Nouvelles

By: Christina Mackenzie PARIS — The French government today signed a €2 billion contract with Dassault Aviation for 28 Rafale aircraft and gave the go-ahead for development of the aircraft's F4 standard which should be validated by 2024, although some functions will be ready by 2022. The 28 aircraft will include some F4 functionalities and be delivered to the French air force from 2023. Defense Minister Florence Parly announced that a further 30 aircraft at the full F4 standard would be ordered in 2023 for delivery between 2027 and 2030. The F4 standard will have upgraded radar sensors and front sector optronics as well as improved capabilities in the helmet-mounted display. It will have new weapons, notably MBDA's Mica NG air-to-air missile and 1,000 kg AASM air-to-ground modular weapon, be able to carry the new Scalp missiles and be equipped with the Talios multifunction optronic pod made by Thales. The Rafale F4 will feature novel connectivity solutions to improve the aircraft's effectiveness in network-centric warfare. “We'll be able to receive more data, strengthen our data rate, talk, receive, notably thanks to satellite communication and software defined radio: the Rafale F4 will move even further into the era of data,” Parly said at the Dassault factory in Mérignac near Bordeaux. “The F4 standard guarantees that Rafale will remain at world-class level so that our combat air forces can carry out all their missions with optimum efficiency, whether in coalition operations or completely independently, as required by the French nuclear deterrent,” said Eric Trappier, CEO of Dassault Aviation. He added that “this new standard also guarantees that Rafale will remain a credible reference on the export market.” The F1 standard was specific to the first aircraft for the French Navy. The F2 standard gave it air-to-ground and air-to-air capaiblities, while the F3 and F3R gave it extended versatility. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2019/01/14/france-orders-upgraded-rafale-warplanes-for-23-billion

By: Jaroslaw Adamowski WARSAW, Poland — The Croatian government has canceled its decision to purchase used F-16C/D Barak fighters from Israel, the Defence Ministry said in a Jan. 14 statement. The move follows a recommendation by the Croatian Defence Council that authorities relaunch the procurement step of its fighter jet acquisition program, set up to replace the country's outdated Mikoyan MiG-21 fighters. The council is comprised of President Kolinda Grabar-Kitarovic, Prime Minister Andrej Plenkovic, and a number of senior government, parliamentary and military officials. After a thorough analysis of the canceled procurement, Plenkovic's cabinet will “define a new model” of acquiring fighter jets for the Croatian Air Force, the prime minister said. Prior to the cancellation, Croatian Defence Minister Damir Krstičević said in a statement that “Israel has ... unfortunately officially informed the Ministry of Defence that it is unable to receive the adequate [third-party transfer] approval for the delivery of Israeli F-16 Barak aircraft to the Republic of Croatia.” Earlier this month, the Croatian government said it had given “Israel a deadline on its capability to deliver the aircraft offered at the international tender” and that Israel was “responsible for obtaining the approval from the United States for the supply of the aircraft.” Croatian officials have told local media the U.S. government accused its Israeli counterpart of unfair competition in the tender, in which the U.S. had offered Croatia secondhand F-16s. Other bidders included Greece, which offered used F-16s, and Sweden, which offered JAS 39 Gripen fighters. https://www.defensenews.com/air/2019/01/14/croatia-backtracks-on-decision-to-buy-israeli-jets-what-went-wrong

By: Tom Kington , Andrew Chuter , and Sebastian Sprenger ROME, LONDON and COLOGNE, Germany — The U.S. and European shipbuilding industries lead largely separate lives against the backdrop of a massive Asian naval buildup, but some trans-Atlantic projects still manage to thrive. The building of warships has always been a prime example of nations nurturing a highly specialized industry deemed so crucial that outside economic forces cannot be allowed to intervene. And while some European nations have begun to think about pooling shipbuilding forces on the continent, analysts and industry executives in Europe say the wall separating the U.S. and European naval markets remains high. Barring missile launchers and the Aegis combat management system, U.S. firms have not grabbed a large slice of naval work in Europe, and no change is on the horizon, according to Peter Roberts, director of military sciences at the Royal United Services Institute in London. “Warships are historically linked to national power, and if you stop building them you are no longer seen as a great power — you are at the bidding of others,” Roberts said. “The Spanish, the British, the French — they haven't given up shipbuilding, even if they were better off buying off the shelf, and we are unlikely to see a reduction of yards in Europe,” he added. At the same time, the U.S. market has been relatively closed off to European shipbuilders, though there is a chance that could change somewhat with the Navy's Future Frigate program. “It's a bit like two different planets,” said Sebastian Bruns, head of the Institute for Security Policy at Kiel University in northern Germany. The reflex to buy only American-made warships is especially strong in the current political climate, he added. The sheer number of ships needed on each side of the Atlantic creates a natural differentiator, according to Bruns, who spent time working U.S. naval policy as a House staffer on Capitol Hill. He said the Navy tends to prefer no-frills designs made for maximum war-fighting power in a great powers competition, while Europeans have taken to building vessels with a kind of peace-maintenance role in mind, affording a greater level of automation and comfort for the crew, for example. One British naval executive, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the lack of trans-Atlantic industrial touch points wasn't limited to market access, arguing that cost-effectiveness was also an issue. “Despite the problems we have and the programs that don't go exactly according to plan ton for ton and capability for capability, the U.K. manages to build and deliver surface ships at a much lower cost than the United States,” he said. “The U.S. shipyards know they would have difficulty competing in the region, particularly if you are talking about yards that have built a good track record. Naval Group, Fincantieri, Damen Shipyards, ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems — these are yards that have been competitive and build with export experience behind them. They are already ahead of the game and I do think it comes back to the cost base, I think it is difficult for the United States to build as cost-effectively as the Europeans,” the executive argued. Full article: https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2019/01/14/an-ocean-apart-few-naval-vendors-manage-to-pierce-us-and-european-protectionism

By: Justin Lynch The U.S. government wants to boost its artificial intelligence capabilities or risks being left behind by the private sector and China. In the last two years, that's meant new AI initiatives from the Pentagon, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and the intelligence community. Now, the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity is requesting information about research efforts on “cutting-edge machine learning techniques.” IARPA posted the formal request for information Dec. 4. The deadline for industry to submit information is Jan. 17. “Of specific interest is the respondent's knowledge of, and experience implementing, current, cutting-edge machine learning techniques,” the intelligence community's research arm said. Respondents are required to have top secret clearances to work on the project, according to the IARPA listing. In addition to its deep learning program, IARPA leaders want information about research into “future computing systems” that can self-learn. Such a move could have implications for improving government cybersecurity. “The need for real-time (or near-real-time) analysis of massive amounts of heterogeneous data in this new era of explosive data growth has dramatically broadened the application space for advanced computers,” IARPA said. “The current volume and variety of data are already beginning to exceed the ability of today's most advanced classical systems to deliver optimal solutions.” Most cyber threat detection platforms use some form of artificial intelligence to create warning indicators, according to public and private sector officials. However, the U.S. government is behind the private sector when it comes to use of AI, said James Yeager, the public sector vice president at cybersecurity firm Crowdstrike. “There is, by design, a more staggered type of approach to some of these advances in technology in the public sector, and as a result, the government is going to be behind the private sector,” Yeager said. IARPA has a “very high-risk-but-high-reward approach to solving complex problems. They take a lot of time and take a lot of resources,” said Yeager. “But If they can come out of that research project with a silver bullet, it is going to benefit everyone.” Andrew Laskow, a senior manager at Blue Prism, which provides AI products to federal government and defense agencies, said that in the U.S. government many people are “looking to AI for problems that they cannot solve.” “There is still a misunderstanding at the highest levels of what AI can and cannot do,” Laskow said. Public and private sector officials warn that AI-backed threat network indicators can overload users and create too many warnings. Michael McGeehan, head of business development at Blue Prism, described intelligent automation being broken down into the “thinking side” and the “execution side.” The artificial intelligence platform is the “thinking side” that makes decisions and is analogous to the human brain. On the other hand, robotic processing automation is the “execution side” that carries out tasks, like an arm or a leg. https://www.fifthdomain.com/dod/2019/01/12/with-china-looming-intelligence-community-backs-ai-research

By: David B. Larter WASHINGTON — As the U.S. Navy's surface fleet moves into 2019, a radical shift is coalescing among its leaders: a move away from a model that has driven the way the service has built its ships for decades. When the Navy built its Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, installing the Aegis combat system into the hull meant a large suite of hardware — computers, servers, consoles and displays — designed and set up specifically to run Aegis software. Any significant upgrades to the suite of systems already installed, or to the Aegis system in general, required cutting a hole in the ship and swapping out all the computers and consoles — a massively expensive undertaking. And what's more, Aegis isn't the only combat system in the fleet. Raytheon's Ship Self-Defense System runs on many of the amphibious ships and the Ford-class carriers. Both classes of littoral combat ship run different combat systems, one designed by Lockheed Martin and the other by General Dynamics. And in regard to the ships themselves, there are multiple, siloed systems that don't feed into the main combat system. If Navy leaders get their way, that's going to change. What the surface fleet wants is a single combat system that runs on every ship, and runs everything on the ship, and that doesn't mind what hardware you are running so long as you have the computing power for it. The goal here is that if a sailor who is trained on a big-deck amphibious ship transfers to a destroyer, no extra training will be necessary to run the equipment on the destroyer. “That's an imperative going forward — we have to get to one, integrated combat system,” Rear Adm. Ron Boxall, the chief of naval operations' director of surface warfare, said in a December interview at the Pentagon with Defense News. Boxall describes the current situation to an integrated combat system as the difference between a flip phone and an iPhone. When buying a flip phone, most of the hardware and software are already included, leaving you with a limited ability to upgrade the phone. And if you want to run more advanced applications, you need a new phone. Instead, Boxall wants the combat systems to run like the iPhone. “For us to get faster, we either have to keep going with the model we had where we upgrade our flip phones, or we cross over the mentality to where it says: 'I don't care what model of iPhone you have — 7 or X or whatever you have — it will still run Waze or whatever [applications] you are trying to run,” he said. On a ship, that means that if the Navy adds a new radar, missile or laser, the software that runs the new equipment is developed as an application that interfaces with the single integrated combat system, the way Waze integrates with the iPhone or Android software. This has the benefit of having everything linked into the central nervous system for operators in the combat information center, sonar control, on the bridge or in the ship's intelligence-gathering center. It also means that new systems are quickly integrated, skipping the expensive process of ripping out old servers and consoles. And it means the companies that develop the myriad combat systems in service today — say, Raytheon or Lockheed Martin — won't have a lock on developing software for Navy ships because the Navy wants the combat system to be developed with interfaces that are accessible by outside application developers. “We need to continue down the path to be more aggressive and get a lot more competition in the open-architecture space,” Boxall said. “I wouldn't call it completely open, but as open as we can be, and then share that with people who can, if they are properly classified and secured, they should be able to come into a common space and apply their expertise to develop products that we may or may not want to buy. That's where I'd like to get to.” The vision The grand vision for this operating system from the deck-plates perspective would be the merging what are, today, disparate functions into one unified system, said Bryan McGrath, a retired destroyer skipper and consultant who heads The FerryBridge Group. One of the areas in which this segmentation creates limitations falls between the combat information center — which collects and displays information gathered by ships' sensors — and the intelligence hub known as the Ship's Signals Exploitation Space — which uses top-secret sources to collect data on the theater in which the ship is operating. “We need to break down the barrier between CIC and SSES, and the barrier is both a physical bulkhead and computing systems and platforms,” McGrath said. “That's what an integrated combat system is: You have the traditional combat system function, and the intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance functions — non-real-time and [top-secret information] functions — merged into one multilevel security-protected computing platform.” In that scenario, if SSES receives information that three Iranian F-14 jets took off from Bushehr Air Base, a watchstander in the combat information center with the proper security clearance could see what information SSES has on the aircraft and their mission while stripping out top-secret information such as sources and methods that SSES needs to protect. And once CIC has a radar track associated with that intelligence, all SSES data will get merged into it so decision-makers in combat have the necessary intel at their fingertips. But the logic applies to all the ship's sensors, not just intelligence collection data. The unified combat system would associate every piece of sensor data with the track being displayed in CIC, McGrath said. Everyone connects to a single system that gives every watchstander all the information they need on every track, both real-time and non-real-time data. “The integrated combat system includes all mission areas,” he said. “It's electronic warfare, it's anti-submarine warfare — we don't segment out air and missile defense and electronic warfare, they are all just applications within the combat system. The Navy has to stop thinking of SESS, sonar, combat, electronic warfare and the bridge as different and separate elements. They have to be part of the whole.” Staggering costs There's a number of obstacles to getting the surface fleet on a unified system, but one that could be insurmountable: the staggering cost of replacing the fleet's outdated computer hardware. The Common Source Library, developed for the Navy by Lockheed, begins moving the Navy down this path of a single, unified combat system. The CSL is essentially the iOS of an iPhone: The Navy can use CSL to program applications that run sensors and weapons systems. So, if the Navy has a new missile system it wants to run, the software application to run it will be designed to run off of the CSL — and ships with the CSL will be able to rapidly integrate it, just like downloading the latest navigation or gaming software for a smartphone. But the issue is that CSL requires specific hardware to function, said Tony DeSimone, chief engineer of Lockheed Martin integrated warfare systems and sensors, in a roundtable with reporters late last year. “One of the challenges the Navy has, the constraints, is the hardware and infrastructure to support a [common integrated combat system],” DiSimone said. “So while we are marching forward with the capability to be open and take in apps, there is an antiquated architecture out there and there is hardware that doesn't support it. ... You can't run [integrated operating] systems today on UYK-43s. You're just not going to be able to do it. So let's gut them and put some blade servers in, and we'll work with you.” The UYK-43 was once the Navy's standard 32-bit computer for surface and submarine platforms. The issue with replacing a fleet full of ancient computers that run old combat systems is the astronomical cost. For example, when the Navy converted the cruiser Normandy into an Aegis Baseline 9 ship, which includes updated displays and blade servers, it cost the service about $188 million and nearly a year offline. When you stretch that over dozens of surface combatants in need of updated computers, you start eating up billions of dollars and lose decades of operational availability. So while CSL does give the Navy an interface with which developers can create applications to run various systems, it's all for naught if the service doesn't have the right equipment. “Our Common Source Library has made us radar-agnostic,” said Jim Sheridan, vice president of Lockheed Martin's naval combat and missile defense systems. “We're also weapons-agnostic. The blocker is that we are not infrastructure-agnostic.” Furthermore, even if the Navy did back-fit all the surface ships with updated servers, you'd need to get various companies to play nice in the sandbox by sharing proprietary information for the benefit of a unified combat system. Ultimately, however, the Navy must affect a paradigm shift that decouples the computer suites that run its combat systems from the system itself, Boxall said. “You can either upgrade the existing ships on that model, which is expensive and you rip the ship apart to do it — cost hundreds of millions of dollars and a year offline — or you design the ship with the idea that you are going upgrade the hardware over its time, and you separate the hardware/software layers,” Boxall said. “We know Aegis,” he added. “What we don't know [is how to] upgrade Aegis at the pace I think we need moving forward in the future. We don't have a structure in place and a process by which we do that upgrades with speed. “When we buy Aegis, it's kind of flip-phone technology: You buy the software and the hardware together. And you can upgrade it, it's just hard to do. If we don't go to a more adaptable model, we are not going to be able to pace the threat.” https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2019/01/14/the-future-of-the-us-surface-fleet-one-combat-system-to-rule-them-all/

Kellstrom Defense Aerospace (KDA) on Monday said it has acquired Williams Aerospace and Manufacturing (WAM) in a deal that increases its manufacturing capabilities and product portfolio. Terms of the deal were not disclosed. Both companies are based in California. http://www.defensedaily.com/kellstrom-defense-acquires-williams-aerospace

Vous êtes une start-up ou une PME/ETI européenne... Vous êtes un industriel, un intégrateur ou un laboratoire de recherche européen... Vous disposez de solutions technologiques dans les domaines de la surveillance par drone, des applications mobiles, de la biométrie, des systèmes de communication (phonie, transmission de données...), du traitement de l'image et de la vidéo, du Big Data, de l'intelligence artificielle, du design d'interfaces numériques centrées sur les usages, etc. Vous disposez de compétences ou de briques technologiques innovantes dans les domaines de l'hypervision, de la fusion, du traitement, de l'analyse, d'aide à la prise de décision, de moyens de conduite d'opération de sécurisation, de la diffusion et du partage de données complexes structurées et non structurées (images, textes, données chiffrées, géolocalisées...)... Venez participer au Défi PRODEF, coordonné par l'agence de l'innovation de défense et soutenu par la Direction générale de l'armement (DGA) et l'armée de l'Air Venez découvrir les missions et les enjeux de protection défense d'une base aérienne Démontrez en quoi votre solution permet d'améliorer l'efficacité et l'agilité du système de sécurisation d'une base aérienne, en utilisant des moyens mobiles déployables facilement Proposez vos solutions innovantes pour les futurs développements des systèmes de défense des bases aériennes https://www.defense.gouv.fr/dga/actualite/participer-au-defi-prodef-systemes-de-protection-defense-des-bases-aeriennes

Sikorsky [LMT] is upgrading the U.S. military's fleet of UH-60 Black Hawks to fight corrosion, increase the number of available flight days for the rotorcraft in Afghanistan and other deployed areas, and reduce operations and maintenance costs. http://www.defensedaily.com/sikorsky-upgrading-uh-60-black-hawks-prevent-corrosion

Le 14 janvier 2019, Valcartier (Québec) Défense nationale/Forces armées canadiennes Aujourd'hui, le ministre de la Famille, des Enfants et du Développement social, Jean-Yves Duclos, au nom du ministre de la Défense nationale, Harjit S. Sajjan, a rendu visite aux membres des Forces armées canadiennes (FAC) à la Base de soutien de la 2e Division du Canada Valcartier pour voir les nouveaux camions logistiques canadiens qui y ont été livrés. Ces camions appuient la politique de défense du Canada, Protection, Sécurité, Engagement, en fournissant l'équipement moderne dont dépendent les femmes et les hommes des FAC pour réaliser leur travail. Les véhicules de soutien, comme ces camions, constituent l'épine dorsale du transport terrestre pour notre Force régulière et notre Réserve. Ces véhicules sont au cœur de presque toutes les opérations nationales et internationales des FAC, et transportent du matériel, du personnel et des fournitures essentiels là où ils doivent se rendre. Qu'il s'agisse d'aider les collectivités canadiennes à faire face à de graves inondations ou à d'autres catastrophes nationales, ou d'appuyer les opérations de l'OTAN en Lettonie et dans l'ensemble de l'Europe de l'Est, ces nouveaux camions serviront nos femmes et nos hommes pendant des décennies à venir. Des plus de 1 500 camions achetés, près de 450 seront basés au Québec et seront utilisés par les unités des FAC, y compris la Réserve. Il y aura cinq variantes de ces camions, allant des camions de transport régulier aux camions de transport avec grue de manutention de matériaux. Les cabines peuvent également être remplacées par une cabine blindée pour être utilisée dans des environnements très dangereux. L'achat de ces camions est assujetti à la politique sur les retombées industrielles et technologiques (RIT) du Canada, ce qui signifie que pour chaque dollar que le gouvernement consacre à des achats importants de matériel de défense, l'entrepreneur retenu doit remettre un dollar dans l'économie canadienne. Gr'ce à cette politique, le pouvoir d'achat du gouvernement est utilisé pour soutenir l'innovation et créer des emplois bien rémunérés dans la classe moyenne. Citations « Gr'ce à notre politique de défense, Protection, Sécurité, Engagement, nous fournissons aux femmes et aux hommes des Forces armées canadiennes le matériel dont ils ont besoin pour réaliser leur travail. Les camions logistiques sont un élément essentiel de la façon dont les militaires des Forces armées canadiennes effectuent leur important travail. C'est pourquoi je suis heureux de voir ces nouveaux véhicules modernes livrés à Valcartier et à d'autres endroits au Canada pour remplacer et moderniser la flotte actuelle de camions logistiques de poids moyen qui ont atteint la fin de leur vie utile. » – Ministre de la Défense Harjit S. Sajjan « Je suis très heureux de voir que ces nouveaux camions sont livrés à Valcartier pour être utilisés par un nombre d'unités basées au Québec. Que ce soit pour des opérations à l'étranger ou pour fournir un soutien aux collectivités locales pendant les inondations printanières, ces camions aideront les militaires des Forces armées canadiennes à accomplir leur travail. » – Ministre de la Famille, des Enfants et du Développement social Jean-Yves Duclos Faits en bref En juillet 2015, le gouvernement du Canada a octroyé deux contrats à Mack Defense, d'une valeur totale de 834 millions de dollars, pour la livraison de nouveaux camions, remorques, systèmes de protection blindée et pour du soutien en service. Au Canada, plus de 1 500 camions, 300 remorques et 150 systèmes de protection blindés devraient être livrés au cours des deux prochaines années. Les nouveaux camions peuvent transporter jusqu'à 9,5 tonnes. https://www.canada.ca/fr/ministere-defense-nationale/nouvelles/2019/01/nouveaux-camions-logistiques-livres-a-valcartier.html