11 juin 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité
By: Laicie Heeley
As the host of a national security podcast literally named “Things That Go Boom,” I spend a lot of my time thinking about what keeps us safe. And usually these thoughts are pretty focused on big, obvious threats — things like bombs. But with the world seemingly imploding, a global pandemic spreading, nationwide protests against police brutality erupting and world economies tanking, it's clearer than ever that we've been preparing for the wrong crisis. You could say we were preparing for World War III, when we got hammered by World War C.
Staying safe means recognizing what threats we're facing — the ones we're expecting and the ones that might catch us off guard. But we didn't do that. Instead we invested hundreds of billions of dollars in weapons and wars while the coronavirus slipped silently and invisibly across our borders, into our homes and even onto our military aircraft carriers.
The greatest threats of the past decade have come in the form of a deadly virus, climate-related natural disasters, economic meltdowns, and attacks on free and fair elections. So why are expensive weapons systems and massive military installations still a foregone conclusion?
America spends over $700 billion a year on our national defense. That's about a sixth of our overall budget and more than health care, education and all the rest of our discretionary spending combined. And the money is solid, meaning that most of the time, it's not subject to normal swings in the economy. Things are bad? We can't let the military feel the pain. Things are good? The military has to prepare for the next big threat. Bad or good, it's always a great time to invest. You can't put a price tag on security, they say. And they don't.
According to the Watson Institute's Costs of War Project, America's war on terror — which now spans more than 80 countries — has cost taxpayers over $6 trillion since 2001, with no signs of slowing down.
And in its latest budget proposal, the Trump administration proposed spending $20 billion more on military programs than on all other federal programs combined.
Conversely, in 2018, the Trump administration cut the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's budget by 80 percent, forcing it to scale back its efforts to prevent epidemics in 39 of 49 countries, including China. These and other major cuts to global health spending left the U.S. unprepared for the crisis we're facing now.
As vital American businesses — from my son's preschool to our friends' farm — struggle to survive, the defense industry has unsurprisingly had no such problem. In late April, for example, some contractors received a windfall of business when the State Department approved over $2 billion in weapons sales to repressive regimes like India, Morocco and the Philippines, with more supposedly on the way. The defense industry is doing so well in fact that it is showing up on investment lists as an example of one of the best places to “hedge in hard times.”
Despite their already deep financial pockets, Congress decided to give these huge contractors billions of dollars in coronavirus relief funds. This comes as a bit of a surprise when you consider that the Pentagon just recently diverted $13.3 billion in unused funds for the construction of the president's border wall. And the first-ever audit of the Department of Defense revealed that it failed to spend almost $28 billion from 2013-2018, all the while asking for more funding.
Unfortunately, experts believe this money, which is supposed to be used to help keep workers safe and employed, will instead only help make the companies' executives richer. We're already seeing this play out. Deemed “essential workers” due to the pending arms sales, workers in these manufacturing plants recently went on strike after they were forced to go to work even as a number of their colleagues tested positive for coronavirus.
Flush with additional resources from a growing military budget, and as other departments' budgets have been cut, the Pentagon has also become deeply embedded in domestic affairs. Last year, Defense Secretary Mark Esper went so far as to proclaim election security a core part of the Pentagon's mission, despite the hesitance of past officials to allow such forms of military creep. The separation of the civilian and the military is one of the hallmarks of our democracy. The breakdown of these norms isn't good for our country, and it isn't good for the Pentagon, which has already sounded the alarm on what the military can — and cannot — do to deal with the pandemic.
What's more, the migration of funds to the Pentagon saps other agencies of vital and limited resources. By many accounts, it also makes us worse at winning wars, as the Pentagon foregoes more focused and essential strategic planning in favor of a do-it-all, buy-it-all reality. Consider that some estimates put the annual cost of eradicating homelessness in the United States at about $20 billion, and the cost of eradicating hunger in America at about $26 billion. And consider, in the midst of an outbreak, that we could buy 2,200 ventilators for the price of one F-35.
It doesn't have to be this way. While some may see the Pentagon budget as a sacred cow, it's not. Reconsidering our spending to invest more heavily in the programs that really keep us safe is not only possible, but long overdue.
5 décembre 2023 | International, Aérospatial
Russian air defence systems destroyed or intercepted a total of 41 Ukraine-launched drones overnight and early morning on Tuesday, the Russian defence ministry said.
23 avril 2019 | International, Terrestre
By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — The U.S. Army plans to take another year to pick an Active Protection System for its Stryker combat vehicle, according to the military deputy to the Army acquisition chief. The service is already fielding the Rafael-made Trophy APS on its Abrams tank and has picked IMI's Iron Fist for the Bradley Fighting Vehicle — both as interim systems until the Army can develop an advanced future system — but it had to go back to square one when its attempt to outfit Stryker with Herndon, Virginia-based Artis LLC's Iron Curtain system failed. The Army put out a request for possible systems to be qualified as an interim solution on the Stryker. Officials ultimately chose a Rafael and DRS team and a Rheinmetall and UBT team to participate in a live-fire rodeo last November to see if either system might work. But while it was believed a decision would come soon after, Lt. Gen. Paul Ostrowski testified at an April 2 Senate Armed Services Airland Subcommittee hearing that it would take another year to make a decision. “We have two companies that are in the process of competing for [APS on Stryker]. One is a venture between ... Rafael and DRS and the other is Rheinmetall and UBT, so we are in the process of going through that,” Ostrowski said. “It's going to take about a year, quite frankly, in order to put those systems on the vehicles, characterize them and make a determination as to whether or not to move forward with either one of the two vendors.” Ostrowski added the service had asked each team to provide blueprints and to build their non-developmental APS systems to fit on Stryker. “They are in the process of doing that build,” he said. “And once the build is put on the vehicle, it's then a matter of testing in order to ensure that it works,” Ostrowski said, which is not unlike the process the Army went through to characterize and qualify APS systems on both Abrams and Bradley. Israeli company Rafael and DRS submitted its Trophy VPS — a lighter version of Trophy — for the rodeo. Germany-based Rheinmetall partnered with Unified Business Technologies, based in Michigan, and submitted its Active Defense System — now renamed StrikeShield. During the rodeo, participants did not perform a full installation of their systems on the vehicle. Instead, they set up test rigs in front of Strykers or hung their system off a Stryker in the evaluation. Following the rodeo, the idea was to select one, possibly two systems, to begin some sort of installation characterization on a platform deemed most appropriate for the APS system, Col. Glenn Dean, the Army's Stryker program manager who is also in charge of the interim APS effort, told Defense News in October 2018. Meanwhile, Ostrowski said the Army bought 88 Iron Fist systems for Bradley in 2019 and planned to buy another 36 in the FY20 budget. The service is on a path to field four brigades of Abrams with Trophy by FY21. The Army is also developing its own Modular Active Protection System, which is seen more like a digital integrated backbone that will be designed with an open-system architecture so that vendors can bring radars, optical sensors and hard- or soft-kill effectors and plug them in, according to Ostrowski. The important thing is “to get a capability out there first. . . . Now it's just a matter of moving beyond that,” he said. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2019/04/02/us-army-needs-another-year-to-pick-protection-system-for-stryker/
8 novembre 2019 | International, Aérospatial
Par Michel Cabirol Le drone tactique Patroller, qui doit être livré très prochainement à l'armée de Terre, devrait être armé d'une roquette guidée laser de 68 mm. Safran a reçu de la DGA une étude de levée de risques pour armer le Patroller. Tic-tac, tic-tac, tic-tac... La livraison du drone tactique Patroller est désormais une question de semaines. Prévue initialement le 22 novembre, elle a été très légèrement reportée à début décembre en raison de l'encombrement du trafic aérien à Istres, où le premier système (5 avions et deux stations sol) doit être remis à l'armée de Terre à l'issue d'une série de vols. Une fois le système testé à Istres, il sera rapatrié dare-dare à Chaumont où les créneaux de vol sont beaucoup plus simples à gérer pour l'armée de Terre, qui va devoir s'approprier ce nouveau système d'arme. Le Patroller est attendu sur les thé'tres d'opération mi-2021, et notamment sur la bande sahélo-saharienne (BSS). Le Patroller sera la "rolls" de l'armée de Terre. Équipé d'une boule optronique gyrostabilisée dernier cri, ce drone tactique vise à répondre aux missions de renseignement au profit des unités tactiques de l'armée de Terre en leur offrant une capacité de surveillance, d'acquisition, de reconnaissance et de renseignement (SA2R). Ce système d'observation est capable de détecter, d'identifier et de localiser, de jour comme de nuit, dans un champ atteignant presque 360°, tous les éléments observés sur une portée de 150 km (14 heures d'autonomie). "Il permet ainsi, presque immédiatement, de décrire une éventuelle unité ennemie, avait confirmé en juin dernier le général Jean-Pierre Bosser, qui était encore chef d'état-major de l'armée de Terre. Voilà un progrès essentiel apporté par la troisième dimension à l'armée de terre". Le Patroller armé d'une roquette guidée laser Une bonne nouvelle peut en cacher une autre. Safran a récemment obtenu la notification d'un contrat d'une durée de 18 mois pour une étude de levée de risques pour l'armement du Patroller, selon des sources concordantes. L'armée de Terre avait fortement plaidé pour armer le Patroller. "Pour les militaires l'armement des drones était depuis longtemps considéré comme une nécessité. (...) Nous avons clairement affirmé le besoin d'armer le Patroller", avait indiqué en mai 2018 lors d'une audition à l'Assemblée nationale le général Charles Beaudouin, sous-chef d'état-major chargé des plans et des programmes de l'état-major de l'armée de Terre. Le choix s'est porté sur la roquette guidée laser de 68mm de Thales, qui équipe déjà l'hélicoptère Tigre. Elle a été préférée à la version sol-air du missile MMP, le MHT de MBDA. Pourquoi ? La roquette guidée laser est dimensionnée aux besoins de l'armée de Terre en étant parfaitement adaptée à des objectifs rencontrés par le Patroller lors de ses missions de surveillance pour réaliser des tirs sur des cibles d'opportunité (pick-up, sniper...). La roquette est également beaucoup moins chère et plus légère que le MMP et son poste de tir. Ce dernier point permet d'optimiser l'autonomie du Patroller, qui un outil de gestion de crise. Enfin, la solution MMP, qui traite des cibles plus importantes (char, bunker...), aurait été plus compliquée techniquement à mettre au point en raison de son guidage (fibre optique). Bloqué par la direction générale de l'armement (DGA) en rétorsion aux retards du Patroller, cette étude de levée de risque était attendue depuis deux ans environ. C'était il y a deux ans déjà en septembre 2017 que la ministre des Armées Florence Parly avait annoncé dans un discours devenu fameux sa décision d'armer les drones Reaper français. "Deux ans de perdu", soupire une source interrogée par La Tribune. Aujourd'hui le Patroller armé est attendu au sein de l'armée de Terre en 2023 https://www.latribune.fr/entreprises-finance/industrie/aeronautique-defense/le-drone-tactique-patroller-tres-proche-de-sa-premiere-livraison-832585.html