US Air Force prioritizing cloud-based command and control

Sur le même sujet

• 

  27 janvier 2020 | International, Aérospatial

  British Defence Ministry reveals why a drone program now costs $427M extra

  By: Sebastian Sprenger Correction: A previous version of this story misidentified the cost increase to Britain's Protector acquisition program. The program is said to now cost an extra £325 million, with £187 million of that attributed to a delivery delay. LONDON — The British Defence Ministry's top civilian has identified in a letter to lawmakers the reasons why a drone acquisition program has experienced a near 40 percent hike in costs. The Ministry of Defence decided to delay by two years the delivery of 16 General Atomic Protector RG Mk1 drones to replace the Royal Air Force's MQ-9 Reaper fleet, the letter to Parliament's Public Accounts Committee said. Stephen Lovegrove, the ministry's permanent secretary, cited that decision as the main reason for the £325 million (U.S. $427 million) cost increase to the program, as £187 million of that could be attributed to the delay. “The cost growth and time delay to the program imposed in July 2017 were outside of program tolerances but were the result of the need to ensure the affordability of the overall defence program,” Lovegrove wrote in his letter. The MoD is currently in negotiations with the U.S. over a deal to build the first three of the 16 Protectors scheduled to be purchased for the RAF. The final number of vehicles on order could eventually expand beyond 16 — subject to the MoD's fragile finances in the coming years unless defense gets a sizable increase in the Conservative government's next budget round due later this year. The letter was sent Nov. 5 but has only recently been made public. Lovegrove detailed further causes of the cost increase rise in the drone program, which was expected to cost £816 million when it was approved by the MoD in 2016. Aside from the increased costs caused by the delay, the letter said that the fall in the value of the pound against the dollar accounted for £50.8 million of the price rise, and a new primary sensor cost another £64 million. Other unspecified program costs accounted for a further £23 million. The pound has firmed up against the dollar a little since the Conservative Party won the general election in December, which may lessen the impact of increased costs for the moment. The new primary sensor investment involves provision of an improved electro-optical and infrared sensor. The letter said the investment was to avoid future obsolescence issues. Consideration is still being given to the purchase of what is known as a “due regard air-to-air radar” designed for vital detect-and-avoid duties on the platform. Protector, which is the British name for its version of the new General Atomics MQ-9B SkyGuardian, is scheduled to achieve initial operating capability in November 2023, the letter read. The vehicle will replace the current fleet of MQ-9 Reapers, which the RAF has operated almost constantly during the last few years over Afghanistan and the greater Middle East. Lovegrove said the MoD had compared Protector with other options to meet the requirement but the General Atomics platform remained the best value for money. “A comparison was made between: developing a new remotely piloted aircraft system capability (either collaboratively or nationally); procuring the current Reaper Blk 5 (as used by the US Air Force and others); and procuring Protector,” he said. “This concluded that procuring Protector represented best value for money, as its higher performance meant that the operational task could be delivered by procuring fewer air vehicles. The 2-year delay and resultant cost increase have not undermined this value for money case ... it remains affordable despite the cost growth,” the permanent secretary added. Lovegrove said the biggest problem for the Protector program was not the platform itself but the availability of trained crew in the run-up to initial operating capability. “The most significant risk to the Protector program is the RAF's ability to generate and sustain the volume of trained personnel necessary to assure IOC in Nov 2023. The Protector work force builds on the current Reaper force; training and retaining sufficient remotely piloted aircraft system crews has historically proved challenging and is being closely monitored,” the letter said. The Protector is expected to fly longer and hit harder than the Reaper. The UAV will also fly in nonsegregated airspace in places like the U.K . in September, the MoD and General Atomics signed a significant deal to complete the test and evaluation activities required to fly the system in civil airspace. The first test and evaluation aircraft is due to be delivered next year subject to the successful completion of the production contract. An initial production deal is currently in negotiation, with aiming of inking a deal in the next few months. In a first for the system, the SkyGuardian version of the medium-altitude, long-endurance drone flew across the Atlantic Ocean in July from Grand Forks, North Dakota, to RAF Fairford in England. The flight covered 3,760 nautical miles in 24 hours and 2 minutes. https://www.defensenews.com/unmanned/2020/01/24/british-defence-ministry-reveals-why-a-drone-program-now-costs-245m-extra/

• 

  19 août 2020 | International, Terrestre

  USAF Errantly Reveals Research On ICBM-Range Hypersonic Glide Vehicle

  Steve Trimble The U.S. Air Force agency that manages the service's nuclear arsenal has started researching enabling technology for an intercontinental-range, hypersonic glide vehicle (HGV), according to a document that was published briefly in error on a public website. Although the document shows a U.S. nuclear weapons agency is researching HGV technology, senior Pentagon officials say there has been no change to a policy that “strictly” limits the emerging class of hypersonic gliders and cruise missiles to non-nuclear warheads. A request for information (RFI) published on Aug. 12 by the Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center asks companies to submit ideas across seven categories of potential upgrades for intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) designed with a “modular open architecture.” The Air Force often describes the future Ground Based Strategic Deterrent ICBM as featuring a “modular systems architecture,” in contrast with the aging Minuteman III, which does not. Among the seven items on the upgrade list, the Air Force called for a new “thermal protection system that can support [a] hypersonic glide to ICBM ranges,” according to the RFI, which is no longer publicly available on the government's procurement website. The RFI appears to have disclosed information that was not meant by the Air Force's nuclear weapons buyers to be made public. Each of the seven items listed in the RFI's “scope of effort” for ICBM upgrades included a prefix designation of “U/FOUO,” a military marking for information that is unclassified, but for official-use only. Although not technically a classified secret, information marked as “FOUO” usually is withheld from the public. The RFI was removed from beta.sam.gov on Aug. 17 after Aviation Week inquired about the document with the Air Force and the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD). The Defense Department (DOD) has three different operational prototypes for HGVs in development now: the Air Force's AGM-183A Air-Launched Rapid Response Weapon, the Army's Long Range Hypersonic Weapon and the Navy's Intermediate Range Conventional Prompt Strike. Once fired from an aircraft, ground-launcher or submarine, all three are designed to strike targets with conventional warheads at intermediate range, which is defined as 1,500-3,000 nm by the official DOD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms. But the Pentagon has no acknowledged plan to develop an HGV with a range beyond 3,000 nm and maintains a policy that “strictly” prohibits arming any such weapon—regardless of range—with nuclear warheads. The two-most senior staffers leading the hypersonic weapons portfolio reiterated that policy during a press conference on March 2. “Our entire hypersonic portfolio is based on delivering conventional warheads,” said Mike White, assistant director of defense research and engineering for hypersonic weapons. “Right,” agreed Mark Lewis, the director of defense research and engineering for modernization programs. “Strictly conventional.” The Pentagon has not changed the policy since March 2, said Lt. Col. Robert Carver, a spokesman for Lewis' office. “DOD is not developing nuclear-capable hypersonic weapons,” Carver said in an email. “There are common technology needs between the nuclear enterprise and hypersonic systems. Particularly in the area of high-temperature materials, we typically collaborate on the development of advanced dual-use materials technology. I will reiterate that our entire hypersonic program portfolio continues to be based on delivering conventional effects only.” Although the DOD upholds the conventional-only policy for hypersonic gliders and scramjet-powered cruise missiles, the source of the RFI raises questions, said James Acton, co-director of the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “The fact that [this RFI] is coming from the nuclear weapons center, it makes it sound an awful lot like this would at least be nuclear-armed or conceivably dual-capable,” Acton said. Although the RFI confirms research is underway, the DOD still has no acknowledged plan to proceed from basic research into the acquisition phase of an ICBM-range hypersonic glider, whether carrying a conventional or nuclear warhead. If the thermal-protection system technology is limited to research only, the RFI by the Air Force's nuclear weapons organization may not violate the DOD policy, which may apply only to fielded weapons. “DOD does a lot of research on a lot of different things and the vast majority of these programs never turn into an acquisition,” Acton said. “It could turn into something, but sophisticated observers recognize that it may not.” The DOD's conventional-only policy for maneuvering hypersonic weapons stands apart from other countries in the field. Russia, for example, has deployed the nuclear-armed Avangard HGV on the SS-19 ICBM. In February, the head of U.S. Northern Command, Gen. Terrence O'Shaughnessy, said in written testimony submitted to Congress that “China is testing a [nuclear-armed] intercontinental-range hypersonic glide vehicle, which is designed to fly at high speeds and low altitudes, complicating our ability to provide precise warning.” The DOD never has had an announced weapons development program for a conventional- or nuclear-armed, intercontinental-range HGV, but has experimented with air-launched gliders. The Hypersonic Test Vehicle-2 program by the DARPA attempted to demonstrate a range of 4,170 nm, but each experimental glider in two tests staged in 2010 and 2011 failed about 9 min. into a planned 30-min. hypersonic glide. The leading edges of an intercontinental-range HGV could be exposed to temperatures as high as 7,000K (6,726C) on reentry, then endure a prolonged glide phase compared to an intermediate-range system, said Christopher Combs, who researches hypersonic aerodynamics as an assistant professor at the University of Texas-San Antonio. “The bottom line is it's just crazy temperatures,” Combs said. “They're still not dealing with space shuttle or Apollo [capsule] temperatures, but it's still really hot.” The rescinded RFI, meanwhile, also may provide a rare glimpse into the Air Force's plans for the new ICBM developed under the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD) program. Apart from the thermal-protection system for a hypersonic glider, the scope of effort in the RFI sought industry input on a variety of topics, including: • Fusing data from lower-fidelity, onboard sensors to improve guidance, navigation and control. • New navigation aids to correct inertial measurement unit drift on long-time-of-flight missions. • A lighter, smaller and more efficient “future fuze,” which also could “accept inputs from external subsystems.” • Radiation-hardening techniques for advanced microelectronics, such as a system on a chip or system in a package. • Improved computer hardware and software, including artificial intelligence algorithms. • A more secure architecture and better security sensors for ICBM ground facilities. The Air Force plans to award the contract to Northrop Grumman by the end of the month to launch the engineering and manufacturing development contract for the GBSD program. Northrop remained the sole bidder for the program to deliver more than 600 new ICBMs to the Air Force after a Boeing-led team withdrew from the competition last year. https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/missile-defense-weapons/usaf-errantly-reveals-research-icbm-range-hypersonic-glide

• 

  16 juillet 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

  Germany sets up European defense agenda with a waning US footprint in mind

  By: Sebastian Sprenger COLOGNE, Germany — The European Union should prepare for the possibility of a gradual disengagement by the United States from the continent, even if Democratic challenger Joe Biden beats President Donald Trump in the November election, according to Germany's defense minister. Speaking before the European parliament on Tuesday, Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer said she believes only the “tone” in trans-Atlantic relations would change following a Biden win. The reorientation of America's foreign policy toward China as a global rival would remain a key driving force in Washington, possibly at the expense of Europe, she said. “If that is the case, it means we Europeans must become able to act more so than is the case today,“ she said in testimony meant to lay out Germany's defense agenda during a six-month turn at the helm of the European Council of the EU that began July 1. To be sure, Kramp-Karrenbauer stressed that Europe remains dependent on U.S. and NATO support, and that there's no sign of that equation changing anytime soon. German leaders have consistently held up the trans-Atlantic alliance as a cornerstone of their geopolitical calculus, even as Trump took shots at Berlin for the its lackluster defense spending. But the defense minister's assessment that nothing other than the style of discourse would change with Trump's exit — he is trailing Biden in recent polls — may be a sign that Germans suspect bigger forces at play on the other side of the Atlantic. In that light, the Defence Ministry's defense agenda for the EU reads as something of a toolkit to avoid getting caught flat-footed. Creating a “strategic compass“ for the bloc, as Kramp-Karrenbauer called it, would be a key step in ensuring all member states back a common foreign and defense policy. An EU-wide threat assessment is the first step in that process, overseen by the EU Intelligence and Situation Centre and supported by member nations‘ intelligence services, she said. The assessment is slated to be “far along“ and will ideally be finished by the end of the year, when Germany hands the presidency baton to Slovenia, Kramp-Karrenbauer said. Also needed is a bloc-wide “operational understanding“ for whenever there is actual fighting to be done, according to the defense minister. Even peacekeeping and training missions, which tend to dominate the EU mission roster, always come with more kinetic, force-protection elements, for example, and there should be a process in place for setting up those types of operations, she argued. “You could approach it with the idea that this would fall to the same few countries in Europe, or you could develop a method as part of the strategic compass that this would become a matter for all members,“ Kramp-Karrenbauer said. West Africa could be a first test case of waning U.S. concerns about European interests. An American counterterrorism mission there has been crucial in supporting a U.N. peacekeeping force of EU and African troops. European leaders consider the region a hotbed for terrorism, fearing the possibility of fighters making their way to Europe. But the mission is controversial in the United States, and an American withdrawal could be in the offing at some point, Kramp-Karrenbauer said. “That is a scenario that we could find ourselves confronted with in the future.“ There is also the question of a withdrawal of almost 10,000 U.S. forces from Germany, the details of which are still somewhat shrouded in mystery. Hashed out by Trump and a small circle of White House advisers, military leaders are still figuring out the details for implementing the decision, Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy said in a phone call with reporters Wednesday. McCarthy said he discussed the matter with U.S. Air Force Gen. Tod Wolters, NATO's top general for Europe, earlier that day. But he had little to share about the process, saying only that Pentagon officials would release more details in the coming weeks. The “repositioning,“ as McCarthy called the move, is controversial among defense analysts on both sides of the Atlantic because it could simultaneously hurt America's and Europe's defense posture. Germany is a hub for U.S. troop training and logistics that would be difficult to quickly recreate elsewhere, the argument goes. The fact that military officials are only now doing the analytic legwork for a possible redeployment shows that no such examinations took place before Trump's announcement, retired Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges, a former commander of U.S. Army forces in Europe, told Defense News. Hodges said he was encouraged to see U.S. lawmakers question the decision, forcing a say on the issue by way of legislation. “Congressional support for NATO and for the German-U.S. relationship remains very strong,“ he said. Meanwhile, opinions differ on how much of a change a Biden presidency would bring to the trans-Atlantic alliance. “If you look at everything that Joe Biden has said, you certainly get the impression that he is interested in restoring alliances, including in Europe,“ said Jeffrey Rathke, president of the American Institute for Contemporary German Studies at Johns Hopkins University. “Of course there would be a different tone,“ he added. “But the substance would be different as well.“ For now, the German Defence Ministry's apparent trajectory of planning for a future where U.S. commitment may be iffy at best can bring more good than harm, he argued. Fears of an increasingly belligerent Russia and Trump's overt questioning of international alliances as key to keeping the peace have driven a wave of increased defense spending on the continent in recent years. “The things that Europe needs to do for its own security are precisely the things that improve the trans-Atlantic security relationship,“ Rathke said. When it comes to Washington's focus on China versus Europe, paying attention to different regions of the world should be possible simultaneously, he argued. “This is not an either-or situation. That's not how the United States should look at it.“ https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/07/15/germany-sets-up-a-european-defense-agenda-with-a-waning-us-footprint-in-mind/