US must be transparent about realistic prospects for cooperation in space

Sur le même sujet

• 

  19 décembre 2018 | International, C4ISR

  Marines look for IBM Watson-like artificial intelligence to plan large-scale wargames

  By: Todd South The Marines are looking to big data analysis and potentially an IBM Watson-like machine or software to help conduct complex wargaming and plan for future battles in an immersive environment. The Corps' Program Manager for Wargaming Capability, Col. Ross Monta, told Marine Corps Times that a recent program announcement seeks to “bring advanced analytics, visualization, models and simulation together to create an environment that enables senior leaders” to make a host of decisions. Those range from capabilities for the future force and ways to test operational plans, develop concepts of operations and help provide information to prioritize resources. The announcement is the service's second round of information gathering in four technology areas that include modeling and simulation, wargame design, data services and visualization. The Marines are reviewing white papers submitted from industry in January, February, March and July. They're aiming to have testing begin as early as October. At the 2017 Modern Day Marine Military Expo, then-Lt. Col. Monta spoke on how the Corps was developing a three- to five-year plan for a wargaming center at Marine Corps Base Quantico that would allow planners to conduct 20 wargames a year, including two large-scale, 250-participant exercises. The simulation they sought at the time would provide, “accurate representation of future operating environments, simulate friendly and enemy capabilities” and perform “rapid, in-depth analysis of game-derived data or insights.” The then-head of Marine Corps Systems Command, Brig. Gen. Joseph Shrader, said that wargaming had to get beyond “moving yellow stickies on a map.” At that time the center was capable of conducting about 11 wargame scenarios a year, Monta said. They were looking at partnering advanced simulation capabilities, such as the one they're seeking in the fbo.gov posting, with flesh and blood experts from the Ellis Group think tank to better see high-order, long-term warfighting needs. The head of training systems command, Col. Walt Yates, told Marine Corps Times that the aim was to have ways of using artificial intelligence to run simulations as many as 1,000 times. With those numbers, planners can learn probabilities of victory, casualty expectations and the logistics required to accomplish the mission. Simulation capabilities would allow commanders to run scenarios against future threats to gauge what equipment and tactics are most needed to succeed. These factors would inform planning for everything from buying the next piece of combat gear to how best to deploy forces, Yates said. The big data analysis is just one of a list of items the Corps has been working in recent years to push their wargaming from squad to Marine Expeditionary Force-level, leveraging advances in computing, data analytics, virtual reality, augmented reality and gaming. Beginning this past year, Marines at each of the Corps 24 infantry battalions began fielding Tactical Decision Kits, a combination of laptop, VR goggles and drones that allow small unit leaders to map battle spaces and then run operations plans in VR to rehearse missions. Earlier this year, MARCORSYSCOM officials sought industry input on pushing weapons simulations for live training, force-on-force shooting past the decades old laser technology still in use today. They want shooting systems that more realistically replicate how bullets and other projectiles move and the types of damage they cause. The system that would be able to simulate all weapons and vehicles typically seen in a battalion, which would include at least: M4/M16; M9 or sidearm, the M27 Infantry Automatic Weapon; hand grenades; rocket propelled grenades; Light Anti-Tank Weapon; 60mm mortars; 81mm mortars; Claymore antipersonnel mine; Mk-19 grenade launcher; Russian machine gun; AK-47 variants; M41 TOW; Javelin missile and the Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle. It would also allow for immediate after-action review so that trainers and commanders could see where their Marines were aiming, when and how much they fired to strike a target and what damage their opponents caused. https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/your-marine-corps/2018/12/18/marines-look-for-ibm-watson-like-artificial-intelligence-to-plan-large-scale-wargames

• 

  16 octobre 2018 | International, Aérospatial

  Most F-35s return to flight operations after fuel tube problem

  By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — After a fuel tube problem sidelined all operational F-35 aircraft last week, more than 80 percent of jets have been cleared to return to flight, the F-35 joint program office stated Monday. In a Oct. 15 statement, the JPO confirmed that the U.S. services and international partners have completed inspections of their F-35 inventories for faulty fuel tubes. The aircraft that are not impacted by the bad tubes — which are a component in Pratt & Whitney's F135 engine — are back in flying status. “The F-35 Joint Program Office continues to work closely with the military services to prioritize fuel tube replacements using the current spares inventory,” the JPO said. “Pratt & Whitney is rapidly procuring more parts to minimize the overall repair timeline for the remaining jets. Current inventory will restore about half of the impacted jets to flight operations, and the remaining aircraft are expected to be cleared for flight over the coming weeks.” Last week, all U.S. and international F-35s were momentarily grounded to allow for an enterprise-wide fuel tube inspection. The review began as a result of an investigation into a Sept. 28 Marine Corps' F-35B crash near Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort in South Carolina — the first F-35 crash in the jet's history. It is still unclear exactly how the defective fuel tubes impact the jet's performance or how serious a safety threat they pose during flight operations. Joe DellaVedova, a spokesman for the JPO, declined to discuss the specific problems that led the program office to call for a fleetwide inspection, saying that details could not be released until the Marine Corps completes its accident investigation. Also still up in the air is whether the Pentagon or Pratt & Whitney will be stuck paying the tab for retrofitting the fleet. Spokesmen from the U.S. Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy declined to lay out exactly how many of their aircraft had been impacted by the faulty fuel tubes. However, as Lockheed Martin delivered its 300th F-35 in June, 20 percent of the operational F-35 fleet can be estimated to be about 60 aircraft across the U.S. and international operators. The JPO called the fuel tube problem an “isolated incident” that would not impact F-35 deliveries. A total of 91 F-35s are planned to be delivered to the U.S. military and foreign customers this year. “The primary goal following any mishap is the prevention of future incidents,” the office said. “We will take every measure to ensure safe operations while we deliver, sustain and modernize the F-35 for the warfighter and our defense partners.” The problem with the defective fuel tubes is the latest in a string of recent supply chain issues that have plagued F-35 prime contractor Lockheed Martin and engine manufacturer Pratt & Whitney, and comes as Defense Secretary Jim Mattis sent a memo directing the Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy to boost the F-35′s mission capable rate to 80 percent. The Pentagon halted F-35 deliveries in March amid disagreements over whether the department or Lockheed should foot the bill for retrofitting part of the fleet that had not received corrosion-preventing primer in certain fastener holes. Deliveries resumed in May once the parties hammered out an agreement — although it was never revealed to the public exactly how the expenses would be paid off. In 2016, certain F-35As were grounded after it was found that coolant lines inside the jets' fuel tanks were rimmed with faulty insulation, which was prone to disintegrating. https://www.defensenews.com/air/2018/10/15/most-f-35s-return-to-flight-operations-after-fuel-tube-problem

• 

  11 mars 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

  Poll: Germans, Americans far apart on use of military, defense spending

  By: Sebastian Sprenger COLOGNE, Germany — Germans and Americans remain far apart on defense issues, ranging from when to use the military, how much to spend on defense and which country poses a bigger challenge — Russia or China — according to a new study unveiled Monday. “Three years into a turbulent period of American-German relations, with Donald Trump at the helm of American foreign policy and Angela Merkel leading Germany, there continues to be a wide divergence in views of bilateral relations and security policy between the publics of both countries,” said a Pew Research Center study published in cooperation with Koerber Stiftung, a German think tank. The two organizations each polled about 1,000 adults in September 2019 in the United States and Germany. Also included in the data are results from Pew's “global attitudes” survey conducted in both countries during the spring and summer of 2019. The results are unlikely to surprise anyone following trans-Atlantic relations, but they put into perspective why deep-seated differences persist in crafting a more coherent political show of force between the two nations. While roughly 80 percent Americans believe that using military might is sometimes necessary to maintain order in the world, Germans were almost split evenly on the same question, with a slight majority disagreeing. On the question of defending a fellow NATO ally against Russia in the event of a conflict, 6 in 10 Americans said the United States should help, whereas 6 in 10 German respondents said their country should not get involved. At the same time, Germans saw the United States high up in the list of key foreign policy allies, much higher than Americans viewed Germany. Asked to name their most or second-most important partner, 42 percent of Germans mentioned the United Sates, surpassed only by the their top choice of France, at 60 percent. For Americans, the British ranked highest on the same question, at 36 percent, followed by China (23 percent), Canada (20 percent) and Israel (15 percent). “One area of convergence is the broad support in both the U.S. and Germany for more cooperation with France and Japan. And similar majorities in the U.S. and Germany want to cooperate more with China,” the study read. As for cooperation with Russia, “Germans are almost twice as likely as Americans to want greater collaboration,” it added. When it comes to defense spending, 35 percent of Americans felt that Europeans should up their military budget, with 50 percent saying it should stay the same and 9 percent saying it should decrease. In 2017, the share of Americans wanting an increase was 45 percent. In Germany, the acceptance for defense budget increases has grown since 2017, when only 32 percent of those polled voiced support and 50 percent wanted it to remain the same. In 2018, 43 percent of respondents supported an increase. At the mid-February Munich Security Conference, much was made about the European Union's need to “learn to use the language of power,” as Josep Borrell, the bloc's defense and foreign policy chief, put it. That, of course, would cost money. Germans have traditionally frowned upon that kind of talk, though there is an increasing awareness of geopolitical perils in the wake of Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014, Jeffrey Rathke, president of the American Institute for Contemporary German Studies at Johns Hopkins University, said in an interview last month. “Germany has been able to get by with its rhetorical response to the deteriorating security environment,” he said. “Now it's increasingly obvious that that is no longer enough.” While the country has significantly upped its defense spending, sensitizing the public for operational contributions to Europe's security will be a crucial next step for this government and the next, Rathke argued. The Pew and Koerber figures point to a generational change in the general attitudes of Germans and Americans about one another. “Despite these divergences in opinion, young people in both countries have more positive views of the U.S.-German relationship,” the study read. “In the U.S., for example, 82 percent of people ages 18 to 29 say the relationship is good, compared with 73 percent of those ages 65 and older. Similarly, in Germany, four-in-ten young people say relations with the U.S. are good, compared with only 31 percent of those 65 and older.” Notably, the two countries' militaries enjoy a much closer level of cooperation than the political discourse suggests, especially during the Trump administration, a fact that officials in both countries keep stressing when the tone between Berlin and Washington turns particularly icy. “There is an instinctive perception in the German public to defense matters anchored in Europe and the trans-Atlantic alliance,” Rathke said. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/03/09/poll-germans-americans-far-apart-on-use-of-military-defense-spending/