential avenue for future transition of PREEMPT technologies. DARPA intends that PREEMPT teams will perform fundamental research and publish results for review by the broader scientific community. https://www.darpa.mil/news-events/2019-02-19

Toutes les nouvelles