16 août 2023 | International, Aérospatial

Ukraine says it has no hope of using F-16 fighter jets this year | Reuters

Ukraine will not be able to operate U.S.-built F-16 fighter jets this coming autumn and winter, air force spokesperson Yuriy Ihnat told Ukrainian television late on Wednesday.

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/ukraine-says-it-has-no-hope-using-f-16-fighter-jets-this-year-2023-08-16/

Sur le même sujet

  • After the US Navy’s Bonhomme Richard catastrophe, a far-reaching crackdown on fire safety

    28 juillet 2020 | International, Naval

    After the US Navy’s Bonhomme Richard catastrophe, a far-reaching crackdown on fire safety

    By: David B. Larter WASHINGTON – U.S. Navy brass is telling sailors and contractors to put fire safety at the center of their work in the shipyards and on the waterfront in the wake of a catastrophic fire aboard the amphibious assault ship Bonhomme Richard. As Naval Sea Systems Command continues its formal assessment of the damage to Bonhomme Richard, the Navy has both sailors across the organization and contractors working on the ships reviewing their procedures and ensuring they are doing everything possible to prevent a second tragedy. Adm. Michael Gilday, the chief of naval operations, said the enterprise-wide effort was to prevent a similar event from taking place, a lesson he drew from the Navy's response to a string of accidents in 7th Fleet in 2017. “Could there be another Bonhomme Richard waiting to happen? If you go back to 2017, who would have predicted we'd have had two collisions of that magnitude within a month?” Gilday said in a July 16 interview with Defense News. “So, I'm not waiting for ‘No. 2' to decide we have a trend here. In a situation like this, one incident is enough for me to determine that there could be a trend and I'm not going to leave it to chance that there might be.” In the wake of the fire, he ordered fleet commanders to send a lengthy list of requirements to the waterfront, including a mandate to do fire safety inspections of every space on every ship. So-called “zone inspections” of each space on a ship are generally spread out over months, rather than packed into a week. The orders also included reviewing maintenance records on all damage control equipment – such as fire hoses and fire main connections, fire extinguishers, fixed fire suppression systems and firefighting gear – and ensure it is 100 percent accounted for. Additionally, each in-port duty section (a rotating group of sailors from the crew designated to stay on board the ship for 24 hours) was required to undergo a formal assessment as to their proficiency in firefighting and validate that they were properly manned to be effective. Contractors and shipbuilders have also been warned by the Navy to take fire safety seriously. In the days following the Bonhomme Richard fire, two minor fires – one on board the amphibious assault ship Kearsarge at General Dynamics NASSCO shipyard and another on the Navy's future carrier John F. Kennedy at Newport News shipbuilding – have curtailed work and prompted a doubling down on safety. In a Friday letter, Navy's top acquisitions official James Geurts told shipbuilders and contractors to take Bohnomme Richard as a lesson. "Anyone who steps aboard our ships must be ever vigilant about ensuring fire safety," Geurts wrote. "I urge you to use [the recent fire] to ensure that our work spaces are clean, that unnecessary clutter is removed, that all fire safety measures are being followed and that there is unrestricted access to firefighting and damage control equipment." ‘Gutted' The safety crackdown follows the Navy's worst in-port disaster since the 2012 fire on board the attack submarine Miami, which suffered a major conflagration while in deep maintenance at Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in Maine. That incident was later determined to be arson. The Bonhomme Richard fire, which experts fear may have damaged the “big deck” amphib beyond repair, raised troubling questions about how prepared sailors are to combat one of their most fearsome enemies: a shipboard fire, a threat they are trained to deal with from their earliest days in Boot Camp. In a letter this week from Gilday to all Navy flag officers and top enlisted leaders, he detailed how a series of explosions and a 1,200-degree inferno caused “extensive damage” to 11 of Bonhomme Richard's 14 decks. “There is fire and water damage, to varying degrees, on 11 of 14 decks,” Gilday wrote. “With the flight deck as a reference, I walked sections of the ship 5 levels below and had the opportunity to examine the superstructure. “The island is nearly gutted, as are sections of some of the decks below; some perhaps, nearly encompassing the 844 ft length and 106 ft beam of the ship ([Naval Sea System Command's] detailed assessment is ongoing). Sections of the flight deck are warped/bulging.” The fire on the Bonhomme Richard broke out the morning of July 12 while it was pierside in San Diego, California, undergoing maintenance. The blaze was aided by wind and explosions, Gilday wrote. “While response from the crew and federal firefighters was rapid, preliminary reports indicate there were two main factors that contributed to the intensity, scope, and speed of the fire,” Gilday wrote. “First was wind that fueled the fire as the vehicle storage area leads to the well deck, which opens to the air at the stern gate. The second were the explosions, one in particular, reportedly heard about 13 miles away. “The explosions, some were intense, and the uncertainty of their location and timing, led to a situation, that might have been under control late Sunday night, but expanded into a mass conflagration, spreading quickly up elevator shafts, engine exhaust stacks, and through berthing and other compartments where combustible material was present.” The Navy has launched dual investigations into the fire: A safety investigation, which are generally not released to the public so that witnesses can feel free to speak openly, and a more formal administrative investigation, which generally comes with disciplinary recommendations and are releasable to the public. https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2020/07/25/after-the-us-navys-bonhomme-richard-catastrophe-a-far-reaching-crackdown-on-fire-safety/

  • Four big questions for the Air Force in 2019

    31 décembre 2018 | International, Aérospatial

    Four big questions for the Air Force in 2019

    By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — As the Air Force leaves 2018 behind and flies into into a new year, the service may face some big changes to its organization and aircraft inventory. Expect to see a lot of these questions answered with the release of the fiscal year 2020 budget, which officials have said will be released in early February. Neither outgoing Defense Secretary Jim Mattis nor its acting head Patrick Shanahan has confirmed a topline budget for the department — the latest reports peg it at $750 billion, up from the $733 billion the Pentagon originally planned for and the $700 billion that President Donald Trump mandated afterward. However, much of this could be dependent on whether the Air Force sees a funding bump this year. What's going on with that F-15X buy? Rumors have swirled for more than a year about whether the Air Force could buy additional F-15s, but it appears that the service will begin purchasing more of Boeing's air superiority jet. On Dec. 21, Bloomberg reported that the Air Force will request 12 F-15Xs for about $1.2 billion as part of the FY20 budget request. The F-15X will be a new variant of the F-15 that includes a new electronic warfare suite, radar, cockpit and the ability to carry more missiles. Bloomberg reports that the decision to buy the new aircraft stems from top Pentagon leaders who want new F-15s to replace the aging models used by the Air National Guard — and pointedly not the Air Force, which has been resistant to buying new, fourth-generation planes. In September, when asked whether the service was considering the purchase of the F-15X, Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson said the service needed to use its purchasing power to buy more fifth-generation fighter jets like the F-35. "We are currently 80 percent fourth-gen aircraft and 20 percent fifth-generation aircraft,” she said. "In any of the fights that we have been asked to plan for, more fifth-gen aircraft make a huge difference, and we think that getting to 50-50 means not buying new fourth-gen aircraft, it means continuing to increase the fifth generation.” One thing to keep an eye on is how Wilson and her uniformed counterpart, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Dave Goldfein, justify the purchase of new F-15s, and how they characterize their own levels of support for the initiative. A lack of enthusiasm could be seen as damning on Capitol Hill. The other big questions: Will the number for FY20 hold if there is more budget fluctuation following Mattis' departure? And what does the Air Force's five-year plan look like? That could provide a hint on just how big this investment ultimately may get. Does the Air Force buy light attack aircraft? The Air Force was supposed to put out a final request for proposals this year for new light attack aircraft. That has officially been pushed back until 2019, leaving two competitors in a state of purgatory. If the service moves forward with a competition, it will come down to Textron's AT-6 and the A-29 Super Tucano made by Embraer and Sierra Nevada Corp. But industry sources are still unsure whether the Air Force will commit to a formal program of record. Another major question is just how big the program will be. If fewer than 100 planes are purchased, those will likely be deployed exclusively by Air Force Special Operations Command for low-intensity combat, Maj. Gen. Scott Pleus, Air Combat Command's director of plans, programs, and requirements, told Air Force Magazine. A larger buy of hundreds of aircraft would allow the Air Force to spread its light attack planes more widely, through the United States, Europe and the Asia-Pacific. How do Air Force space operations change with the addition of a Space Force? The Pentagon's latest draft proposal would funnel the new military branch for space operations under the Department of the Air Force, a decision that would give the Air Force a continued voice on national security space pursuits. The service would be led by a Space Force chief of staff and an undersecretary of the Air Force for the Space Force, who would report to the Air Force secretary. This seemingly gives the service's top civilian a considerable amount of authority over the Space Force. Still yet to be seen is whether that solution will satisfy Congress. Rep. Adam Smith, the incoming head of the House Armed Services Committee, remains skeptical about the need for a separate military branch for space, but other lawmakers may be more bullish about the Space Force's need to remain separate from the Air Force. Another big question is what this means for the military's current space organization. Does Air Force Space Command and the Space and Missile Systems Center transfer over to the Space Force? Do the Navy and Army keep their own portions of the military space enterprise? And who is going to get named as the undersecretary of the Air Force for the Space Force, anyway? Will there be some restructuring of Air Force headquarters at the Pentagon? Earlier this month, Heidi Grant, the outgoing deputy secretary of the Air Force for international affairs, confirmed that the service is considering transferring some of her office's strategy development functions to the Air Staff's office for plans and requirements, also known as the A5. This, she said, was part of a larger reorganization currently being considered by service leadership. These internal decisions reportedly aren't tied to the budget, and Grant said the Air Force could come out with a decision as early as January. However, leaders have said little about what sort of changes have been proposed. Is this just the transfer of some responsibilities from one office to another, or might we see some consolidation or the creation of new offices as a result of the deliberations? https://www.defensenews.com/air/2018/12/27/four-big-questions-for-the-air-force-in-2019/

  • Lithuania enlists EMSA’s RPAS services to monitor ship emissions

    8 avril 2021 | International, Aérospatial, Naval

    Lithuania enlists EMSA’s RPAS services to monitor ship emissions

    In response to a request from the Environmental Protection Department of Lithuania's Ministry of the Environment, EMSA is providing the country with Remotely Piloted Aircraft System (RPAS) services to assist in monitoring ship emissions, protect the marine environment and improve maritime safety. The services which began on 23 March will run for three months and will see EMSA RPAS being used to calculate the sulphur content of the fuel being used by the passing ships. Sensors on board the RPAS will measure the emissions from the exhaust plumes of vessels travelling in the main shipping lanes and when at anchorage around the Lithuanian port of Klaipeda. The sulphur content of marine fuel in this Sulphur Emission Control Area (SECA) should be no greater than 0.1%. While great interest has been shown in the emissions monitoring capability of EMSA's RPAS service, the Environmental Protection Department will also be working in collaboration with other Lithuanian authorities - including the Navy, MRCC and fisheries control services – to conduct other types of maritime surveillance missions. The aircraft being used for this service is the Schiebel CAMCOPTER® S100 and it is under contract to EMSA via a consortium led by Nordic Unmanned AS. The model is a vertical take-off and landing drone and is fitted with gas sensors and cameras covering optical and infrared spectral ranges to better detect vessel plumes and conduct maritime surveillance as required. All the information is transmitted in real-time to trained users through EMSA's RPAS Data Centre. Records of the emission measurements are encoded automatically into the THETIS-EU information sharing system. This system is operated by EMSA to assist in the enforcement of the EU sulphur directive as well as to support port inspectors when targeting vessels to be inspected. ABOUT RPAS RPAS services, offered free to all EU Member States by EMSA, have been developed to assist in ship emission monitoring and maritime surveillance operations and can operate in all seas surrounding the European Union. RPAS services can provide support to traditional coast guard functions, including search and rescue and pollution prevention and response. The services are offered to Member States individually and as part of EMSA's regional RPAS strategy, which allows multiple coast guard functions in several EU Member States to be supported by one or more RPAS services. Further expansion of RPAS regionally is planned in 2021 and 2022. ABOUT EMSA The European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) is a decentralised agency of the EU, based in Lisbon, Portugal. EMSA serves the EU's maritime interests for a safe, secure, green and competitive maritime sector through support for pollution prevention and response, maritime surveillance, safety and security, digitalisation and the provision of integrated maritime services, and technical assistance. Any requests for further information can be sent to: information@emsa.europa.eu

Toutes les nouvelles