Wittman proposes way to keep Next-Generation Air Dominance on track

Sur le même sujet

• 

  15 septembre 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval

  Reaper Replacement Reveals Bold New GA-ASI Vision

  Steve Trimble In December 2018, General Atomics Aeronautical Systems executives still felt the bitter sting of a losing bid two months earlier for the U.S. Navy MQ-25 contract, but a clearly disappointed company president vowed to return for the next competition against the aerospace industry's largest companies. “If the [request for proposals] comes out for a major program of record, we're all-in,” said David Alexander in that December 2018 interview in his offices in Poway, California. “We'll maybe have a few more lessons learned on what to do and what not to do,” he added. "But we'll go in with both feet planted again and go after it.” Eighteen months later, General Atomics Aeronautical Systems (GA-ASI) is doubling-down on Alexander's commitment, releasing exclusively to Aviation Week a concept rendering of a next-generation unmanned aircraft system (UAS) that reflects the characteristics the company's designers view as essential for the class of aircraft that could replace the MQ-9 by the early 2030s. Ultra-long-endurance UAS proposed GA-ASI hints at propulsion advances GA-ASI was among at least five industry teams that responded to the U.S. Air Force's request for information (RFI) for a next-generation intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) and strike UAS to enter service in fiscal 2030. Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin shared concepts for next-generation UAS designs on Sept. 11. Boeing and Kratos also responded to the Air Force RFI by the July 15 deadline but declined to release concepts at this nascent stage of the bidding process. Arguably, GA-ASI invented the role of the ISR/Strike UAS with the MQ-9, and the company's concept for the Reaper is no less provocative, featuring a jet-powered aircraft with distinctive, tear-shaped inlets and a long, high-aspect-ratio wingspan that appear optimized for ultra-long-range flight at high altitudes. “We're embracing ultra-long endurance to keep our next-generation ISR/Strike UAS in the fight for longer periods than many ever imagined possible,” Alexander said in a statement to Aviation Week. Although GA-ASI released no specifications with the rendering, it is clear Alexander means the next-generation concept should have even longer range that the 27-hr. endurance currently offered by the Air Force's MQ-9. The Air Force Research Laboratory defined ultra-long-endurance in 2019, when a popular light sport aircraft, the Pipistrel Sinus, was modified to fly autonomously for 2.5 days over the Dugway Proving Ground, Utah. The modified aircraft was called the Ultra-Long-Endurance Aircraft Platform. How the new GA-ASI concept achieves ultra-long endurance is likely to include intriguing surprises beyond the disproportionately long, thin-chord and highly swept wings. The tear-shape inlets appear to feed airflow through parallel ducts down the middle of the fuselage into a mysterious propulsion system. Alexander's statement hints that the aircraft's engine is a critical element of the ultra-long-endurance capability. “Our advancements in propulsion technology will give commanders a longer reach than ever before,” Alexander said. In the late-1990s, GA-ASI designed the MQ-9 to perform the hunter-killer UAS mission's three “F's”—find, fix and finish—by itself if necessary, with a targeting sensor embedded beneath the nose and AGM-114 Hellfire missiles along with GBU-12 laser-guided or GBU-38 GPS-guided gravity bombs under the wing. GA-ASI's next-generation UAS concept appears capable of performing the role in a similar stand-alone fashion. A faintly visible bulge under the leading edge suggests capacity for a large payload bay, allowing the future concept to carry sensors and weapons internally, unlike the MQ-9. But the Air Force's concept of operations is changing. Whether manned or unmanned, any aircraft in the future combat fleet must be capable of finding and striking targets on their own, but they are expected to be able to operate as part of a network. Data from onboard sensors must be shared to the network, and data coming from other sensors elsewhere on the network must be receivable. GA-ASI's concept is adapted to that approach, Alexander said. “We envision [the] next-gen ISR/Strike [aircraft] as a conduit, supplier and consumer of information,” hesaid. “We believe it is imperative that future unmanned systems are able to communicate, share information and collaborate—together and intuitively with their human counterparts—across systems and domains in record time.” The next-generation UAS also addresses the workforce needed to operate the MQ-9, including separate teams of pilots and sensor operators during cruise flight and takeoff and landing. GA-ASI notes that the company has already qualified technologies to enable the existing fleet to taxi, take off and land automatically as well as a ground control system that allows a single pilot to control six UAS. “Our team has been developing and delivering automation solutions for years,” Alexander said. https://aviationweek.com/shows-events/afa-air-space-cyber-conference/reaper-replacement-reveals-bold-new-ga-asi-vision

• 

  2 décembre 2019 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

  SASC chairman: We must build the national security innovation base our defense strategy requires

  By: Sen. Jim Inhofe Since World War II, the American people have believed our military has had the best of everything, but the technological superiority that kept us 20 years ahead of our competitors has rapidly diminished. In some cases, we're already behind. By 2030, unless we pursue “urgent change at significant scale,” as former Defense Secretary Gen. James Mattis put it, it's likely the U.S. will face an enemy with superior weapons, superior equipment and superior capabilities. Nowhere is this better illustrated than in our strategic competition with China. China used to just steal our technology. Now, through heavy investment, they are improving it. The result? China is outpacing the U.S. in key areas like hypersonic weapons, artificial intelligence and biotechnologies — not to mention conventional capabilities. China isn't the only one. Technological development is accelerating across the globe, expanding to more actors and changing the very nature of war. We can't afford to let our advantage erode further. It is up to the Department of Defense and Congress to make sure that the defense-industrial base becomes, as the National Defense Strategy demands, an “unmatched 21st century National Security Innovation Base.” If we want to “sustain security and solvency,” we need to consider wholesale change to industry culture and its interface with the Department of Defense, shed outdated management processes, and reimagine a resilient supply chain that mitigates 21st century risks. This essay is part of the Defense News 2020 Outlook project. Click here for more. This begins with software, which is foundational to military capability. The DoD and its traditional hardware-dominant industry partners have been behind on software in almost every way — talent, tools, development and delivery processes. Software innovation has failed in countless DoD programs, including the Ford-class carrier, the F-35′s Autonomic Logistics Information System and the GPS next-generation operational control system. Instead of taking the Pentagon for granted as an endless source of cash flow, partners must refocus their attention on delivering secure capability that actually works. Next, the Department of Defense needs to continue to expand capacity — prioritizing speed of delivery and adapting its systems to maximize value and output. For too long we have been slow to expand our stockpiles of fifth-generation weapons required to fight peer adversaries. The second production line for JASSM-ER cruise missiles is a good start toward building the capacity needed to retain advantages that will make any enemy think twice before attacking. We must do the same for other fifth-generation weapons, including air-to-air missiles. Shipbuilding, including aircraft carriers, surface ships, submarines and our logistics fleet, is another area where our capacity is severely limited. The Chinese People's Liberation Army Navy, which recently surpassed ours in size, is on track to reach 400 ships in 2025 and is nearly self-sufficient for all components. Size of the fleet isn't a sole consideration. We've focused on ensuring the capability of our fleet remains unmatched and bolstering suppliers of critical components, but we must also improve the construction performance of lead ships in new classes to maintain and build upon our capability advantage. The last thing we want is a fair fight. Innovation is best done at the subsystem level through a rigorous engineering-based process centered on building knowledge through full-scale prototypes, which can then inform ship design. We are eager to work with the Navy to identify and fund more of these prototypes, which will serve as the building blocks of the future fleet. We also must accelerate innovation. Recent defense authorization legislation encourages the DoD to streamline acquisition, take a business-minded approach to contracting, and tap into nontraditional suppliers and public-private partnerships. This must continue. Dilapidated testing infrastructure is holding us back from catching up to our enemies. Just look at hypersonic weapons: Beijing is parading around dozens of its newest weapons, and we have yet to build one. The DoD has looked to Silicon Valley, but we are competing with Chinese influence there as well, and the Pentagon has often proven an impossible customer due to its antiquated bureaucracy. Any technological improvements will be meaningless if vulnerable to being infiltrated or stolen. Recent legislation continues support for the DoD as it assesses and mitigates risks to its supply chains posed by adversaries. Both the government and contractors need to cooperate on and use modern verification tools to identify trusted suppliers and manufacturers, as well as fix vulnerabilities. To make these tools useful, the DoD must first establish a working digital model of its suppliers. Lastly, while we must continue to invest in the domestic, organic industrial base, it's important to remember that we can't take on China and Russia alone — which is why the National Defense Strategy emphasizes our network of allies and partners. We must remove unnecessary barriers to industrial cooperation that degrade our collective competitive edge. We do not have to make a false choice between investing domestically and in our allies — we can do both. Under our National Technology and Industrial Base partnership with Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom, we can develop a more diverse, resilient industrial base, secure our supply chains, and become a “five eyes for defense procurement.” It's in our best interest to ensure our allies can leverage our technological advantages and we can leverage theirs. Without a strong national security innovation base, the Pentagon cannot implement the National Defense Strategy. Congress' job is to put the appropriate, tailored policy in place and provide sufficient, predictable resources to help the industrial base meet these challenges. Together, we can harness the power of American innovation to ensure that we are able to win the wars of the future. https://www.defensenews.com/outlook/2019/12/02/sasc-chairman-we-must-build-the-national-security-innovation-base-our-defense-strategy-requires

• 

  21 mai 2024 | International, Terrestre

  Gold Coast manufacturer secures Hunter class frigate contract

  The Gold Coast-based company has secured a contract to provide transparent armour on each of the anti-submarine warfare warships being built for the Royal Australian Navy as part of the...