4 mars 2024 | International, Terrestre
13 juillet 2020 | International, Aérospatial
US Air Force considers adopting the Army’s Future Vertical Lift program
By: Valerie Insinna
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Air Force is keeping an eye on the Army's next-generation rotorcraft program, which could fill a gap for agile airlift that might be needed in a fight against Russia and China, an Air Force general said Thursday.
With its large air bases vulnerable to attacks from a near-peer adversary, there's no guarantee that the Air Force will be able to rely on its current processes or equipment to transfer supplies in and out of air bases. In a war with China or Russia, the U.S. Air Force would distribute its assets to bases owned by allies and partners, cutting down the threat to aircraft usually located at the service's large installations.
But that poses a problem for rapidly transporting materiel like spare parts and maintenance equipment to more austere locations in a time of war, said Lt. Gen. Warren Berry, the Air Force's deputy chief of staff for logistics, engineering and force protection.
“We know we're going to have to get after some other things that might be a different way of doing distribution and lift,” he said during a July 9 event hosted by the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies. “It might be a different way of doing airfield recovery. It might be different equipment that's lighter and leaner that allows us to set up in a more expeditious manner with less fuel.”
“Agility Prime is certainly one [option],” he said, referring to an ongoing Air Force effort to tap into the emerging commercial market for “flying cars” — basically, experimental transport aircraft that the service could use for logistics, search and rescue, or shuttling troops to remote locations.
Another option is the Army's future vertical lift effort, or FVL, Berry said. “That's something that we'll certainly look at, but we know that we need to do lift in a different way.”
The Army intends to break FVL into multiple programs, which could give the Air Force multiple aircraft to pick from if it decides to buy in. The future long-range assault aircraft will replace the UH-60 Black Hawk utility helicopter and is planned to be fielded in 2030. As part of the Army's risk-reduction effort, Bell Helicopter is developing its V-280 Valor, while a Sikorsky-Boeing team is working on its own SB-1 Defiant aircraft.
The future attack reconnaissance aircraft would fill an existing capability gap, accomplishing the reconnaissance missions that have been performed by AH-64E Apaches teamed with Shadow drones following the retirement of the OH-58D Kiowa Warrior in 2017. It's currently on track to be fielded in 2028, with Sikorsky and Bell chosen to build prototypes.
Aside from closely watching the Army's FVL effort, the Air Force is also engaging with the Army-led Joint Counter-Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems Office on ways to defend U.S. bases against small drones, Berry said.
“That's going to be a demand signal on this force moving forward that we're going to have to really think through and make sure that we have them [airmen] resourced appropriately to execute that part of the air base air defense mission as well,” he said.
In June, the office rolled out a plan for the Defense Department to consolidate its counter-UAS technologies from about 40 systems to a total of eight. The approved systems were chosen after an Army-led assessment and included fixed, mounted and dismounted solutions. An Air Force system known as Negation of Improvised Non-State Joint Aerial-Threats, or NINJA — which jams radio signals between the UAS and its operator — was among those selected.
“Our goal is to align existing and future counter-UAS technology solutions to best address operational needs while applying resources more efficiently,” said Maj. Gen. Sean Gainey, the office's director.
Berry said that the Air Force has embedded some of its personnel within the counter-UAS office to stay synchronized with the Army's efforts. “So far we're happy with where it is and where it's going,” he said.
Sur le même sujet
-
-
22 octobre 2019 | International, Terrestre
Industry Brings Robotic Vehicles To AUSA, Army Awarding Deals For Initial Prototypes Next Spring
By Matthew Beinart | The Army will release a prototype proposal request for the Robotic Combat Vehicle light and medium of variants before November and award contracts for test vehicles next spring, the lead official for the program told reporters on Monday. The push towards the next phase of the Army's effort to grow a robotic vehicle fleet arrives as vendors such as BAE Systems, Germany's Rheinmetall, as well as a team of Textron Systems [TXT], Howe & Howe and FLIR [FLR] all unveiled potential offerings at this week's Association of the United States Army conference in Washington, D.C. Brig. Gen. Ross Coffman, director of the Army's Next-Generation Combat Vehicle cross-functional team, detailed plans this week for the next phase of the RCV program, which he said would “revolutionize the way [the Army] fights in the future.” The Army will begin to solicit proposals for RCV-Light and RCV-Medium prototypes before the end of the month, with plans to hold a demonstration next March to put the platforms through a platoon-level operations experiment. Following the demonstration, the Army will then select one vendor to build four RCV-Ls and one vendor to build four RCV-Ms, according to Coffman. Those vehicles will then participate in a 2021 experiment going through company-level operations, before ultimately informing a 2023 decision on how the Army wants to construct its robotic vehicle fleet including the addition of an RCV-Heavy. Coffman has said previously that RCV is intended to eventually replace soldiers in dangerous tactical situations on the future battlefield with vehicles that are payload agnostic, semi-autonomous and integrated with a range of sensors and weapon systems (Defense Daily, Aug. 22). BAE Systems unveiled its Robotic Technology Demonstrator at AUSA, which has already participated in a recent demonstration with the Army on an outdoor test track in Sterling Heights, Michigan. “RTD is our way to go after that leap-ahead technology. We've designed it as rolling lab. Our intent is to keep developing this thing. This is a test platform that allows us to keep moving ahead,” Jim Miller, BAE Systems' senior director of business development, told reporters. “This is probably not going to be an RCV-L. It's probably the medium and it may lead us to a heavy option if that's where the Army continues to go.” Miller noted RTD uses a hybrid-electric drive, is currently integrated with a 30mm gun, and contains a range of sensor suites, including a 360-degree situational awareness system and the company's RAVEN soft-kill active protection system. The vehicle also includes a tethered UAS and a legged ground robot developed by Ghost Robotics. Rheinmetall brought its Wiesel Wingman configured toward the RCV-L path, which combines technology from its digitized Weasel platform, in use with the German Army, and the Mission Master unmanned ground vehicle. “That platform already exists in a digitized version. So throw out the hydraulics, the electronic kits inside, the drive-by-wire steering and electric transmission, and you combine it with the sensor and autonomy kit of the Mission Master and then you basically get a new vehicle that we call the Weasel Wingman,” Florian Reisch, director of business development and sales for Rheinmetall's American business, told Defense Daily. Basically you combine the Weasel platform that is able to hold the autonomy kit and then you basically get what the Army is looking for with robotic combat vehicles.” Reisch added that Rheinmetall could be interested in exploring the heavier RCV variants, listing potential options with the company's Lynx or Marder infantry fighting vehicles. “Of course we would be interested in the medium as well because we have different platforms available. We did have different research and development programs where we were modifying these platforms to basically enable them to carry a medium-caliber remote controlled turret. So that would be possible and we are looking at that.” The team of Textron, Howe & Howe and FLIR showcased the Ripsaw 5 platform at AUSA. The companies said it could be scaled down for RCV-L or up to a heavier version for RCV-M. “It's capable for both the RCV light and the RCV medium mission sets that the Army has put forward. What this does is it optimizes the superior value, the logistics, the mission outcome. We've got extraordinary modularity of performance. It's scalable with its high degree of reuse between the light and medium variants, and that just brings unmatched value to the team,” Lisa Atherton, Textron's CEO, told reporters during a teleconference last week. Geoff Howe, senior vice president of Howe & Howe, said the company is continuing to pursue additional technology additions for Ripsaw to grow capability for the robotic vehicle while the Army assesses its needs for a future unmanned fleet. “We are running a parallel program. Our program, we don't stop for anything. We're pushing forward with this technology we've advanced, and our plan is to meet the Army down the road with that parallel program. We're not waiting for anybody. We're pushing this development as far as we can,” Howe said. QinetiQ and Pratt & Miller also announced at AUSA a new partnership to offer a variant of the Expeditionary Modular Autonomous Vehicle (EMAV) for RCV. https://www.defensedaily.com/industry-brings-robotic-vehicles-ausa-army-awarding-deals-initial-prototypes-next-spring/army/
-
6 mai 2020 | International, Aérospatial
Expand missile defenses during the pandemic, don’t cut them
By: Rebeccah L. Heinrichs Rogue states are taking advantage of the American preoccupation with the COVID-19 pandemic. North Korea may test another long-range missile according to the head of U.S. Northern Command, Gen. Terrence O'Shaughnessy. He warned Congress in March that the North Korean regime is still a serious threat and is improving its missile program. And last week, Iran's Revolutionary Guard successfully launched a satellite into space. This was the first for the terrorist paramilitary group, though not the first for the regime. The pandemic is likely to prompt Congress to reassess, cut and redirect spending, but safeguarding the American people from missile attack is an essential service the government cannot afford to scale back. Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Rob Soofer said at a recent Hudson Institute event: “[T]oday we are in an advantageous position vis-a-vis North Korea. Forty-four ground-based interceptors. Gen. O'Shaughnessy has complete confidence that the system will work and we can address the threat. Then the question is: Can we wait until 2028?” The Trump administration intends to deploy in 2028 the Next Generation Interceptor, or NGI, meant to handle far more complicated missile threats than what the Ground-based Midcourse Defense, or GMD, system was initially designed to do. Still, as Dr. Soofer explained, threats develop at an unpredictable pace, and so the Pentagon is pushing for initiatives to bolster defense in the meantime. Those initiatives will require serious bipartisan cooperation while concurrently developing the NGI and pursuing other advanced capabilities meant to dramatically increase the ability of the missile defense architecture. It's a tall order, but critical, nonetheless. First, and to be clear, the Pentagon has not yet embraced this step due to its determination to focus on NGI. But Congress should invest in more than just sustaining the current GMD system; it should improve it by adding 20 GBIs to the already fielded 44. The silos will be prepared for the additional numbers since, in 2017, President Donald Trump called for adding more deployed GBIs considering the heightened North Korea missile threat. The Pentagon began work on preparing for their delivery but never emplaced GBIs into those silos because Pentagon officials canceled the Redesigned Kill Vehicle. The Pentagon had anticipated the Redesigned Kill Vehicle for the nation's new GBIs. After evaluating the resources and time it would take to restart the production line of the Capability Enhancement II interceptors or to rapidly develop an improved kill vehicle that leverages new technology, the Pentagon should choose the most cost-effective solution. Recall, the Capability Enhancement II was the kill vehicle that performed well in the last complex flight test, which was the first salvo engagement of a threat-representative intercontinental ballistic missile target by GBIs. Regardless of the option the Pentagon would choose, the result would be a near-term enhanced capability by either increased capacity at a minimum, or an increased capacity with improved kill vehicles on 20 of the 64 at best. Either would be a much better scenario than keeping the backbone of homeland defenses stagnant while we anticipate the NGI in 2028. But that is not all the country should do. It should also move forward with steps the Pentagon has embraced. Those steps include improving the discrimination radar capability in the next few years so GMD can better detect and characterize the evolving threat, and deploying other existing systems to bolster GMD. Utilizing current systems with impressive testing records against missiles shorter than ICBM range as part of a layered homeland defense is called the “underlay.” As a key component of the underlay, Congress has directed the Pentagon to test the Aegis SM-3 IIA interceptor against an ICBM target. Unfortunately, because of the pandemic, the Missile Defense Agency's planned flight tests will be delayed, including for the SM-3 IIA. The threats facing the country will not wait for the end of the pandemic, and the Pentagon should reconsider that delay. As soon as the country can test the system, and if it is a success, it would be wise to prepare to deploy Aegis SM-3 IIA as the threat requires. If there is an ICBM attack against the U.S. homeland, a GBI would have the first shot at the incoming missile while it's in its midcourse phase of flight; and if an enemy missile gets through, and the Aegis SM-3 IIA is positioned correctly, it could have another shot at the missile as it begins its descent. There has been some concern about whether Russia or China have legitimate claims that bolstering homeland defense in this way is destabilizing. But no evidence supports these claims, and, as Dr. Jim Miller, an Obama-era undersecretary of defense for policy, said at a recent Hudson event: “We cannot and must not give Russia or China a veto over the United States' ability to defend ourselves from North Korea and Iran. That is an absolute no-go for any administration.” Another system that is a natural candidate for the underlay is the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense air defense system. Embracing that concept as well, Dr. Miller said: “It makes sense for certain contexts. And if you're looking at a shorter-range missile and a relatively small footprint of coverage, THAAD has a real chance to contribute in that. To me, that's certainly the case for Guam and Hawaii.” But what about cost? That's the $10 billion question — a question that happens to be valued at more than the current president's budget requires for the Missile Defense Agency. The budget request that Congress is currently considering for the MDA is roughly $9.2 billion, noticeably less than previous years, even as the role of missile defense is supposed to be expanding in the country's National Security Strategy. There is no margin for cutting the budget. Congress should rally around this mission and budget, and it should increase funding to sufficiently make these necessary improvements in the near term without paying for them by sacrificing investments like NGI for the not-so-distant future. It can do that without tipping the scale much more than $10 billion this year. That is eminently reasonable given the pressure every government department will feel after the sudden spending splurge due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Rebeccah L. Heinrichs is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute where she specializes in nuclear deterrence and missile defense. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/05/05/expand-missile-defenses-during-the-pandemic-dont-cut-them/