Filtrer les résultats :

Tous les secteurs

Toutes les catégories

    12091 nouvelles

    Vous pouvez affiner les résultats en utilisant les filtres ci-dessus.

  • COVID-19: Army Futures Command Takes Wargames Online

    22 avril 2020 | International, C4ISR

    COVID-19: Army Futures Command Takes Wargames Online

    While the pandemic's halted field exercises, tabletop wargames can continue long-distance. The catch? Getting classified bandwidth so you can discuss specific military capabilities. By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR.on April 21, 2020 at 7:31 AM WASHINGTON: With Pentagon travel restrictions now extended through June 30th, the Army's in-house futurists can't hold their usual face-to-face brainstorming sessions. So rather than delay their work for months, they're moving seminars and wargames online – but there's a tradeoff. The long-distance collaboration tools available so far aren't secure enough for classified data, which means some scenarios are off-limits. The COVID-19 coronavirus has halted some – but far from all – military training and experimentation. Army Futures Command in particular has had to cancel some high-priority field exercises to try out new tactics and technologies, but a lot of its work is thinking about the future, which you can do long-distance, one of its deputy commanders said in a video town hall last week. “We did have to cancel the Joint Warfighting Assessment [JWA] in Europe,” Lt. Gen. Eric Wesley said, “[but] a lot of the work we do in terms of developing concepts...is moving ahead without significant impact.” Wesley runs one of Army Futures Command's three major subunits, the internal thinktank now known as the Futures & Concepts Center (formerly ARCIC), which brainstorms, wargames, and writes about how conflict will change. Tabletop exercises (TTXs, in Army jargon) can move online. That will include the Futures & Concept Center's annual “capstone exercise” on the Army's concept for future warfare, Multi-Domain Operations, he said. It also included another MDO exercise that had been set to take place in May at the Army War College. Four-Star Orders The May wargame was particularly important because it was the kick-off for a study ordered by the four-star chief of Army Futures Command himself, Gen. John “Mike” Murray, one of Wesley's staff officers told me when I followed up. “We wanted to be able to return to Gen. Murray sooner versus later with initial findings,” Col. Chris Rogers told me, “then continue to experiment throughout the summer and the [fall].” The topic that Murray was so intent on? “It was focused specifically on addressing concerns that Gen. Murray had with calibrated force posture,” Rogers said. In layman's terms, that means what soldiers need to be where, with what equipment, at what time, to handle specific threats. In practice, “calibrated force posture” is a 3-D chess game with a few hundred thousand pieces. You have to figure out what kind of forces need to be forward-deployed on allied territory before a crisis starts, what they should do to deter potential adversaries, what warning you might have of an impending attack, what reinforcements you can send in time, how the adversary can stop those reinforcements, how you can stop the adversary from stopping you, and so on ad infinitum. To start tackling these questions, the plan had been to bring officers and civil servants together from all the Army's “schoolhouses” – the armor and infantry center at Fort Benning, the artillery center at Fort Still, the aviation center at Fort Rucker, and so on – for two weeks at the War College. The scenarios to be examined, focused on a particularly challenging region for military deployments: the vast expanses of the Pacific. Now, this wasn't going to be a wargame in the classic sense, with somber men pushing wooden blocks on big maps or icons battling each other on a big screen. No one can write the rules for a detailed simulation yet because the Army's still brainstorming solutions. Instead, such events are more like highly structured seminars, with teams splitting off to analyze particular aspects of the scenario and reporting back on possible plans, at which point they may get challenged with “well, what if the enemy does this?” But precisely because this wasn't a detailed simulation, the Army didn't need specialized software to run it long-distance – just standard online collaboration tools. (In this case, those tools were provided by DTIC, the Defense Technical Information Center). Rogers described the process as a “guided, threaded discussion.” As he explained it, it sounded a lot like an online discussion board, with moderators posting topics and participants posting replies and replies to replies back and forth. That's actually one of the longest-established applications of the Internet, dating back to the Bulletin Board Systems (BBS) that predate the World Wide Web. Modern equivalents are much more sophisticated: You can post graphics like maps and operational diagrams, for instance, which are definitely useful for a military planner. But the systems available to Rogers & co. in May still had definite limits. Limiting Factor The biggest issue? “It's an unclassified network, so there are certain things that we lose,” Rogers told me, like the ranges of specific current and future weapons. The compromise the wargamers made is they'll restrict this first exercise to what's called the “competition phase.” That means everything that happens before – or hopefully instead of — the outbreak of a shooting war — the “conflict phase.” Not simulating actual battles might sound like a major handicap for military planners. But the Army has slowly and painfully come to realize that, while it's really, really good at planning combat operations (what it calls “kinetics”), it really needs to practice the strategic, political and propaganda maneuvering that goes on outside of combat (“non-kinetics”), because you can win every battle and still lose the war. Indeed, from Russia seizing Crimea without a shot to China quietly annexing large portions of the South China Sea, America's adversaries have proven highly capable of accomplishing military objectives without firing a shot. Now, military power still matters in the competition phase: Over all the shadow-boxing there looms the threat of force. But because the competition phase is about deterring war, not waging it, what matters is not the actual capabilities of your weapons, but what the enemy thinks your weapons can do. That, in turn, means you can brainstorm the competition phase in an unclassified discussion, using publicly available information, without ever getting into the classified details of what your weapons could really do when and if the shooting starts. “That's why we felt very comfortable with [changing] from a classified event to an unclassified event, [for] the first iteration,” Rogers told me. Likewise, instead of using classified scenarios depicting potential future crises, he said, they used real crises from recent history, where there's plenty of unclassified information, and then discussed different ways the US could have approached them. At some point, of course, the discussion will have to move on from the competition phase to conflict – from how you calibrate the posture of your forces to how those forces, once postured in the right place, would actually fight. Rogers & co. help to get into those classified details in the next major wargame, scheduled for August. August is after the Pentagon's travel ban expires – at least, in its current form. But given how unpredictable the pandemic has been so far, another extension is entirely possible, Rogers acknowledges, so he and his team are studying alternatives to a face-to-face event. As Lt. Gen. Wesley put it in his town hall: “The real issue is, how long does this last?” https://breakingdefense.com/2020/04/covid-19-army-futures-command-takes-wargames-online/

  • Babcock announces Type 31 supply chain contract awards

    22 avril 2020 | International, Naval

    Babcock announces Type 31 supply chain contract awards

    April 17, 2020 - Babcock Team 31 is pleased to announce the second round of supply chain contract awards across the UK and Europe to support the Royal Navy's Type 31 general purpose frigate programme. Rolls-Royce is now a major supplier to the programme with its brand MTU, delivering the Main Engines and Diesel Generators for the Frigates, which will be manufactured in Germany. Renk, will provide the main reduction gearboxes, and MAN Energy Solutions will supply the propellers and propeller shaft lines. In addition, Blunox are contracted to supply the exhaust environmental equipment that significantly reduces emissions from the Main Engines and Diesel Generators. Combined with the subcontract placed with Darchem Engineering Ltd, will supply the intake and exhaust systems for the main engines and generators, rounding out the key propulsion system subcontracts. We are also pleased to announce award of the Chilled Water Plant subcontract with Novenco AS, providing critical system capability for the HVAC system. The Type 31 Programme will deliver prosperity into shipbuilding and the extended supply chain. The scale of this investment, principally in design, engineering, project management, procurement and advanced manufacturing skills, has an enduring positive impact on the UK. Sean Donaldson, Managing Director for Energy & Marine, said: “Team 31 have committed to a programme of investments to deliver prosperity in line with the National Shipbuilding Strategy. We are delighted to welcome these key suppliers to the supply chain for the Type 31 frigate programme, and we continue to engage with additional suppliers to support this exciting programme for Babcock and the Royal Navy.” View source version on Babcock: https://www.babcockinternational.com/news/babcock-announces-type-31-supply-chain-contract-awards/

  • Kratos Wins Place on U.S. Navy Unmanned Surface Vehicle Family of Systems in $982.1 Million IDIQ Multiple Award Contract

    22 avril 2020 | International, Naval

    Kratos Wins Place on U.S. Navy Unmanned Surface Vehicle Family of Systems in $982.1 Million IDIQ Multiple Award Contract

    San Diego, April 16, 2020 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Kratos Defense & Security Solutions, Inc. (Nasdaq: KTOS), a leading National Security Solutions provider, announced today that its Kratos Unmanned Systems Division (KUSD) has been selected, and will participate in the Indefinite-Delivery Indefinite Quantity - Multiple Award Contract (IDIQ-MAC) to support the U.S. Naval Sea Systems Command Unmanned Surface Vehicle (USV) Family of Systems (FoS). The USV FoS includes platforms and systems that comprise the U.S. Navy's future unmanned surface fleet. With a contract ceiling for all orders under this IDIQ-MAC of $982.1 million, the government intends to support, maintain and modernize USV systems and subsystems to meet current and future operational requirements for Unmanned Maritime Systems under Program Executive Office Unmanned and Small Combatants. Under the contract KUSD is eligible to compete for individual tasks and/or delivery orders. The USV FoS IDIQ-MAC base contracting vehicle has an initial ordering period of 60 months after date of contract award. If options are exercised the base contracting vehicle will extend to an ordering period of 120 months. Steve Fendley, President of Kratos Unmanned Systems Division, said, “Kratos Unmanned is excited to extend its unparalleled experience in fielding unmanned systems for air, land, and sea applications further into the unmanned surface vessel domain. KUSD has a unique combination of expertise in the design, engineering, integration, and manufacturing of affordable unmanned system components, which will bring innovative, responsive, and best-value solutions to FoS customers.” Kratos Unmanned Systems Division is a leading provider of high performance unmanned aerial drone and target systems for threat representative target missions to exercise weapon, radar, and other systems; and tactical aerial drone systems for strike/ISR and force multiplication missions. About Kratos Defense & Security Solutions Kratos Defense & Security Solutions, Inc. (NASDAQ:KTOS) develops and fields transformative, affordable technology, platforms and systems for United States National Security related customers, allies and commercial enterprises. Kratos is changing the way breakthrough technology for these industries are rapidly brought to market through proven commercial and venture capital backed approaches, including proactive research and streamlined development processes. Kratos specializes in unmanned systems, satellite communications, cyber security/warfare, microwave electronics, missile defense, hypersonic systems, training, combat systems and next generation turbo jet and turbo fan engine development. For more information go to www.KratosDefense.com. Notice Regarding Forward-Looking Statements Certain statements in this press release may constitute "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements are made on the basis of the current beliefs, expectations and assumptions of the management of Kratos and are subject to significant risks and uncertainty. Investors are cautioned not to place undue reliance on any such forward-looking statements. All such forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made, and Kratos undertakes no obligation to update or revise these statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. Although Kratos believes that the expectations reflected in these forward-looking statements are reasonable, these statements involve many risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially from what may be expressed or implied in these forward-looking statements. For a further discussion of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ from those expressed in these forward-looking statements, as well as risks relating to the business of Kratos in general, see the risk disclosures in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Kratos for the year ended December 29, 2019, and in subsequent reports on Forms 10-Q and 8-K and other filings made with the SEC by Kratos. Press Contact: Yolanda White 858-812-7302 Direct Investor Information: 877-934-4687 investor@kratosdefense.com View source version on GlobeNewswire: http://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2020/04/16/2017266/0/en/Kratos-Wins-Place-on-U-S-Navy-Unmanned-Surface-Vehicle-Family-of-Systems-in-982-1-Million-IDIQ-Multiple-Award-Contract.html

  • Daily Memo: Powering Down

    22 avril 2020 | International, Aérospatial

    Daily Memo: Powering Down

    Guy Norris As the airframers go, so goes the aircraft engine industry. After spending most of the past decade accelerating production to keep pace with unprecedented airliner delivery rates the engine makers have spent the past month in reverse thrust. But as production lines slow, and in some cases come to a full stop, the grim guessing game about the industry's post-COVID-19 pandemic future can begin. For every engine company, anchored midway between their own supply chains and Airbus, Boeing and Embraer in particular, all scenarios paint a bleak picture and the potential impact of the virus-triggered crisis is alarming on at least three key levels. Near term, all must weather the storm and rapidly shrink capacity by 40% or even more to match the new realities of the slower airframe production rates now expected for the next couple of years. Second, having long since focused the core of their business models on the aftermarket, they must adjust to significantly lower revenues from a near term reduction in demand for maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) services. Third, with nearly all their resources dedicated to survival, reduced revenues and spending trimmed, development of new engines and propulsion technology is expected to slow significantly—at least in the near term. However, all the manufacturers know that in the mid-to-longer term the environmental pressures on performance will return and so will the relentless demand for lower emissions and greater innovation. Already committed programs will therefore continue, albeit potentially stretched over longer test and development schedules. From a volume perspective, GE Aviation and Safran's CFM joint venture is expected to see the greatest change. Having delivered 1,736 LEAP-1s and 391 CFM56-5/7s in 2019, output from the combined French and U.S. operations will decline significantly in 2020 in lockstep with urgent reductions in production at Airbus and Boeing. CFM, which was previously on track towards a planned annual production rate of more than 2,000 LEAP-1s by the end of 2020, cannot comment on numbers while its parent companies remain in a dark period prior to earnings calls at the end of April, but is expected to slash this target by around half. GE Aviation, which was already expecting a leaner 2020 before the COVID-19 pandemic because of delays to the GE9X-powered Boeing 777-9 and slow-downs to the GE90-115/GEnx-1 powered 777-200LR/300ER and 787 programs, is eyeing the even more troubling impact of the crisis on its aftermarket business. Although around a quarter of GE Aviation's revenues come from its military and other businesses, just 30% comes from commercial engine sales. A much larger portion of its revenue—approximately 45%—comes from MRO services. While some programs, like the CFM56 for the P-8 maritime patrol aircraft as well as military fighter engine efforts, will continue much as before, the company has already taken drastic action to stem losses by furloughing half of its engine manufacturing workers for four weeks. This move, taken in early April, followed an announcement in late March that it was reducing its workforce by 10% (around 2,500 employees), in direct response to the collapse of its MRO workload which the company estimates will be down by around 50% through mid-year at least. However, given the exodus of around two-thirds of the world's airline fleets into storage (almost 17,000 aircraft), the short to medium outlook for engine MRO would be described as dire at best. Compounding the issue for many of the OEMs is that the higher value aftermarket engines powering the widebody fleet, particularly the older generation Airbus and Boeing models, now look increasingly unlikely to ever return to service—at least in their existing guise. For Rolls-Royce, this problem is particularly acute as the UK engine maker focused increasingly on the widebody market over the past decade, widening its exposure to reliance on the support revenue from aftermarket work on older fleets of 747 and 777s as well as older A330s. With full-time premature retirement a possibility, including the previously unthinkable sunsetting of relatively young Trent 900-powered A380s as well as the rapid decline of the RB211-535 powered 757 and Trent 500-powered A340-600 fleets, the company can no longer bank on the expected rebound in deferred maintenance coming out of the crisis. Rolls has also rushed to mitigate losses by enacting measures aimed at saving at least £750 million ($937 million) in cash this year. These include a 10% salary cut for the global workforce and canceling dividend payments. Further moves are expected as the company adjusts to rate reductions announced by Airbus involving the Trent-powered A330no and A350-900/1000, as well as yet-to-be announced rate cuts for the Trent 1000-powered 787 which will shortly be revealed in detail by Boeing. Pratt & Whitney, now part of Raytheon Technologies, is similarly impacted across the board with production of the PW1000G geared turbofan reduced for the A220/A320neo families and commercial revenues hit by falling aftermarket revenues for the PW2000/PW4000 and V2500. Measures such as 10% pay cuts through year-end, as well as furloughs, are being introduced while research and development spending is being frozen. Deliveries of military engines, in particular the F135 for the F-35 fighter and PW4000 for the KC-45A tanker remain unaffected. The early retirements of the PW4000, as well as some CF6-powered fleets, is also significantly impacting revenues for German engine maker MTU. https://aviationweek.com/air-transport/aircraft-propulsion/daily-memo-powering-down

  • What Will It Take To Get Parked Aircraft Back Into Service?

    22 avril 2020 | International, Aérospatial

    What Will It Take To Get Parked Aircraft Back Into Service?

    Sean Broderick What will it take to get parked aircraft back into service? Air Transport and Safety Editor Sean Broderick responds: Airlines are consulting with aircraft and engine original equipment manufacturers (OEM) for specific guidance, because most maintenance manuals do not cover how to idle aircraft/engines for a short period of time (30-90 days). Typical maintenance manuals' procedures for parking aircraft are focused on long-term storage, which most airlines aren't doing, because they plan to reactivate their fleets as soon as possible, with the exception of aircraft they might retire. Once these procedures are in hand, it's about having technical manpower that is able to follow a task card and operate aircraft systems. Some supplier opportunities exist—engine covers are hard to find, for instance, so operators are turning to foam inserts and other options—but that is more about keeping aircraft out of service longer versus bringing them back out. Another note: Some operators are keeping aircraft on “active maintenance” programs until they understand what their fleet needs will be post-pandemic. Basically, this treats an airframe as if it's flying even though it is not. Regular maintenance intervals such as daily and weekly checks are performed, but there may be some manpower issues, especially with operators that do not have sufficient tech ops talent in-house. https://aviationweek.com/mro/what-will-it-take-get-parked-aircraft-back-service

  • Germany’s Defence Ministry is under the gun to name a Tornado replacement

    21 avril 2020 | International, Aérospatial

    Germany’s Defence Ministry is under the gun to name a Tornado replacement

    By: Sebastian Sprenger COLOGNE, Germany — You can count on Germany to stir the pot of nuclear weapons sharing amid a global pandemic. Such was the case in the past few days in a country that, armed with a superb health care system and a relatively low COVID-19 mortality rate, is seen as a model for managing the coronavirus crisis. But as of Sunday afternoon, the national security community was abuzz about a news report saying Defence Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer effectively promised her U.S. counterpart that the ministry will buy 45 F-18 jets from Boeing. The Der Spiegel report comes after news broke a few weeks ago that Berlin planned to acquire a mix of Airbus Eurofighter jets and Boeing F-18s for a smattering of air warfare jobs too demanding for the country's aging Tornado fleet. Those jobs include flying conventional fighter-bomber missions, jamming enemy air defenses and carrying U.S. nuclear-tipped gravity bombs to hypothetical World War III targets somewhere eastward, per NATO's so-called nuclear sharing deal. According to Der Spiegel, Kramp-Karrenbauer sent U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper an email last week detailing her ministry's wish to buy F-18s not only for the atomic mission — which comes as little surprise — but also for the electronic warfare role. That reported promise stung Eurofighter advocates — even those who might begrudgingly accept an American product for the nuclear mission — because Airbus has plans for a souped-up jamming plane that it wants to see in Germany's inventory. In short, the Eurofighter crowd wants nothing more than Berlin to pick a pure Eurofighter fleet, arguing that the F-18′s shelf life is expiring in U.S. budget planning anyway, and that the Boeing jet is no closer to nuclear weapons certification than any other aircraft. The German Defence Ministry has always signaled it will take into account industrial policy considerations in the Tornado-replacement question. So strongly did senior leaders believe in the idea of a keeping the European industrial base humming toward an eventual Franco-German aerial über-weapon that they nixed Lockheed Martin's F-35 from the competition. But keeping American aircraft entirely out of the loop has always seemed a nonstarter. A ministry spokesman on Monday said Kramp-Karrenbauer's missive to Esper was only meant to test the waters regarding America's ability to start delivering those planes when the actual acquisition program gets underway in a few years. A formal decision on replacing the Tornados had initially been expected by the end of March. But as the coronavirus crisis unfolded, that decision was pushed to after Easter. Kramp-Karrenbauer is expected to announce her plans before the parliamentary Defence Committee on Wednesday, where she is likely to face opposition from lawmakers of the SPD coalition partner. Until then, Germans have yet another puzzle to discuss, as an increasingly divisive debate unfolds here over reopening the country. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/04/20/germanys-defence-ministry-is-under-the-gun-to-name-a-tornado-replacement/

  • The Air Force made a surprise decision to sole-source the Long Range Standoff Weapon. Here’s who will move forward.

    21 avril 2020 | International, Aérospatial

    The Air Force made a surprise decision to sole-source the Long Range Standoff Weapon. Here’s who will move forward.

    By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — In a surprise move, the Air Force on Friday announced plans to continue its Long Range Standoff Weapon program with Raytheon as the prime contractor. The LRSO program, which aims to field a new air-launched cruise missile capable of both nuclear and conventional strikes, is currently in its technology maturation and risk reduction phase, with both Raytheon and Lockheed Martin developing their own versions of the weapon. Typically, the Air Force would downselect to a single company in fiscal year 2022, when it awarded the engineering and manufacturing development contract that precedes low-rate production. However, the Air Force decided to press ahead with Raytheon's design after an “extensive evaluation” of the company's technology as presented during the preliminary design review, said Maj. Gen. Shaun Morris, who leads the Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center. “Our competitive TMRR phase, which included both Lockheed Martin and Raytheon as the prime contractors, enabled us to select a high-confidence design at this point in the acquisition process,” he said, according to an Air Force release. “And this early off-ramp of a contractor is completely in line with the existing LRSO acquisition strategy, which included periodic reviews to assess contractor designs,” Morris said. “Lockheed Martin has been an excellent contractor and partner throughout the TMRR effort and this pivot to Raytheon does not represent a lack of effort or commitment on their part. Lockheed Martin has supported the nuclear enterprise for decades and we continue to value their expertise in sensors and nuclear certification and surety.” Elizabeth Thorn, the service's program manager, characterized the decision as “not a downselect, per se,” adding that the Air Force will continue to work with Lockheed on specific technologies that could drive down risk to the LRSO design or otherwise be beneficial to the program. The Air Force noted that the company had begun the “closeout process” to stop work on risk reduction phase of the program, leaving Lockheed's precise role in the LRSO program unclear. “We've supported our nation's nuclear triad for more than 60 years and look forward to working with the USAF to support the LRSO mission, specifically leveraging our sensor technology and nuclear certification and surety expertise,” Lockheed said in a statement. LRSO is set to replace the AGM-86B Air Launched Cruise Missile or ALCM, but the program has come under intermittent fire from lawmakers who believe that arming aircraft with a weapon that could be either nuclear or conventional could unnecessarily raise the risk of miscalculation, triggering a nuclear war. The Air Force has argued that it needs a nuclear missile that can be fired from standoff distances to enable the non-stealthy B-52 to remain a credible deterrent to adversaries with advanced air defense systems. Due to the decision to select Raytheon early, the Air Force wants to shift funding that will allow the company to begin certain work early, such as flight tests, the service said. A contract award for the next phase of the program is still scheduled for fiscal year 2022. Morris added that the service was also confident in its ability to keep the program affordable in a sole-source environment, despite the lack of competition that usually helps the government negotiate a lower-cost product. Roman Schweizer, a defense analyst with Cowen Washington Research Group, said the Air Force's announcement prompts additional questions about Lockheed's future role and the information both companies presented during the preliminary design view. “It's possible the USAF made an industrial base/cost decision based on other long-range weapons,” he wrote in an email to investors. “Singling up on LRSO could have been an industrial base decision or a way to reduce cost and speed up development.” In a statement, Raytheon noted that the company is on track to complete risk reduction efforts by January 2022. “LRSO will be a critical contributor to the air-launched portion of America's nuclear triad,” said Wes Kremer, president of Raytheon Missiles and Defense. https://www.defensenews.com/smr/nuclear-arsenal/2020/04/20/the-air-force-made-a-surprise-decision-to-sole-source-the-long-range-standoff-weapon-heres-who-will-move-forward/

  • DARPA awards nine new contracts to foster drone swarm technology

    21 avril 2020 | International, Aérospatial

    DARPA awards nine new contracts to foster drone swarm technology

    Nathan Strout The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency has issued nine new contracts to companies developing drone swarm technologies, the agency announced April 13. Through the agency's Offensive Swarm-Enabled Tactics program, or OFFSET, it hopes to foster technology developments that will enable 250 small unmanned air or ground robots to work together in support of the war fighter. The program works in five main areas: swarm tactics, swarm autonomy, human-swarm teaming, virtual environment and physical test bed. The agency has hosted multiple swarm sprints to encourage rapid innovation in one or more of those areas. The nine awards mark the fifth such swarm sprint, with this one focused on swarm tactics and physical test beds in an urban environment. “The urban environment presents compelling challenges such as tall buildings, tight spaces, and limited sight lines,” Timothy Chung, the OFFSET program manager in DARPA's Tactical Technology Office, said in an agency news release. “Enhancing the Swarm Physical Testbeds that tackle those unique challenges is a desired goal of the OFFSET program.” Four of the participants will be tackling the swarm tactics portion of the sprint, where they will be asked to solve problems such as “disrupting the opposition's decision making, obfuscating swarm intent, updating maps of a dynamic environment, and maintaining the swarm's communications indoors.” The remaining five performers will work on the physical test bed thrust area, which includes reducing deployment times, utilizing new navigation sensors, incorporating fixed-wing aircraft into the swarm and enhancing mobility for robotic, wheeled vehicles in urban settings. Participants will incorporate their technologies into the OFFSET swarm systems architecture to demonstrate their respective solutions, with field tests taking place in December 2020. The recipients are as follows: Thrust area: Physical test bed Michigan Technological University/Michigan Tech Research Institute Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory HDT Expeditionary Systems, Inc. Sentien Robotics Texas A&M University Thrust area: Swarm tactics Michigan Technological University/Michigan Tech Research Institute Charles River Analytics, Inc. Soar Technology, Inc. Northwestern University https://www.c4isrnet.com/unmanned/2020/04/20/darpa-to-foster-urban-drone-swarm-tech-with-nine-new-contracts/

  • Is the Air Force’s Advanced Battle Management System program gearing up to be the next major acquisition failure?

    21 avril 2020 | International, Aérospatial

    Is the Air Force’s Advanced Battle Management System program gearing up to be the next major acquisition failure?

    Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — Since Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Dave Goldfein took over as the service's top general in 2016, the Air Force has made figuring out how to connect its weapons with those of the Army, Navy and Marine Corps its biggest priority. The Air Force is set to have spent $300 million on the Advanced Battle Management System through fiscal year 2021. However, the service is still struggling to define what ABMS needs to do and how much it will cost, the Government Accountability Office said in a report released April 16. "The Air Force has not established a plan or business case for ABMS that identifies its requirements, a plan to attain mature technologies when needed, a cost estimate, and an affordability analysis. ... To date, the Air Force has not identified a development schedule for ABMS, and it has not formally documented requirements,” it read. That could have significant consequences for the program down the road, GAO continued: “GAO's previous work has shown that weapon systems without a sound business case are at greater risk for schedule delays, cost growth, and integration issues.” The GAO made four recommendations: create a cost estimate and a plan laying out how to afford the program, formalize the decision-making authorities of those involved in ABMS, and develop a list of technologies that are expected to fit into the initial system. In a response to the report, Kevin Fahey, the assistant secretary of defense for acquisition, concurred with all four recommendations — a sign that, going forward, the Air Force may be required to solidify more of its ABMS plans. The Air Force has maintained that the program's unconventional structure and methodology is a feature, not a bug. It wants to use a series of experiments to help discover and mature new technologies that can be weaved in alongside legacy platforms. For instance, the first ABMS experiment connected SpaceX's Starlink constellation with an AC-130 gunship, and the next demo will employ a Kratos Valkyrie drone carrying communications gear that enables the F-22 and F-35 to securely share data while allowing them to maintain stealth. Air Force officials have said technologies that are proven to be successful and mature during the experiments could become programs of record inside the ABMS family of systems. However, the Air Force does not seem to have a firm plan for what technologies it needs and when to bring them online, the GAO said. The service has identified 28 development areas that includes a new cloud network, a new common radio, and apps that provide different ways of presenting and fusing data. However, none of those areas are linked to specific technical requirements, and the Air Force hasn't explained what organizations are responsible for the development of those products. In one damning section, GAO compared ABMS with several cancelled programs with similar aims, such as the Army's Future Combat Systems program that sought to field a family of manned and unmanned technologies and the Joint Tactical Radio System, which was intended to create a government-owned software defined radio. These programs publicly flamed out after millions of dollars were spent in development, in part because certain technologies were not mature enough and caused the schedule to unravel. The scope of ABMS will be far larger than those previous programs, the Pentagon's Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation told the GAO. But because the Air Force has not provided a detailed acquisition strategy, CAPE does not have confidence that the Air Force will be able succeed where those programs have failed. “Given the criticality of the battle management command and control mission and the planned retirement of legacy programs, the lack of an ABMS business case introduces uncertainty regarding whether the needed capabilities will be developed within required time frames,” the GAO said. Figuring out who has responsibility and decision-making authority for ABMS is also a messy proposition, the GAO said. The ABMS effort is led by a chief architect, Preston Dunlap, who is responsible for managing tradeoffs among the portfolio of technologies and guide experimentation efforts. However, existing programs that will be part of the ABMS family will retain their separate program office with their own independent management, and the Air Force has yet to clarify whether Dunlap will be able to redirect those program's funding to fall in line with ABMS objectives. For example, the Air Force's program office for space is currently working on a data integration project that could correspond with ABMS efforts to field a cloud network. But “although some ABMS funds have been obligated for this project, there is no documentation to support that the Chief Architect will be able to direct the PEO to change the project objectives or timeline to align with ABMS requirements once they are defined,” the GAO said. The role of the Air Force Warfighting Integration Capability or AFWIC, which was established in 2017 to help define how the service will fight wars in the future, is also unclear. An AFWIC senior official told the GAO that the organization began leading the service's multidomain command and control initiatives in 2019, but it is uncertain whether AFWIC also has the power to change the direction of the ABMS program. https://www.c4isrnet.com/c2-comms/2020/04/20/is-the-air-forces-advanced-battle-management-system-program-gearing-up-to-be-the-next-major-acquisition-failure/

Partagé par les membres

  • Partager une nouvelle avec la communauté

    C'est très simple, il suffit de copier/coller le lien dans le champ ci-dessous.

Abonnez-vous à l'infolettre

pour ne manquer aucune nouvelle de l'industrie

Vous pourrez personnaliser vos abonnements dans le courriel de confirmation.