Nouvelles

By: Mark Pomerleau How can the Defense Intelligence Agency ensure its staff members can effectively communicate in the everyday environments of far-flung places without sending them into potentially risky situations? Agency leaders are hoping the answer to improve foreign language training is just a computer away. In a sources sought notice issued in late December, the agency said virtual, augmented and mixed reality provides a safer means for trainees to be fully immersed in areas where they might one day be sent on assignment but that are too dangerous to visit for training purposes. “The risk of traveling overseas is always a main concern when considering the safety of intelligence officers, especially those who have language skills or specialize in regions of high risk,” the notice reads. “The use of VR for language training would allow these DIA employees to enter a VR scenario in which they, for example, would practice their language skills (e.g., Russian, Chinese, Arabic, etc.) without having to actually travel to these high-risk environments. By using VR as a language training tool, DIA can offer its officers an immersive language experiences while also maintaining their safety.” These scenarios will be relevant to the curricula in multiple languages and could help improve language learning and cultural sensitivity. The potential contractor will initially develop scenarios in Russian with Chinese and Egyptian Arabic as options. Additionally, the contractor must develop an environment that includes interaction in a large apartment, a small grocery store, a café, a small park with vendor kiosks, community markets, realistic historical locations and a 4x4 block section of a city environment. In-country immersions will also have to be incorporated. The user will face situations that include social pressures such as making friends, avoiding embarrassment or offending others, as well as real-world noise, such as background conversations or street sounds, exposure to a variety of accents and slang. The agency's hope is that users will get a better understanding of the stress of the situation and the experience of being bombarded by foreign language at speed. https://www.c4isrnet.com/it-networks/2018/12/27/how-dia-can-recreate-the-stress-of-learning-in-a-foreign-country/

By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — As the Air Force leaves 2018 behind and flies into into a new year, the service may face some big changes to its organization and aircraft inventory. Expect to see a lot of these questions answered with the release of the fiscal year 2020 budget, which officials have said will be released in early February. Neither outgoing Defense Secretary Jim Mattis nor its acting head Patrick Shanahan has confirmed a topline budget for the department — the latest reports peg it at $750 billion, up from the $733 billion the Pentagon originally planned for and the $700 billion that President Donald Trump mandated afterward. However, much of this could be dependent on whether the Air Force sees a funding bump this year. What's going on with that F-15X buy? Rumors have swirled for more than a year about whether the Air Force could buy additional F-15s, but it appears that the service will begin purchasing more of Boeing's air superiority jet. On Dec. 21, Bloomberg reported that the Air Force will request 12 F-15Xs for about $1.2 billion as part of the FY20 budget request. The F-15X will be a new variant of the F-15 that includes a new electronic warfare suite, radar, cockpit and the ability to carry more missiles. Bloomberg reports that the decision to buy the new aircraft stems from top Pentagon leaders who want new F-15s to replace the aging models used by the Air National Guard — and pointedly not the Air Force, which has been resistant to buying new, fourth-generation planes. In September, when asked whether the service was considering the purchase of the F-15X, Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson said the service needed to use its purchasing power to buy more fifth-generation fighter jets like the F-35. "We are currently 80 percent fourth-gen aircraft and 20 percent fifth-generation aircraft,” she said. "In any of the fights that we have been asked to plan for, more fifth-gen aircraft make a huge difference, and we think that getting to 50-50 means not buying new fourth-gen aircraft, it means continuing to increase the fifth generation.” One thing to keep an eye on is how Wilson and her uniformed counterpart, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Dave Goldfein, justify the purchase of new F-15s, and how they characterize their own levels of support for the initiative. A lack of enthusiasm could be seen as damning on Capitol Hill. The other big questions: Will the number for FY20 hold if there is more budget fluctuation following Mattis' departure? And what does the Air Force's five-year plan look like? That could provide a hint on just how big this investment ultimately may get. Does the Air Force buy light attack aircraft? The Air Force was supposed to put out a final request for proposals this year for new light attack aircraft. That has officially been pushed back until 2019, leaving two competitors in a state of purgatory. If the service moves forward with a competition, it will come down to Textron's AT-6 and the A-29 Super Tucano made by Embraer and Sierra Nevada Corp. But industry sources are still unsure whether the Air Force will commit to a formal program of record. Another major question is just how big the program will be. If fewer than 100 planes are purchased, those will likely be deployed exclusively by Air Force Special Operations Command for low-intensity combat, Maj. Gen. Scott Pleus, Air Combat Command's director of plans, programs, and requirements, told Air Force Magazine. A larger buy of hundreds of aircraft would allow the Air Force to spread its light attack planes more widely, through the United States, Europe and the Asia-Pacific. How do Air Force space operations change with the addition of a Space Force? The Pentagon's latest draft proposal would funnel the new military branch for space operations under the Department of the Air Force, a decision that would give the Air Force a continued voice on national security space pursuits. The service would be led by a Space Force chief of staff and an undersecretary of the Air Force for the Space Force, who would report to the Air Force secretary. This seemingly gives the service's top civilian a considerable amount of authority over the Space Force. Still yet to be seen is whether that solution will satisfy Congress. Rep. Adam Smith, the incoming head of the House Armed Services Committee, remains skeptical about the need for a separate military branch for space, but other lawmakers may be more bullish about the Space Force's need to remain separate from the Air Force. Another big question is what this means for the military's current space organization. Does Air Force Space Command and the Space and Missile Systems Center transfer over to the Space Force? Do the Navy and Army keep their own portions of the military space enterprise? And who is going to get named as the undersecretary of the Air Force for the Space Force, anyway? Will there be some restructuring of Air Force headquarters at the Pentagon? Earlier this month, Heidi Grant, the outgoing deputy secretary of the Air Force for international affairs, confirmed that the service is considering transferring some of her office's strategy development functions to the Air Staff's office for plans and requirements, also known as the A5. This, she said, was part of a larger reorganization currently being considered by service leadership. These internal decisions reportedly aren't tied to the budget, and Grant said the Air Force could come out with a decision as early as January. However, leaders have said little about what sort of changes have been proposed. Is this just the transfer of some responsibilities from one office to another, or might we see some consolidation or the creation of new offices as a result of the deliberations? https://www.defensenews.com/air/2018/12/27/four-big-questions-for-the-air-force-in-2019/

By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — Under the purview of Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, reform has become a buzzword inside the Department of Defense, with every office trying to find ways to be more efficient, whether through cost savings or changes to bureaucracy. The department's Acquisition and Sustainment office, headed by Ellen Lord, manages billions of dollars in materiel; and by Lord's own belief, it is ripe for changes that could net the department big savings. On Dec. 17, Lord sat down with reporters and outlined a series of goals for 2019 that she hopes will help transform how the Pentagon buys equipment. Here, then, are six key items to watch for in the coming year. 1. Rework the department's key acquisition rules: The DoD Instruction 5000.02 is a key bedrock that forms the basis of how the defense acquisition system works, guiding acquisition professionals in their day-to-day program execution. And if Lord gets her way, she'll largely rip it up and start over. “In 2019, one of my key objectives is to rewrite 5000.02. We have, right now, this huge, complicated acquisition process that we encourage our acquisition professionals to tailor to their needs,” Lord said. “We are going to invert that approach and take a clean sheet of paper and write the absolute bare minimum to be compliant in 5000.02, and encourage program managers and contracting officers to add to that as they need for specific programs.” Lord envisions taking the massive, unwieldy 5000.02 guidance and getting it down to “a couple page outline of what you need to do,” with “simple” contract language and an easy-to-follow checklist “so that this isn't an onerous process.” “I'm encouraging what I call creative compliance. I want everyone to be compliant, but I want people to be very thoughtful and only use what they need,” she said. “This is literally starting with a clean sheet of paper, looking at the law and the intent, and working to vastly simplify this.” Andrew Hunter, a former Pentagon acquisition official now with the Center for International and Strategic Studies, notes that the instruction is supposed to be rewritten every five years to keep it fresh, and now is probably the right time to start looking into that. But, he added, “a lot of what she says she wants to do are things that sound very similar to my ear to what [Lord's predecessor] Frank Kendall was trying to do in the last rewrite. He tossed stuff out left and right, worked very hard to create the different models, put in extended discussions of different potential models of programs so that it would be obvious to people there's not one single way to do a program.” Hunter is cautious when it comes to a massive shift in the 5000.02 system. “If you literally tell the system, ‘All the rules are repealed, go do everything you want,' the reaction won't be a sudden flood of creativity that astounds you with the amazing talent at the department, even though there is a lot of talent there," he said. “What's more likely to happen is you have total paralysis because everyone is sitting around going: ‘Oh no, the rules are gone. How do we know what we can do? What do we do now?' But over time that might shake out.” If Congress needs to get involved, Lord said, she's prepared to go to Capitol Hill “because I know they are partnering with us and they want to make sure we do things in a simpler, most cost-effective manner.” 2. Intellectual property rules: A long-standing fight between the department and industry is over who should own the intellectual property used by the American military. Before fully taking on 5000.02, Lord hopes to write a departmentwide intellectual property policy. Lord pointed to the “very good job” done by the Army on creating an IP policy and said her goal is to build on that to create a standard across the DoD. “From an industry perspective, we are trying to be consistent across all the services and agencies, so that we don't have different requirements for similar needs,” Lord said. “So intellectual property is a good example. We'd like to have the same kind of contract language that can be tailored to individual needs, but basically have consistent language.” David Berteau, a former Pentagon official who is now the president and CEO of the Professional Services Council, noted it is hard to read the tea leaves for what Lord may be planning based on her public comments. But he pointed out the long-standing challenge for the Pentagon — that nearly 70 percent of all program costs are life-cycle sustainment and maintenance costs — as a sign that something needs to change so the department can avoid major issues in the future. Depending on how new rules are implemented, the use of IP might drive down costs — or, he warned, it might lead to companies unable to compete, forcing the Pentagon to pay more or be less prepared for challenges. Put plainly, Berteau said, “it's complicated.” He hopes Lord will begin interacting with industry on this issue in ways similar to the current “listening tour” on changes to progress payments. 3. Better software development: It's become almost cliché that the department needs to do better at developing software, but in this case it's a cliché that experts, including Lord, agree with. The Defense Innovation Board, a group of tech experts from outside the department, is working on a series of studies on software, including one focused on how to drive agile development techniques inside the building. Lord said to expect that report before the end of March, adding: “I think that will be important in terms of capturing a road map forward on how to do this correctly.” 4. Increase use of OTAs: In 2018, Lord's office released a handbook on when and how to use other transaction authorities — legal standards designed to speed acquisition that critics say are underutilized by the department. Lord called it “sort of a warmup” for creating more useful handbooks for the acquisition community, but said that the goal for 2019 is to get people to correctly employ OTAs. “Usually they should be used when you don't have a clear requirement. So, true prototyping when you don't know what you're going to get,” Lord said. “Prototyping early on, probably before you get to the middle-tier acquisition.” 5. Greater use of prototyping: Speaking of which, Lord said the department has about 10 projects underway for rapid prototyping at the mid-tier level, with the goal of growing to about 50 in the next year. The goal is to take the systems into the field, test them out and then grow the next iteration of the capability based on what is learned. “We're taking systems that are commercially available and perhaps need a little modification, or defense systems that need a modicum of modification to make them appropriate for the war fighter,” Lord said. “That's one of the authorities we are very appreciative for, and we will continue to refine the policy. I signed out very broad policy on that this year. We'll write the detailed policy coming up early next year.” 6. Making the Selected Acquisition Reports public again: Until recently, the department publicly released annual Selected Acquisition Reports for each of the major defense programs. Those reports can inform the public of where programs stand and the costs associated. However, under the Trump administration, those reports have been largely classified as “For Official Use Only,” or FOUO, a higher level of security. Critics, including incoming House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith, D-Wash., have argued there is no need for those once-public reports to be listed as FOUO. It appears Lord is working to open those back up. “We're going to try to minimize the FOUO on that,” Lord said in response to a question about it. “There are certain information [issues] that we have to protect, but [we] understand the need, the requirement, and I will put our guidance to make everything open to the public to the degree we can.” https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2018/12/27/six-things-on-the-pentagons-2019-acquisition-reform-checklist/

The Kremlin said the Avangard missile successfully hit a designated practice target 6,000 kilometres away from its launch site The Associated Press , Vladimir Isachenkov MOSCOW — Russian President Vladimir Putin oversaw a test Wednesday of a new hypersonic glide vehicle, declaring that the weapon is impossible to intercept and will ensure Russia's security for decades to come. Speaking to Russia's top military brass after watching the live feed of the launch of the Avangard vehicle from the Defence Ministry's control room, Putin said the successful test was a “great success” and an “excellent New Year's gift to the nation.” The test comes amid bitter tensions in Russia-U.S. relations, which have sunk to their lowest level since the Cold War times over the conflict in Ukraine, the war in Syria and the allegations of Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Putin's hopes for repairing ties with Washington under President Donald Trump have fizzled amid investigations into allegations of Trump's campaign ties with Russia, and tensions have escalated as the U.S. administration slapped Russia with new waves of sanctions. The Avangard was among the array of new nuclear weapons that Putin presented in March, saying that Russia had to develop them in response to the development of the U.S. missile defence system that could erode Russia's nuclear deterrent. In Wednesday's test, the weapon was launched from the Dombarovskiy missile base in the southern Ural Mountains. The Kremlin said it successfully hit a designated practice target on the Kura shooting range on Kamchatka, 6,000 kilometres away. “The Avangard is invulnerable to intercept by any existing and prospective missile defence means of the potential adversary,” Putin said after the test, adding that the new weapon will enter service next year with the military's Strategic Missile Forces. When first presenting the Avangard in March, the Russian leader said the new system has an intercontinental range and can fly in the atmosphere at 20 times the speed of sound, bypassing the enemy's missile defence. He emphasized that no other country currently has hypersonic weapons. Putin has said that Avangard is designed using new composite materials to withstand temperatures of up to 2,000 degrees Celsius (3,632 degrees Fahrenheit) that come from a flight through the atmosphere at hypersonic speeds. https://nationalpost.com/news/world/russias-putin-oversees-test-of-hypersonic-weapon

By Lee Berthiaume, The Canadian Press — Dec 25 2018 OTTAWA — The federal government and Halifax-based Irving Shipbuilding are asking a trade tribunal to throw out a challenge to their handling of a high-stakes competition to design the navy's new $60-billion fleet of warships. In separate submissions to the Canadian International Trade Tribunal, the federal procurement department and Irving say the challenge filed by Alion Science and Technology of Virginia does not meet the requirements for a tribunal hearing. Alion was one of three companies, along with U.S. defence giant Lockheed Martin and Spanish firm Navantia, vying to design the new warships, which are to be built by Irving and serve as the navy's backbone for most of this century. While Lockheed was selected as the preferred bidder and is negotiating a final design contract with the government and Irving, Alion alleges the company's design did not meet the navy's requirements and should have been disqualified. Two of those requirements related to the ship's speed, Alion alleged, while the third related to the number of crew berths. Alion has asked both the trade tribunal and the Federal Court to stop any deal with Lockheed. But the government and Irving say the contract is exempt from normal trade laws, which the tribunal is charged with enforcing, because of a special "national security exception," meaning there is "no jurisdiction for the tribunal to conduct an inquiry." Another reason the challenge should be quashed, they argue, is that Alion is not a Canadian company, which is a requirement for being able to ask the tribunal to consider a complaint. Alion's challenge has been formally filed by its Canadian subsidiary, but the government and Irving say that subsidiary was never actually qualified to be a bidder in the competition — only its American parent. The responses from the government and Irving are the latest twist in the largest military purchase in Canadian history, which will see 15 new warships built to replace the navy's 12 aging Halifax-class frigates and three already-retired Iroquois-class destroyers. The trade tribunal ordered the government last month not to award a final contract to Lockheed until it had investigated Alion's complaint, but rescinded the order after a senior procurement official warned that the deal was "urgent." The procurement department has not explained why the deal is urgent. Lockheed's bid was contentious from the moment the design competition was launched in October 2016. The federal government had originally said it wanted a "mature design" for its new warship fleet, which was widely interpreted as meaning a vessel that has already been built and used by another navy. But the first Type 26 frigates, upon which Lockheed's proposal was based, are only now being built by the British government and the design has not yet been tested in full operation. There were also complaints from industry that the deck was stacked in the Type 26's favour because of Irving's connections with British shipbuilder BAE, which originally designed the Type 26 and partnered with Lockheed to offer the ship to Canada. Irving, which worked with the federal government to pick the top design, also partnered with BAE in 2016 on an ultimately unsuccessful bid to maintain the navy's new Arctic patrol vessels and supply ships. That 35-year contract ended up going to another company. Irving and the federal government have repeatedly rejected such complaints, saying they conducted numerous consultations with industry and used a variety of firewalls and safeguards to ensure the choice was completely fair. But industry insiders had long warned that Lockheed's selection as the top bidder, combined with numerous changes to the requirements and competition terms after it was launched — including a number of deadline extensions — would spark lawsuits. Government officials acknowledged last month the threat of legal action, which has become a favourite tactic for companies that lose defence contracts, but expressed confidence that they would be able to defend against such an attack. —Follow @leeberthiaume on Twitter. Lee Berthiaume, The Canadian Press https://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2018/12/25/feds-irving-ask-trade-tribunal-to-toss-challenge-to-warship-contract-2/#.XCT7OFxKjIU

By: Jill Aitoro WASHINGTON — Sikorsky and Boeing provided the first look at the Defiant helicopter, one of two designs competing under the U.S. Army's Joint Multi-Role technology demonstrator program, two weeks after confirming the first flight would be delayed until 2019. The Joint Multi-Role Technology Demonstrator effort will inform requirements for the U.S. Army's FVL family of systems, which will come online in the 2030s. The Defiant is designed to fly at twice the speed and range of today's conventional helicopters and offers advanced agility and maneuverability, according to the Sikorsky-Boeing team. Data from the Defiant will help the Army develop requirements for new utility helicopters expected to enter service in the early 2030s. The Defiant's first flight was bumped to 2019 following a technical issue discovered during ground tests. Competitor Bell's V-280 Valor tilt-rotor aircraft has been flying since December 2017. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2018/12/26/heres-the-first-look-at-the-sikorsky-boeing-defiant-helicopter

By: Tara Copp President Donald Trump has no plans to nominate a replacement for Defense Secretary Jim Mattis any time soon, and said acting secretary Patrick Shanahan may remain in the post for the foreseeable future. Shanahan currently serves as the deputy secretary of defense at the Pentagon, the No. 2 civilian position there, which has traditionally focused more on the internal workings and business practices of the Defense Department. Trump announced on Sunday via Twitter that Shanahan would immediately replace Mattis after the departing defense chief released a public resignation letter last week citing his differences with the administration's security policies. Instead, Shanahan will immediately take the reins and Shanahan “could be there for a long time” in the acting defense secretary position, Trump said, according to Reuters, during his surprise visit to Iraq Wednesday. Mattis had intended to remain in place for two months to give the administration time to get through the 2020 budget hearings and give the White House time to find a replacement. Shanahan, a career Boeing executive, had been primarily focused on the Pentagon's inner workings, developing a space force and overhauling the building's business practices. https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2018/12/26/trump-no-plans-to-name-mattis-replacement-soon

By Ed Adamczyk Dec. 26 (UPI) -- A Program Management Office has been established by the Air Force at Tyndall Air Force Base to lead redevelopment and reconstruction efforts there, which are expected to take more than five years and cost about $3 billion. The PMO will be responsible for leading the redevelopment and reconstruction efforts at the base after it sustained devastating damage in October from Hurricane Michael, the U.S. Air Force said in an update Wednesday. Full article: https://www.upi.com/Defense-News/2018/12/26/Air-Force-establishes-office-at-Tyndall-AFB-to-guide-five-year-rebuilding-process/7501545848204/

By Ed Adamczyk Dec. 26 (UPI) -- The British army accepted the first four of 56 bomb disposal robots it ordered from Harris Corporation, the U.K. government announced. The T7 ground vehicles, manufactured by Florida-based Harris, are equipped with high-definition cameras, data links, an adjustable manipulation arm, and tank-like all-terrain treads. They also employ "haptic feedback," which recreates the sense of the robot's touch and gives an operator a better understanding of the object being diffused. They also offer vibrations when wires or other elements of the bomb are touched by the robot, to guide the operator. Full article: https://www.upi.com/Defense-News/2018/12/26/First-Harris-T7-bomb-disposal-robots-sent-to-British-army/6771545850861/