Nouvelles

By: Jen Judson and Leo Shane III WASHINGTON — The new Army Futures Command (AFC) will be in Austin, Texas, congressional sources, who are now being notified of the choice, have confirmed. The new four-star command was stood up in October at the Association of the U.S. Army's annual conference in Washington. The plan is to realign the Army's modernization priorities under a new organization that will implement cross-functional teams that correspond with the service's top six modernization efforts: Long-Range Precision Fires, Next-Generation Combat Vehicle, Future Vertical Lift, the network, air-and-missile defense and soldier lethality. The service plans to make an official announcement on the location of the command July 13 at the Pentagon. The Army has wanted the new command's headquarters in a city or urban hub close to industry and academia and not on a base or military installation. Earlier this year it shortlisted several major cities in the U.S. as possible locations and put each through a rigorous vetting process. Congressional leaders from the locales pressed hard for a chance to host the new command. The creation of the AFC has also meant taking some elements from some of the major commands and moving them over to the new organization, Army Undersecretary Ryan McCarthy told Defense News in an exclusive interview just ahead of the Association of the U.S. Army's Global Force Symposium in March. But he said many of those elements won't have to move to the command's new location. The AFC's first commander has been reported to be Lt. Gen. John Murray, the current Army G−8,but the Army has not officially confirmed that selection. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2018/07/12/army-futures-command-headed-to-austin/

Camille Grand, secrétaire général adjoint de l'Otan, se veut rassurant sur les relations entre les Etats-Unis et l'Europe sur les questions de défense. JACQUES HUBERT-RODIER L'Organisation militaire qui unit les puissances occidentales n'est pas en danger, selon le secrétaire général adjoint de l'Otan. Les critiques répétées du président américain Donald Trump sur l'implication financière insuffisante des pays européens sont plutôt justifiées, selon lui, et ne devraient pas dégénérer en une confrontation ouverte. Le renforcement de l'Europe de la défense, complémentaire de l'Otan, serait également bien accepté outre-Atlantique, à condition qu'elle reste complémentaire dans ses développements. L'Otan peut-elle surmonter la tension entre les Etats-Unis, l'Europe et le Canada ? Ce n'est pas la première fois que l'Alliance atlantique connaît des tensions entre ses Etats membres. C'est arrivé avec le départ de la France des structures militaires intégrées dans les années 1960, puis au moment des décisions de déploiement des euromissiles dans les années 1980, et plus récemment lors de la guerre en Irak, en 2003. Mais les Alliés ont toujours su surmonter ces débats et il ne faut pas dramatiser ces tensions, d'autant plus que, sur les dossiers de fond, l'Otan avance et s'adapte. Certes, il y a aujourd'hui de vrais désaccords transatlantiques, mais sur des sujets extérieurs à l'Otan, comme sur le changement climatique,les questions de commerce international ou l'Iran. Ce ne sont pas des sujets sur l'agenda, quotidien ou régulier, de l'Otan. Le président Trump ne cesse de critiquer l'Otan... Malgré les critiques adressées aux Alliés par le président Trump, il y a aux Etats-Unis un consensus assez large sur le soutien à l'Otan et à la relation transatlantique. La forte critique sur le partage du fardeau financier de l'Alliance est un thème récurrent depuis des années de la part des Américains qui estiment, non sans raison, que les dépenses militaires sont trop déséquilibrées entre les Etats-Unis et les autres alliés. Les choses évoluent aujourd'hui. Européens et Canadiens font-ils assez pour leur défense ? Les Américains demandent aux Alliés de respecter l'objectif qu'ils se sont assignés eux-mêmes lors du sommet de 2014 à Newport, au pays de Galles , c'est-à-dire de parvenir à 2 % de leur PIB consacré à la défense en 2024 - dont 20 % pour l'investissement dans de nouveaux matériels et à la recherche et développement. Aujourd'hui, le tableau est contrasté : d'un côté, tous les Alliés ont augmenté leur effort de défense. Canadiens et Européens ont au total dépensé 87 milliards d'euros de plus. En 2018, huit alliés (1) consacreront au moins 2 % de leur PIB à la défense, contre trois il y a quatre ans. Dix-huit ont annoncé qu'ils atteindront cet objectif en 2024 ou peu après. La France s'y est, pour sa part, engagée pour 2025. De l'autre côté, il est vrai qu'un certain nombre de pays sont encore un peu en retrait et n'ont pas pris d'engagement clair pour parvenir aux 2 % en 2024, même s'ils augmentent leur effort. C'est un peu un débat sur le verre à moitié plein ou à moitié vide. Donald Trump accuse surtout l'Allemagne ? L'Allemagne s'est engagée fermement à parvenir à 1,5 % de son PIB en 2024. Ce qui constitue une augmentation déjà significative de ses dépenses pour une grosse économie. Parviendra-t-elle à 2 % dans un avenir rapproché ? Politiquement, c'est encore en discussion au sein de la coalition et du Bundestag. Techniquement, l'Allemagne, je pense, peut et doit y arriver car l'argument de dire « nous sommes un pays trop riche » n'est pas recevable alors que des pays plus pauvres font cet effort. Cela sera sans doute étalé dans le temps. Pourquoi 2 % ? Cet objectif existe depuis longtemps mais il est devenu politiquement très engageant depuis 2014 avec la promesse faite au sommet du pays de Galles. C'est un chiffre raisonnable si l'on compare à la période de la guerre froide où la plupart des pays de l'Otan étaient plutôt entre 3 % et 4 % du PIB, ou aux dépenses d'autres puissances majeures. Ce n'est pas une course frénétique aux armements mais une norme cohérente avec un environnement stratégique incertain et dégradé. L'Europe de la défense est-elle concurrente de l'Otan ? Ce débat est aujourd'hui largement dépassé. L'Europe de la défense et l'Alliance atlantique doivent être complémentaires. Si l'Otan plaide bien sûr pour éviter les duplications inutiles et assurer la meilleure coordination possible, les décisions récentes de l'Union européenne pour renforcer l'Europe de la défense sont bienvenues et utiles avec la mise en oeuvre de la coopération structurée permanente, et surtout avec des investissements dans le prochain cadre budgétaire européen 2021-2027 dans deux domaines importants vu de l'Otan : 6,5 milliards d'euros pour des infrastructures liées à la « mobilité militaire » et la création du Fonds européen de défense doté de 13 milliards d'euros. Certes, tout cela représente 1 % des dépenses de défense en Europe, mais cela aide à faire de l'Union européenne un acteur de la scène stratégique avec lequel l'Otan travaille dans un nombre croissant de domaines. Les relations entre les deux organisations sont denses et n'ont d'ailleurs sans doute jamais été aussi bonnes Comment voyez-vous les relations avec la Russie ? Depuis deux ans, l'Otan mène une double approche : d'une part, de dissuasion et de défense avec la consolidation du flanc oriental de l'Alliance gr'ce à une présence avancée, légère, de quatre bataillons dans les trois pays Baltes et en Pologne, et un renforcement de ses structures de commandement ; et, d'autre part, de dialogue. Depuis 2016, le conseil Otan-Russie (COR) s'est réuni sept fois. La rencontre du 16 juillet, à Helsinki, entre les présidents Poutine et Trump s'inscrit ainsi dans les échanges normaux et réguliers entre les leaders de l'Alliance et la Russie. La menace terroriste est-elle un autre sujet de préoccupation ? L'Otan est engagée dans la défense collective. C'est notre « coeur de métier ». Ce qui est nécessaire face à l'attitude russe des dernières années, comme en Ukraine avec l'annexion illégale de la Crimée. Mais elle l'est aussi dans la lutte contre le terrorisme. Plus de 16.000 soldats sous le drapeau Otan sont déployés en Afghanistan pour aider et soutenir l'armée afghane. L'organisation prépare, en outre, une mission d'entraînement en Irak. Ce qui est une contribution à la lutte contre Daech. La Turquie pose-t-elle un problème pour l'Alliance ? La Turquie est un allié majeur et toujours actif, depuis 1952, dans nos débats. Elle est confrontée à des défis de sécurité exceptionnels du fait de sa situation stratégique et de la menace terroriste. La situation dans le nord de la Syrie a pu donner lieu à quelques tensions. Actuellement, il y a cependant une feuille de route américano-turque sur la Syrie, et les tensions et les incompréhensions sont moins perceptibles. https://www.lesechos.fr/monde/enjeux-internationaux/0301937638238-camille-grand-tous-les-allies-de-lotan-augmentent-leurs-depenses-de-defense-2191399.php

By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR. With its eyes firmly on Russia, the US Army is racing to field 8×8 Strykers with an array of weapons that can down enemy aircraft — from drones to helicopters to jets — and incidentally make enemy tanks think twice. The first prototypes will be delivered next year, with up to 144 (four battalions) by 2022, although the contract details are still being negotiated. With the IM-SHORAD (Initial Maneuver Short Range Air Defense) Stryker, “you'll have more combat power, more lethality, than the Bradley fighting vehicle,” says Ed House, the retired Army infantry colonel who runs the program for Leonardo DRS. Now, before everyone gets too excited, this doesn't mean the new Stryker is a substitute for the Bradley as an infantry assault vehicle. The Stryker's got lighter armor, and wheels instead of tracks, so it can't handle all the threats or terrain a Bradley can. Plus, this variant's interior volume will be largely filled with spare missiles, leaving little room to carry troops. But it does raise intriguing tactical possibilities for IM-SHORAD Strykers to take up positions right behind the frontline forces — ideally on hills with good fields of fire — to provide both air defense and long-range shots against enemy armor. It's similar to how the German's famous 88mm high-velocity cannon of World War II did double duty as flak gun and tank killer. Rolling Arsenal Put together by Leonardo DRS and then installed on the Stryker by the vehicle's original manufacturer, General Dynamics Land Systems, the package includes an intimidating arsenal of weapon — and the flexibility to add more: Two Hellfire missiles, capable of hitting both air and ground targets. Hellfire has not only a larger warhead than the Army's standard Stinger anti-aircraft missile (18-20 pounds vs. 6.6) but a long range than the TOW anti-tank missiles on its M2 Bradleys and ATGM Strykers (5 miles vs. at most 2.8). Four Stinger missiles for less well-armored aircraft targets, in a new quad launcher put together by Raytheon. A 30mm automatic cannon, an upgraded model (M230LF) of the gun on the AH-64 Apache attack helicopter and considerably more powerful than the Bradley's 25 mm. A standard 7.62mm machinegun as backup and to kill targets that don't merit a 30 mm round, such as slow-moving drones and infantry in the open. An electronic warfare package to jam drones' control links without having to shoot them. A Rada multi-mission radar to track both air and ground targets. What's more, the weapons are all mounted on a multipurpose unmanned turret, Moog's Reconfigurable Integrated-weapons Platform (RIwP, pronounced “rip”), which House said could take a wide range of alternative layouts as technology, tactics, and threats evolve. It could also be adapted to other vehicles, with Leonardo having tried a counter-drone version on an M-ATV truck. “It takes us about four hours to put the RIwP turret on an M-ATV,” House told me. While they've haven't put one on a Stryker yet, once General Dynamics preps a Stryker — which includes cutting the appropriate hole in the top armor — “it won't be any harder to mount it on the Stryker.” The loaded turret weighs less than the TOW missile turret already installed on the Stryker's anti-tank variant, he said. (By contrast, a rival proposal from General Dynamics and Boeing involved a much larger turret that would have required cutting off the back half of the Stryker's cargo bay). With the turret installed and loaded, the vehicle has two Hellfires and four Stingers ready to fire and more would be carried in the hull. The three-man crew should be able reload the Stingers and the 30mm without leaving the vehicle, although they'd be partially exposed in an open hatch. The Hellfires, however, are simply too big and heavy to fit through the hatches, so the crew would have to get out and clamber on top of the vehicle to reload those. That's an awkward operation under fire and another reason the IM-SHORAD Stryker shouldn't hang out in range of enemy machineguns alongside the Bradleys. If fewer or no reloads are needed for a particular mission, House said, some or all of the Stryker's cargo/passenger area would be available for supplies or troops. But with Short-Range Air Defense identified as one of the Army's glaring shortfallsagainst a modern adversary like Russia or China, the IM-SHORAD Stryker probably won't have much time for odd jobs. Rushing vs. Russia The Army is rushing to fill multiple gaps in Europe, not just air defense. It's developing a new scout helicopter and adding Trophy Active Protection Systems(APS) to its M1 Abrams heavy tanks to protect them from Russian anti-tank missiles. But while armored brigades of M1 tanks and M2 Bradleys regularly deploy to Europe, the heaviest force stationed there permanently is mounted on Strykers. So the Army is rushing to upgun these relatively lightweight armored vehicles with anti-armor weapons from 30 mm cannon to Javelin anti-tank missiles, as well as the effectively dual-purpose IM-SHORAD package. How fast is that schedule? September 2017: The Army conducts a SHORAD “shoot off” of potential systems. February 2018: Army issues a Directed Requirement for what they call an “initial material solution” for SHORAD. April: The Army holds an industry day with interested companies. May: An Army panel evaluates companies' White Paper proposals and selects Leonardo DRS for the weapons, turret, and electronics (the Mission Equipment Package); Raytheon for the upgraded Stinger Launcher (which the government then provides to Leonardo); and General Dynamics to integrate everything on the Stryker. August 31: The Army's target date to award contracts. Mid-2019 (3Q FY19): First prototype to be delivered. 2020: First IM-SHORAD battery deployed. 2022: Up to four IM-SHORAD battalions fielded. At this point the Army may either keep upgrading IM-SHORAD — note it's called the “initial” solution, not the “interim” one as is sometimes reported — or choose another system. Different missiles, improved electronic warfare, and entirely new weapons such as lasers are all options, with 50 kilowatt lasers planned for 2023. https://breakingdefense.com/2018/07/army-anti-aircraft-stryker-can-kill-tanks-too/

By: Pierre Tran PARIS - France seeks to shake up, speed up and closely audit its arms acquisition with a “transformation” of its procurement office, the Direction Générale de l'Armement. In a July 5 speech, Armed Forces Minister Florence Parly pointed to the need for a deep restructuring of the DGA in response to changing threats, international relations, technology and innovation. AS part of that process, the DGA will spin up an innovation office for key programs, with a budget of €1 billion (US $1.2 billion). Closer ties with industry will be part of the new approach, with prime contractors sitting down with the DGA and chiefs of staff to draw up a requirement – but industry must also assume responsibility and better share risk, Parly said. “Transformation of the DGA” was the mission assigned to its director, Joël Barre, when he took up the post, Parly told the audience gathered at the defense ministry. Efficiency and responsiveness were key goals, requiring greater dialog between the DGA and the military services, rather than working in silos, she said. There are now three phases in arms programs, half the previous number, she said. Those key stages are preparation, production and use of the equipment. The ministry seeks to simplify procedure, increase flexibility and acquire innovation, while pursuing new legal structures and financing. While greater conversations with industry will be vital going forward, Parly pointed up that there would “balance” in the government's relations with industry. France was ready to talk to industry but the government was not ready to pay any price. There will detailed audits to ensure a right price was agreed to, Parly warned. “The DGA is not a quartermaster's store, nor little old grandma with an open check book,” she said. One of the major reforms for industry will be to pressure prime contractors deliver on time, with the government seeking to move to an approach used in civil aviation, where most of the payment is made on delivery. That encourages a delivery on time, rather than the present phased payment, where defense contractors have no incentive to speed up the work. The DGA will send teams to inspect the contractors to ensure the right price was paid. Additionally, Parly said there will be greater sharing and use of engineering information between the DGA and industry, with increased use of artificial intelligence and large databases. Innovation agency To help drive the new culture, DGA will set up an innovation agency, intended to be the one number to call for inquiries on innovation, and ready to take risk and speed up official backing. There is a search on for director of the agency, which will merge various existing offices including Astrid, Def'invest and Rapid. The agency will have a budget of €1 billion (US $1.2 billion) for investment. There will be a greater cooperation between the DGA, Joint chief of staff and Chief of staff of each of the services, with teams working together in the same office area from this autumn. There are two pilot projects being considered: the Future Combat Air Systems, which will also consider the potential for cooperation with Germany and other European countries, and a maritime surveillance system. There is a search for greater speed by merging the operational requirements set by the services with the technical needs drafted by the DGA. The forces and DGA will, with a prime contractor, draw up a single document setting out requirement. This combined approach will be tested on a new internal communications system for the ministry. The DGA will seek greater flexibility in its staff management as the office relies on technical staff, which are in strong demand in the job market. That includes sending its employees to work temporarily in companies to learn best practice and boost cooperation between the ministry and industry. The DGA manages an average annual budget of €11 billion for some 100 arms programs, employs 9,600 staff, of which 56 percent are engineers and executives. The office has a major role in managing export deals. Parly, in her opening remarks, quoted former U.S. President John F. Kennedy in his 1960 acceptance speech of the Democrats' nomination for the presidential campaign: “We stand today on the edge of a New Frontier--the frontier of the 1960′s--a frontier of unknown opportunities and perils-- a frontier of unfulfilled hopes and threats.” The DGA was formed just a few months before the presidential candidate delivered his speech at the Democratic National Convention at the Memorial Coliseum, Los Angeles. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2018/07/06/french-procurement-office-to-undergo-transformation/

Colin Butler Even an expert in armoured fighting vehicles thinks it's a strange place to find what the Canadian Army calls "the backbone" of its combat vehicle fleet. "I'm surprised that vehicles of this importance and significance are being stored in a conventional steel breaker's yard," said Jon Hawkes, the Land Management Editor for military information publisher Jane's Information Group. "Typically they'd be in a military facility of some kind, even if it's sort of, you know, popped out in the back out of the way in the contractors own facility." "For them to be in this breaker's yard is not where I would expect them to be." "Them," in this case are the LAV III, the workhorse of the Canadian Army. You've likely seen them on television, either helping Canadians stricken by some natural disaster, such as the 2013 floods in Alberta, last year's floods in Quebec, or, maybe overseas, carrying our troops into hot zones in such places as Afghanistan and more recently Mali. What are these LAV IIIs doing in a junk yard? So what on Earth are they doing in the back lot of a junk yard? "I think it's interesting," John Hawke said. "You could read that two ways." "On one hand, these things are being quasi-dumped in a corner somewhere to be dealt with later and perhaps that's not caring for them in the best possible way. Although as I say, they're very hardy vehicles. I wouldn't necessarily fear for their status." "Alternatively you could say that someone somewhere is actually being quite smart in finding a very cost-effective solution for storing them for a period of time. I'd imagine it's not hugely expensive to put them wherever this is." Secretive contractors Except, no one working with these LAVs is willing to talk. CBC News first attempted to visit the site in person, but was told to leave the property by staff at the scrap yard. When contacted by phone, Matt Zubick, a member of the family that owns John Zubick's Limited said "I can't talk about that" before he hung up. Steph Bryson, a spokeswoman for General Dynamics Land Systems Canada, declined to comment, referring the question to the Department of National Defence. So why all the secrecy? No secret at all "I find that a bit amusing," said Daniel Le Bouthillier, the head of media relations for the Department of National Defence. "From our perspective, the work is hardly a secret." It turns out the work inside John Zubick's Limited has been happening for the better part of a decade. After Canadian troops deployed in Afghanistan, they quickly realized the army's fleet of LAV IIIs, which they've had since 1997, needed a few tweaks to give soldiers better protection against the Taliban insurgency. Those tweaks involved better armour, blast absorbing seats and other upgrades. However, the LAV IIIs were never designed to handle the extra weight, according to Le Bouthillier. "This additional weight meant more wear and tear and affected the vehicles' what they call 'full mobility potential.' So these upgrades that are happening now address all those issues." The upgrades are being done by London, Ont.-based military manufacturer General Dynamics Land Systems Canada as part of a $1.8 billion refitting and refurbishment program with the Canadian Armed Forces called LAVIIIUP, a deal that was first struck in 2010. The program will see all 550 Canadian-made LAV IIIs, getting new armour and new hulls in order to extend the life of the vehicles until the year 2035. "As part of that process, LAV III hulls, which were not designed to support the weight of upgrades are being sent to a scrap yard, taken apart and melted and this is done because these are considered controlled goods," Le Bouthillier said. "So what you're seeing in that scrap yard are parts that are not being harvested for the upgrades," he said. "These are not drive-in, drive-out full capability vehicles. These are just parts of them. They might look like full vehicles because they're so big. Especially when you look at them from above." The first batch of upgraded LAV IIIs were delivered to the military in 2012, with the delivery of the final batch expected next December. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/london-ontario-lav-1.4734920

Hydro-Québec et le U.S. Army Research Laboratory annoncent une percée dans le domaine des matériaux pour les batteries au lithium-ion avec la publication de résultats de leurs recherches(Cet hyperlien s'ouvrira dans une nouvelle fenêtre)dans le réputé Journal of Power Sources(Cet hyperlien s'ouvrira dans une nouvelle fenêtre). Gr'ce à une cathode utilisant de nouveaux matériaux sécuritaires, les chercheurs ont réussi une première mondiale : fabriquer une batterie au lithium-ion de 1,2 Ah ayant une tension de 5 V. « La tension élevée de cette nouvelle batterie nous permet d'atteindre une énergie massique très élevée. C'est une propriété qui est très en demande et qui peut améliorer les batteries ciblant une foule d'applications », a déclaré Karim Zaghib, directeur général du Centre d'excellence en électrification des transports et en stockage d'énergie. Les scientifiques de l'ARL, Jan Allen et Richard Jow, également inventeurs de ce matériau de cathode haute tension, pensent que la tension élevée de la cellule peut, en plus de permettre une densité énergétique élevée, améliorer la conception des dispositifs. Les batteries au lithium-ion équipent une foule d'appareils électroniques tels que les téléphones intelligents, les dispositifs médicaux et les véhicules électriques. Leur grande énergie massique, leur durabilité et leur légèreté sont des atouts précieux. Elles font l'objet d'une demande croissante pour différents produits, ce qui encourage le perfectionnement de leur capacité de stockage. Les constructeurs de batteries s'intéressent particulièrement aux nouveaux composés qui promettent une capacité, une stabilité et une durabilité accrues. Voilà pourquoi l'innovation annoncée aujourd'hui présente un fort potentiel de commercialisation. À propos d'Hydro-Québec Hydro-Québec produit, transporte et distribue de l'électricité. L'entreprise est le plus grand producteur d'électricité du Canada et l'un des plus grands producteurs d'hydroélectricité du monde. Son unique actionnaire est le gouvernement du Québec. L'entreprise exploite essentiellement des filières d'énergie renouvelables, et plus particulièrement l'hydroélectricité. Son institut de recherche, l'IREQ, fait de la recherche-développement dans divers aspects du domaine de l'énergie, notamment l'efficacité énergétique et le stockage de l'énergie. http:/www.hydroquebec.com À propos du Centre d'excellence en électrification des transports et en stockage d'énergie Le Centre d'excellence en électrification des transports et en stockage d'énergie a le mandat d'effectuer la recherche sur les matériaux de batteries pour Hydro-Québec. Regroupant 70 employés, il dispose en 2018 d'un budget de fonctionnement de l'ordre de 20 M$ provenant entièrement de revenus externes, générés notamment par la vente de licences d'utilisation de ses technologies. Le Centre d'excellence est dirigé par Karim Zaghib, un expert reconnu à l'échelle internationale. M. Zaghib a d'ailleurs récemment été nommé, pour une troisième année de suite, parmi les scientifiques les plus influents du monde(Cet hyperlien s'ouvrira dans une nouvelle fenêtre). Le Centre d'excellence commercialise des technologies d'Hydro-Québec protégées par 800 brevets. Il créera également de nouveaux partenariats de recherche et développera de nouvelles technologies. À propos du U.S. Army Research Laboratory Le U.S. Army Research Laboratory est le principal laboratoire des forces terrestres de l'armée des États-Unis. Il fait partie du commandement de Recherche, développement et ingénierie (RDECOM), dont la mission est d'apporter un avantage décisif à l'armée de manière à soutenir le combattant et la nation malgré les complexités de l'environnement opérationnel d'aujourd'hui et de demain. RDECOM est un des principaux commandements subordonnés au commandement du Matériel (AMC). http://nouvelles.hydroquebec.com/fr/communiques-de-presse/1379/percee-dans-le-domaine-des-materiaux-de-batteries-par-hydro-quebec-et-le-us-army-research-laboratory/

By: Andrew C. Jarocki WASHINGTON ― The U.S. Navy and Marine Corps continue to invest in vertical takeoff aircraft, announcing a $4.2 billion contract with the Bell-Boeing Joint Program Office for dozens of new V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft. The agreement provides for the manufacture and delivery of 39 CMV-22B aircraft for the Navy and 14 MV-22B aircraft for the Marines. The delivery is expected to be completed by November 2024. The Navy will use the new tilt rotors for transporting personnel and cargo from shore to aircraft carriers. The Osprey is also used in infiltration/exfiltration operations. The V-22 and its variations have seen use by the U.S. Air Force for resupply operations, and by the Marines in Syria. The Army is also interested in developing vertical lift capabilities for deploying strike teams. The contract included a sale of four MV-22B aircraft for the government of Japan, where five American Ospreys arrived this spring to begin a deployment based in Tokyo. The purchase “enables the U.S. Navy to begin advancing its carrier onboard delivery fleet with modern tiltrotor aircraft” Kristin Houston, vice president for Boeing tilt-rotor programs and director of the Bell-Boeing V-22 program, said in a news release. The Air Force will also receive one new CV-22B from the contract. https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2018/07/03/us-navy-marine-corps-order-dozens-of-osprey-aircraft-in-42b-deal/

By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — The U.S. Army's interim short-range air defense system, which will urgently fill a capability gap identified a few years ago in the European theater, has crystallized. The Army had already decided the Interim Maneuver-Short-Range Air Defense system would be developed around its Stryker combat vehicle, but it has now chosen Leonardo DRS to supply a mission equipment package that will include Raytheon's Stinger vehicle missile launcher, according to Col. Chuck Worshim, program manager for cruise missile defense systems with the Army's Program Executive Office Missiles and Space, who spoke to Defense News on June 28. General Dynamics Land Systems — which produces the Stryker — will be the platform integrator for the IM-SHORAD system, he added. The Army went through a selection process through the Department of Defense Ordnance Technology Consortium to determine the best collection of vendors to build prototypes. A Boeing-GDLS team was a front-runner for an interim SHORAD mission package, unveiling before any other vendor a solution in August 2017 at the Space and Missile Defense Symposium in Huntsville, Alabama. Using an Avenger system on top of the Stryker, which was the team's solution, sought to take what was already in the Army's inventory to create a system. And a SHORAD demonstration at White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico, last September saw more possibilities for the interim solution including Rafael's Iron Dome and South Korean defense firm Hanwha's Flying Tiger. But a dark horse emerged at the Association of the U.S. Army's Global Force Symposium, also in Huntsville, in March. Leonardo DRS showed an unassuming small-scale mock-up of its concept at its booth at the symposium that featured its partner Moog's Reconfigurable Integrated-weapons Platform. The platform would provide a choice of sights, direct-fire weapons and missiles, Ed House, DRS Land Systems' business development manager, told Defense News at the show. The system would be able to integrate both Stinger and Longbow Hellfire missiles, requirements for the service's IM-SHORAD solution. It also would come equipped with a complement of direct-fire weapons and sights to include the M230 chain gun and the 7.62mm coaxial machine gun. But the solution also has non-kinetic defeat capabilities and Rada's onboard multimission hemispheric radar. And that dark horse has won the opportunity to provide the mission equipment package for the IM-SHORAD prototype program. The system will also have Hellfire rails as well as an onboard sensor, according to Worshim. The Army decided to choose DRS to provide the mission equipment package because of the flexibility of its reconfigurable turret, which allows for growth opportunities should the threat change or something else change that requires a new interceptor or another capability, Worshim said. The solution also posed less intrusion to the existing Stryker platform, he added, and provided an increased level of protection as the crew reloads ammunition, which can be done under armor. While the Avenger solution was deemed technically acceptable and met requirements, one of the reasons the Army decided against using the Avenger on Stryker as the solution was because the government felt it would require major modifications to the Stryker, according to Worshim. The Army has a desire to keep the Stryker as common across the fleet as possible, Worshim said. Boeing was also looking to the government to supply Avenger turrets, of which a limited amount of those exist readily in the service's inventory, which would have been problematic when considering the Army's goal to deliver 144 IM-SHORAD systems by fiscal 2022, he explained. Now that vendors have been selected, the Army will move into a negotiation period expected to wrap up in mid- to late July. The service expects to officially award the contract to build nine prototypes by Aug. 31, but has the intention to possibly move that date up, Worshim said. Once the contracts are solidified, DRS will provide the first mission equipment package, complete with a new digital Stinger missile launcher in February 2019. Then GDLS will fully integrate the SHORAD prototype by April 2019. The final prototypes will be delivered to the service by the first quarter of fiscal 2020. As the prototypes are coming along, the Army will conduct prototype testing to see if the systems are meeting requirements. “From there, the Army will decide if this solution truly meets requirements in this respect,” Worshim said. If the solution does meet requirements, production efforts to build 144 systems — a total of four battalions — will move forward. The Army's goal is to provide the first battery no later than the fourth quarter of 2020, but that will depend on funding. If funding is lower than expected, the Army will deliver the first platoon by about that time, according to Worshim. The service has moved from receiving a directed requirement in late February 2018 to selecting vendors for the IM-SHORAD solution in just about four months, which, Worshim noted, is moving at “lightning speed” for a typical acquisition process. The hope is the process to build an IM-SHORAD solution will be used as a model for Army procurement that incorporates the “fly before you buy” concept and creates a way to rapidly understand capabilities moving forward, he said. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2018/06/28/us-armys-interim-short-range-air-defense-solution-crystallizes/

By Julie Hirschfeld Davis WASHINGTON — President Trump has written sharply worded letters to the leaders of several NATO allies — including Germany, Belgium, Norway and Canada — taking them to task for spending too little on their own defense and warning that the United States is losing patience with what he said was their failure to meet security obligations shared by the alliance. The letters, sent in June, are the latest sign of acrimony between Mr. Trump and American allies as he heads to a NATO summit meeting next week in Brussels that will be a closely watched test of the president's commitment to the alliance. Mr. Trump has repeatedly questioned its value and has claimed that its members are taking advantage of the United States. Mr. Trump's criticism raised the prospect of another confrontation involving the president and American allies after a blowup by Mr. Trump at the Group of 7 gathering last month in Quebec, and increased concerns that far from projecting solidarity in the face of threats from Russia, the meeting will highlight divisions within the alliance. Such a result could play into the hands of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, who is to meet with Mr. Trump in Helsinki, Finland, after the NATO meeting, and whose primary goal is sowing divisions within the alliance. In his letters, the president hinted that after more than a year of public and private complaints that allies have not done enough to share the burden of collective defense, he may be considering a response, including adjusting the United States' military presence around the world. “As we discussed during your visit in April, there is growing frustration in the United States that some allies have not stepped up as promised,” Mr. Trump wrote to Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany in a particularly pointed letter, according to someone who saw it and shared excerpts with The New York Times. “The United States continues to devote more resources to the defense of Europe when the Continent's economy, including Germany's, are doing well and security challenges abound. This is no longer sustainable for us.” “Growing frustration,” Mr. Trump wrote, “is not confined to our executive branch. The United States Congress is concerned, as well.” The president's complaint is that many NATO allies are not living up to the commitment they made at their Wales summit meeting in 2014 to spend 2 percent of their gross domestic product on national defense. American presidents have long complained about the lack of burden-sharing by NATO member countries, but Mr. Trump has taken that criticism much further, claiming that some of the United States' closest allies are essentially deadbeats who have failed to pay debts to the organization, a fundamental misunderstanding of how it functions. The Trump administration has already reportedly been analyzing a large-scale withdrawal of American forces from Germany, after Mr. Trump expressed surprise that 35,000 active-duty troops are stationed there and complained that NATO countries were not contributing enough to the alliance. In the letter, Mr. Trump told Ms. Merkel that Germany also deserves blame for the failure of other NATO countries to spend enough: “Continued German underspending on defense undermines the security of the alliance and provides validation for other allies that also do not plan to meet their military spending commitments, because others see you as a role model.” In language that is echoed in his letters to the leaders of other countries — including Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada, Prime Minister Erna Solberg of Norway and Prime Minister Charles Michel of Belgium — Mr. Trump said he understands the “domestic political pressure” brought to bear by opponents of boosting military expenditures, noting that he has expended “considerable political capital to increase our own military spending.” “It will, however, become increasingly difficult to justify to American citizens why some countries do not share NATO's collective security burden while American soldiers continue to sacrifice their lives overseas or come home gravely wounded,” Mr. Trump wrote to Ms. Merkel. Mr. Michel reacted tartly last week to the letter, telling reporters at a European Union summit meeting in Brussels that he was “not very impressed” by it, according to a report by Deutsche Welle. Mr. Trump has long complained about the alliance and routinely grouses that the United States is treated shabbily by multilateral organizations of which it is a member, be it the World Trade Organization or the North Atlantic alliance. But in Europe, the letters to NATO allies have been greeted with some degree of alarm because of their suggestion that Mr. Trump is prepared to impose consequences on the allies — as he has done in an escalating tariff fight with European trading partners — if they do not do what he is asking. “Trump still seems to think that NATO is like a club that you owe dues to, or some sort of protection racket where the U.S. is doing all the work protecting all these deadbeat Europeans while they're sitting around on vacation, and now he is suggesting there are consequences,” said Derek Chollet, a former Defense Department official who is the executive vice president for security and defense policy at the German Marshall Fund of the United States. “Europeans have been watching Donald Trump begin to implement his rhetoric on trade in ways that are very combative,” he said, “and they're starting to contemplate whether he would do this regarding security issues, as well.” Mr. Trump's letter to Mr. Trudeau was reported last month by iPolitics in Canada, and the existence of others was reported last week by Foreign Policy. It was not clear precisely how many Mr. Trump wrote, and the White House would not comment on presidential correspondence. But two diplomatic sources said they believed at least a dozen were sent, including to Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal and Spain. A White House official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because the official was not authorized to discuss the matter, said that Mr. Trump is committed to the NATO alliance and expects allies to shoulder “their fair share of our common defense burden, and to do more in areas that most affect them.” John R. Bolton, Mr. Trump's national security adviser, said Sunday that it was NATO members who refused to spend more on defense — not the president — who were responsible for undercutting the alliance. “The president wants a strong NATO,” Mr. Bolton said in an interview on CBS's “Face the Nation.” “If you think Russia's a threat, ask yourself this question: Why is Germany spending less than 1.2 percent of its G.N.P.? When people talk about undermining the NATO alliance, you should look at those who are carrying out steps that make NATO less effective militarily.” But for diplomats hoping fervently to avoid another high-profile summit meeting collapse with Mr. Trump as the instigator, the letters were concerning. “Europeans, like many folks in our Defense Department, think that there are many good things that could come out of this summit if only they can keep it from going off the rails,” Mr. Chollet said. “They are hoping to survive without irreparable damage, and so the fact that you have all these storm clouds surrounding NATO and Trump is really worrisome.” Mr. Trump's disparagement of Europe and the alliance has become almost routine, leaving some veteran diplomats aghast. Last week, Jim Melville, the United States ambassador to Estonia, told friends and colleagues that he would resign at the end of this month after more than 30 years in the Foreign Service, in part because of the president's language. “For the President to say the E.U. was ‘set up to take advantage of the United States, to attack our piggy bank,' or that ‘NATO is as bad as NAFTA' is not only factually wrong, but proves to me that it's time to go,” Mr. Melville wrote in a Facebook post. He was referring to remarks about Europe that the president made during a rally last week in Fargo, N.D., and comments about NATO that he is reported to have made privately during the Group of 7 gathering. Still, the president is not alone in demanding more robust military spending by NATO allies. Jim Mattis, the secretary of defense, wrote to Gavin Williamson, the British defense minister, last month saying he was “concerned” that the United Kingdom's military strength was “at risk of erosion” if it did not increase spending, and warned that France could eclipse Britain as the United States' “partner of choice” if it did not invest more. A United States official confirmed the contents of Mr. Mattis's letter, first reported by The Sun. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/02/world/europe/trump-nato.html