1 octobre 2018 | International, Aérospatial

US government may gain new power to track drones and shoot them down

An aviation bill Congress is rushing to approve contains a little-noticed section that would give authorities the power to track, intercept and destroy drones they consider a security threat, without needing a judge's approval.

Supporters say law enforcement needs this power to protect Americans from terrorists who are learning how to use drones as deadly weapons.

They point to the Islamic State terrorist group's use of bomb-carrying drones on battlefields in Iraq, and warn that terrorists could go after civilian targets in the United States.

Critics say the provision would give the government unchecked power to decide when drones are a threat. They say the government could use its newfound power to restrict drone-camera news coverage of protests or controversial government facilities, such as the new detention centers for young migrants.

The provision is tucked in a huge bill that provides $1.7 billion in disaster relief and authorizes programs of the Federal Aviation Administration, which regulates drones.

The House approved the measure Wednesday by a 398-23 vote, and the Senate is expected pass it on to President Donald Trump's desk in the coming days. The White House signaled support of the drone provision in July.

Sen. Ron Johnson, a Wisconsin Republican, introduced the Preventing Emerging Threats Act this year. It would give the Homeland Security Department and the Justice Department power to develop and deploy a system to spot, track and shoot down drones, as unmanned aircraft are called. Officers would have the authority to hack a drone operator's signal and take control of the device.

The bill was never considered on its own by the full Senate or the House. Instead, in private negotiations that ended last weekend, it was tucked into a "must-pass" piece of FAA legislation.

Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen wrote in a recent op-ed that the threat of drone attacks "is outpacing our ability to respond." She said criminals use drones to smuggle drugs across the border, but worse, terrorists like the Islamic State are deploying them on the battlefield.

"We need to acknowledge that our first and last chance to stop a malicious drone might be during its final approach to a target," she wrote.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a statement this week that the measure "would finally give federal law enforcement the authority we need to counter the use of drones by drug traffickers, terrorists and criminals."

The National Football League's top security executive recently endorsed the bill's intent but said it should go further by letting trained local police officers intercept drones. The official, Cathy Lanier, a former Washington, D.C., police chief, said the NFL is alarmed by an increase in drone flyovers at stadiums.

Opponents including the American Civil Liberties Union argue that the proposal gives the government unchecked power to track and seize drones without regard for the privacy and free-speech rights of legitimate drone operators. It exempts the government agencies from certain laws, including limits on wiretapping.

The bill provides no oversight or means to question a government decision about what is a "credible threat" and what is an "asset" or "facility" in need of protection when drones are nearby.

News organizations are increasingly using drones. They deploy them to cover natural disasters like the recent flooding from Hurricane Florence and also controversies such as the Trump administration's construction of new camps for migrant children who were separated from their parents at the U.S.-Mexico border.

"Being able to see footage of protests, the size of protests, being able to see facilities like those at the border is useful — those are newsworthy events," said India McKinney, a legislative analyst for the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Without a specific means to protect First Amendment rights — something not in the bill — "it's entirely feasible to think that the DOJ or DHS could just decide that a drone owned by a news organization provides a credible threat and then destroys the footage," she said.

___

David Koenig can be reached at http://twitter.com/airlinewriter

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2018/09/28/government-may-gain-new-power-to-track-drones-and-shoot-them-down

Sur le même sujet

7 août 2019 | International, Terrestre

Elbit Systems Demonstrates an Innovative Armored Fighting Vehicle Operated by a Helmet Mounted Display
Haifa, Israel, August 04, 2019 – Elbit Systems has concluded extensive testing and carried out a series of successful capability demonstrations of its innovative Armored Fighting Vehicle (AFV), as part of the CARMEL Future Combat Vehicle project of the Israeli Ministry of Defense. The innovative AFV introduces a step change in the operational capability of combat vehicles. This is underpinned by applying autonomous capabilities and Artificial Intelligence (AI) to accelerate decision making and facilitate target engagement with dramatically increased rapidity and accuracy. Using a Helmet Mounted Display (HMD) a crew of two warriors operates the AFV under closed hatches, further enhancing capabilities and survivability. The AFV successfully demonstrated its capacity to function as an independent high fire-power strike cell, as a networked station for multi-spectral sensing and information fusion, as well as a base platform for operating additional unmanned systems. The capabilities were exhibited by a technology demonstrator integrating a range of the Company's systems, among them: UT30 unmanned turret, Iron Vision HMD, a land robotic suite, TORCH Command & Control (C2) system, E-LynX software defined radios, SupervisIR terrain dominance system, MAY acoustic situational awareness system, AI applications, THOR Vertical Take-off and Landing (VTOL) and Pioneer fighting Unmanned Ground Vehicle (UGV). The AFV is capable of performing key combat tasks with high level of autonomy – off road driving, rapid target acquisition and prioritization, as well as fast, high precision fire missions, in day and night. The AFV is networked allowing it to carry out missions ordered by Headquarters and other fighting platforms as well as to transmit missions and intelligence to other forces. Additionally, the AFV is capable of operating other unmanned platforms such as a VTOL to feed intelligence into the crew's operational picture or a fighting UGV to perform high risk missions. Using the Iron Vision ‘See-Through' HMD, a crew of two is capable of operating the AFV entirely under closed hatches. The system transmits real-time, high resolution video to the crew's helmet mounted display, providing them with a 360° view of the surroundings, together with relevant symbology and C4I data. In addition, Iron Vision enables the crew to acquire targets, conduct line-of-sight (LOS) driving and navigation and enslave the AFV's weapons systems to their LOS. About Elbit Systems Elbit Systems Ltd. is an international high technology company engaged in a wide range of defense, homeland security and commercial programs throughout the world. The Company, which includes Elbit Systems and its subsidiaries, operates in the areas of aerospace, land, and naval systems, command, control, communications, computers, intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance (“C4ISR”), unmanned aircraft systems, advanced electro-optics, electro-optic space systems, EW suites, signal intelligence systems, data links and communications systems, radios and cyber-based systems and munitions. The Company also focuses on the upgrading of existing platforms, developing new technologies for defense, homeland security and commercial applications and providing a range of support services, including training and simulation systems. For additional information visit: elbitsystems.com, follow us on: Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook or visit our official YouTube Channel. This press release contains forward‑looking statements (within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) regarding Elbit Systems Ltd. and/or its subsidiaries (collectively the Company), to the extent such statements do not relate to historical or current fact. Forward-looking statements are based on management's expectations, estimates, projections and assumptions. Forward‑looking statements are made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, as amended. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve certain risks and uncertainties, which are difficult to predict. Therefore, actual future results, performance and trends may differ materially from these forward‑looking statements due to a variety of factors, including, without limitation: scope and length of customer contracts; governmental regulations and approvals; changes in governmental budgeting priorities; general market, political and economic conditions in the countries in which the Company operates or sells, including Israel and the United States among others; differences in anticipated and actual program performance, including the ability to perform under long-term fixed-price contracts; and the outcome of legal and/or regulatory proceedings. The factors listed above are not all-inclusive, and further information is contained in Elbit Systems Ltd.'s latest annual report on Form 20-F, which is on file with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. All forward‑looking statements speak only as of the date of this release. The Company does not undertake to update its forward-looking statements. Elbit Systems Ltd., its logo, brand, product, service and process names appearing in this Press Release are the trademarks or service marks of Elbit Systems Ltd. or its affiliated companies. All other brand, product, service and process names appearing are the trademarks of their respective holders. Reference to or use of a product, service or process other than those of Elbit Systems Ltd. does not imply recommendation, approval, affiliation or sponsorship of that product, service or process by Elbit Systems Ltd. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring by implication, estoppel or otherwise any license or right under any patent, copyright, trademark or other intellectual property right of Elbit Systems Ltd. or any third party, except as expressly granted herein. https://www.epicos.com/article/455197/elbit-systems-demonstrates-innovative-armored-fighting-vehicle-operated-helmet
21 avril 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

Coronavirus : La Corée du Sud réduit son budget de défense
Le gouvernement sud-coréen décide de réduire de 2 % le budget de défense initialement prévu pour 2020 et qui s'inscrivait sur une hausse de 7,4 %. L'avion de combat F-35 en est la première victime. Moins que prévu pour la défense Conséquence de la mobilisation budgétaire pour amortir les conséquences économiques de la pandémie de coronavirus ou covid-19, le gouvernement sud-coréen, par la voix de son ministre de l'Economie et des finances, annonce une réduction du budget de défense initialement programmé pour l'année 2020. Ce budget avait été b'ti sur une hausse de 7,4 % pour s'élever à 41 Md$. Il baissera finalement de 2 %, soit près de 740 M$ de moins que prévu. Sur ce total, les réductions portent essentiellement sur les achats d'équipements de matériels programmés, soit 582 M$. F-35 et Aegis Dans la même temps, le ministère sud-coréen de la Défense a commencé de négocier avec Lockheed Martin le report des paiements prévus sur les avions de combat F-35 acquis par la Corée du Sud ainsi que sur le système combat Aegis qui associe radars haute puissance et missiles anti-navires et missiles anti-aérien. https://air-cosmos.com/article/coronavirus-la-core-du-sud-rduit-son-budget-de-dfense-22948
27 avril 2020 | International, C4ISR

Recalculating: GPS, L-band and the Pentagon’s untenable position on 5G
Daniel S. Goldin Last week, Ajit Pai, the chairman of the Federal Communication Commission, submitted the L-band Ligado spectrum proposal for approval, which, he said, will “make more efficient use of underused spectrum and promote the deployment of 5G” with “stringent conditions to prevent harmful [GPS] interference.” All five FCC commissioners voted to affirm the proposal, which was formally published in a 70-page report. L-band is a critical piece of spectrum that will help accelerate the deployment of U.S. 5G so we can compete and ultimately win against China. The Department of Defense argues that use of the L-band (as Ligado proposes) will interfere with GPS, which is essential to our military and economy. The FCC's final order concludes that the testing upon which the DoD and other opponents based their GPS interference claims was invalid. L-band opponents' interference measurement (termed 1dB C/No) is “inappropriate” and “there is no connection presented in the technical studies” that prove this measure of interference “relates to performance-based metrics” of a GPS receiver. In short, the FCC said there is no harmful GPS interference, and opponents have been using a flawed methodology and an invalid test with which the FCC “strongly disagree[s].” The FCC's recent report is not the first time the Ligado proposal was determined to cause no GPS interference. In early 2019, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration under David Redl reviewed the Ligado proposal carefully — along with the 20 government agencies that comprise the review body — and determined there is no interference. The NTIA then wrote a recommendation for approval and, before it could get to the FCC, it was blocked, eventually leading to Redl's dismissal. Further, over 5,000 hours of testing, including 1,500 hours at a high-tech U.S./DoD-sponsored and designed facility (performed by the world-recognized standard-in-testing National Institute of Standards and Technology scientists and engineers), proved no harmful GPS interference. Afterward, a DoD expert who monitored and confirmed the testing results told me “there is no interference problem, only a bureaucracy problem.” Yet DoD has continued to blitz the executive and legislative branches, galvanizing opposition with a compelling plea: Ligado hurts GPS, which endangers military operations and will harm the economy. Powerful. But factually wrong. And if wrong, why is Defense Secretary Mark Esper continuing to lobby against the FCC? The FCC is an independent agency. The Communications Act of 1934 charged the FCC with regulating communications for important reasons, including “for the purpose of national defense.” So why is the DoD employing principles of war — offensive operations to mass upon and seize the objective — toward the demise of Ligado's proposal and, perhaps implicitly, Ligado itself? Members of the Senate Armed Services Committee and the House Armed Services Committee are weighing in on the DoD's behalf. They have been presented partial, one-sided information. Mr. Esper is a capable, reform-minded defense secretary who has brought much-needed change to the Pentagon. But he has also been advancing one-sided recommendations from his senior staff for GPS issues, some with longstanding connections to the highly influential Position, Navigation, and Timing Advisory Board — which enjoys a level of influence akin to a special interest group within the U.S. government. A reading of the defense secretary's November 2019 letter to the NTIA reveals that even the DoD was never really sure about its own GPS interference claims, stating merely there are “too many unknowns,” the “risks are far too great,” testing shows “potential for” disruption and the Ligado system “could have a significant negative impact.” Yet, once the Ligado proposal was presented for approval on April 15 — with no new testing or analysis since November — DoD leadership tweeted that Ligado's signal “would needlessly imperil” DoD capabilities that use GPS, and risk “crippling our GPS networks.” If taken at face value, this means the DoD has spent over $50 billion over 45 years on a military GPS system that is so fragile it can be rendered useless by a 10-watt transmitter (a refrigerator light bulb) operating 23 MHz away. If true, this would represent one of the most egregious mismanagements of taxpayer dollars in federal procurement history. The pandemic has shown that China is coercing nations in need of medical assistance to adopt Chinese 5G infrastructure. Coercion from Chinese dominance in 5G would be worse. Agencies like the FCC and NTIA are in the national security arena now. As Attorney General William Barr stated in February, “we have to move decisively to auction the C-band and bring resolution on the L-band. Our economic future is at stake. We have to bear in mind in making these spectrum decisions that, given the narrow window we face, the risk of losing the 5G struggle with China should vastly outweigh all other considerations.” It is time for bold, forward-looking leadership and a wartime mindset. Chairman Pai deserves credit for setting this example. His courageous decision, coupled with support from the FCC commissioners and the strong statements of support from Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Barr, signals a new determination to win the 5G race. L-band spectrum will enable other key elements of the U.S. 5G strategy and private sector innovation faster than any other option. It also demonstrates that a science-based approach to technology and policy is critical, otherwise we will grind to a near halt on every major decision — like this one — to China's benefit. America is truly “exceptional,” and the envy of every political system the world over, because our system is anchored on the rule of law and institutions that allow stakeholders' competing interests to be adjudicated. All parties have had many years to make their cases. The FCC's world-class scientists and engineers have come to a conclusion. The DoD has no new information; it just does not like the result. After all the internal policy battles are fought, there is only one constituency that matters: the American people and their national and economic security, consistent with U.S. policy objectives grounded in facts. This is why we must embrace this scientifically sound and strategically wise decision by the FCC and move forward, guided by another more apt principle of war: unity of effort. https://www.c4isrnet.com/opinion/2020/04/24/recalculating-gps-l-band-and-the-pentagons-untenable-position-on-5g/

Toutes les nouvelles