Nouvelles

ByEd Adamczyk March 30 (UPI) -- The State Department approved a sale of upgrades to South Korea's F-16 fighter planes, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency said on Monday. The $194 million sale, expected to be approved by Congress, calls for South Korea to obtain Mode 5 Identification Friend or Foe equipment, known as IFF, and Link 16 Technical Datalink equipment for its F-16 Block 32 fleet. IFF, in use since the 1940s and improved regularly, identifies and tracks military aircraft, and Mode 5 is the most recent implementation of the system. It uses waveform modulation, coding, and cryptographic techniques to quickly determine the identity and heading of an aircraft. Link 16 is a military data link network allowing military ships and aircraft to share tactical picture of a situation in real time, and offers an offers an exchange of text messages, imagery data and two channels of digital voice transmission. Each system is currently in use by NATO countries. The proposed deal includes the sale of radios, Combined Interrogator Transponders, a Joint Mission Planning upgrade, secure voice modules, crypto fill devices, aircraft ferry support, training, integration support and test equipment, and contractor, engineering, technical and logistics support services. The Republic of Korea Air Force has 180 F-16s, in two variants. https://www.upi.com/Defense-News/2020/03/30/State-Dept-approves-194M-upgrade-deal-for-South-Koreas-F-16s

"I have mobilized the Department of the Air Force into a wartime acquisition posture," said Roper. "We are at war with this virus." By THERESA HITCHENS WASHINGTON: The Air Force has stood up a special acquisition task force to help keep its industrial base humming during, and after, the COVID-19 pandemic, says service acquisition czar Will Roper. “I have mobilized the Department of the Air Force into a wartime acquisition posture, and that is the purpose of our acquisition COVID-19 task force,” Roper told reporters in a teleconference today. “We are at war with this virus.” The move follows in the footsteps of DoD Undersecretary for Acquisition and Sustainment Ellen Lord, who has set up a number of task forces as the Pentagon puts into place the $2 trillion coronavirus relief package passed by the Senate last night, the House this morning and on its way to President Donald Trump for signature. The package includes $10-plus billion for Pentagon response efforts, including $1.5 billion that could go directly to industry. “Cash flow and liquidity are everything right now,” Roper explained. One of key focuses is on small businesses and the startup ecosystem, he stressed, given that the Air Force over the past two years significantly ramping up its efforts to reap technology innovations from the commercial sector. “All of you know that small businesses are the most vulnerable right now,” Roper said. “We're going to have to do things differently with our small companies than with our primes.” As an example, Roper mentioned the move by the service's new AFVentures arm for startup investment to switch within 72 hours its planned ‘Pitch Bowl' at the March 13-20 South By Southwest festival in Austin to a virtual event. The event involved some 5,000 participants, he said and resulted in 599 contracts worth a total of almost $1 billion — “the single largest small business transaction in government history.” “That was one of our first big virtualizing activities within acquisition,” he said. “We flowed critical cash to companies who can burn it against that in their contracts now.” Further, he said, the Air Force already has put out another solicitation asking small businesses who might be able to help with COVID-19 response “to put their hands up so that we can get additional cash to them or put them on contract if their not already working with us.” Roper said the Air Force acquisition task force has “four lines of effort:” “Relief.” Roper said “these teams are thinking through external assistance requests that may potentially come in,” and how best to apply contracting to move out “billions of dollars if needed.” “Resilience.” This is focusing on “defense industrial base health issues,” he said. For example, if there are “suppliers under duress, or small businesses that are not getting enough cash flow fast enough,” are there ways the service can help? “Recovery.” This team will look at what is needed after the crisis lifts. While Roper cautioned industry that “COVID-19 is not a blanket excuse for programs slipping to the right,” he said the service will be mindful that some will do so — thus the “recovery” team will try to figure out what funding those programs might need to get back on track after a schedule slip. “Being rapid for small businesses.” This effort, Roper said, is led by AFVentures, and is meeting daily to ensure the Air Force spends all of its small business funds. “They have been in training for this for two years,” he said of AFVentures personnel. “They have demonstrated the ability to do more small business contracts that anyone in the government at speeds never seen.” Roper said that so far there have been “no major delays” in critical acquisition programs, such as the top priority Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD) to replace the aging Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missiles. Indeed, he said he talked with the GBSD team this morning who are “doing business as usual,” only virtually. Similarly, testing under the Skyborg program not only is moving ahead, but Roper has given that acquisition team the go-head to “accelerate solicitations as soon as they are ready.” Under the program, the Skyborg “brain” would use artificial intelligence to pilot low-cost “attritable” drones that would provide data (such as telemetry, flight plans and weather) to a manned fighter leading a formation — a job that a wingman's aircraft normally would do. While so far the only drone body to have flown the Skyborg computing package is the the Valkyrie, built by Kratos, the service isn't ruling out using others. One of the key reasons that Air Force acquisition programs can keep moving, Roper said, is because of the service's past efforts to innovate in the area of information technology. Asked about the some $300 million in the coronavirus relief package slated for DoD to spend on IT to support teleworking, Roper wouldn't provide the exact Air Force share. But, he stressed that IT is key to DoD's success not just during this crisis but for the future. “Information technology in the government has never been an exceptionally high priority, and it's been one of the most disappointing things to me about joining the government is having to have antiquated 1990s-era technologies to exchange information,” he said. The Air Force's “pivot” to begin using commercial cloud technology — now embodied in the cloudONE — has “really benefited” the service as the COVID-19 crisis has unfolded, he said. However, he added, a key barrier to taking full advantage of this tech are out-dated security measures — particularly around classified information — that have been in place for decades. Therefore, he said, his office is working with DoD CIO Dana Deasy and his Air Force counterpart Bill Marion “to try to smartly look at removing security restrictions and using new technology.” If this effort is successful, he explained, “then we'll be able to work remotely as long as needed.” The effort in part is bouncing off of Air Force's project — under its high-priority Advanced Battle Management System designed to underpin Joint All-Domain Command and Control (JADC2) — to develop the “deviceONE” that can securely allow classified information to be relayed to tablets and handhelds for operators in the field, he said. The bottom line, Roper said, is that the changes in how the Air Force and DoD as a whole are working in driven by the pandemic are likely to have lasting effects. “I'm excited to see what the Department of the Air Force will be like post-COVID-19, because with this much disruptive change happening in the government all at once, and rethinking about how we do our business, we won't go back to being the same department again.” https://breakingdefense.com/2020/03/covid-19-roper-stands-up-task-force-to-assist-industrial-base

The Army's urgently developing new air-launched drones, long-range missiles, and electronic architecture to go on the Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft that Bell and Sikorsky are vying to build. By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR WASHINGTON: The Army's Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft program is much bigger than the two ambitious high-speed helicopters that Bell and Sikorsky will now get more than $1 billion to build. At least five other major moving pieces must come together on time to turn the final aircraft, whoever makes it, into a working weapon: a new Improved Turbine Engine built by GE; helicopter-launched mini-drones called Air Launched Effects (ALE); a new Long-Range Precision Munition (LRPM), with the Israeli Spike-NLOS as the initial version; an Integrated Missile Launcher (IML) to launch both the missile and the drones; and the underlying electronic framework of standards and interfaces to plug it all together, the Modular Open Systems Architecture (MOSA). The Army is “not just focused on the air vehicle, but focused on the weapon system,” said Brig. Gen. Walter Rugen, Future Vertical Lift director at Army Futures Command, in a call this morning with reporters. Here's the current schedule for everything to come together: 2019 April: The Army awarded five contracts for “initial designs” of the FARA aircraft itself. 2020 March: The Army assessed the five initial designs – including each company's ability to deliver on budget and schedule. Yesterday, they chose Bell and Sikorsky to build prototypes. Each company has already received a “digital model” of how their design must conform to the Modular Open Systems Architecture (MOSA), which will allow the government to plug-and-play MOSA-compliant components from any company, not just the manufacturer, over the life of the program, program manager Dan Bailey said: “We, the government, will control the interfaces internal to the aircraft so we can efficiently upgrade.” December: The Army will conduct a Final Design Review of both designs to confirm “that they are postured for success and risk is acceptable,” Bailey said. “After that, they will begin to build the aircraft.” 2021 Bell and Sikorsky build their prototypes. Despite their very different designs, each company must incorporate certain common Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) provide by the Army. That includes a 20mm cannon; the GE T909 Improved Turbine Engine, which will also be retrofitted to existing Apache and Black Hawk helicopters; and the Integrated Munitions Launcher (IML), which will use MOSA interface standards to connect missiles and ALE mini-drones to the aircraft – without having to modify the aircraft each time a new weapon is developed. If the Army's 2021 budget request is approved, this year the service will buy $152 million of Spike NLOS (Non-Line-Of-Sight) missiles from Israel armsmaker Rafael as an interim Long Range Precision Munition. 2022 Bell and Sikorsky begin ground testing of their prototypes. The Army fields Spike-NLOS missiles on existing aircraft across three Combat Aviation Brigades (CABs), providing both immediate combat power and hands-on experience with the technology to refine either the Spike or a competitor into the full-up LRPM. November: The Bell 360 Invictus and Sikorsky Raider-X fly for the first time. Flight testing begins. 2023 Summer: The prototype aircraft move from their builders' test sites to Redstone Arsenal to begin Army flight testing with all-government crews. The Army finalizes its formal requirements for FARA based on how the prototypes actually perform. Fall: The Army conducts a Weapons System Preliminary Design Review – that is, not of the aircraft alone, but of how all the pieces work together – and, in context of that holistic assessment, selects either Bell or Sikorsky to build the aircraft. By December 31st: The Army launches an official Program Of Record (POR) to acquire FARA. While the first few aircraft will cost more, the service's long-term goal is to spend no more than $30 million per FARA, the same price as the current AH-64 Apache gunship. 2024-2025 The Air-Launched Effects (ALE) mini-drones begin to enter service on existing Army aircraft. As with the Spike missile, this early deployment provides both immediate military benefit and the necessary experience to refine the technology for FARA. 2028-2030 The first FARA aircraft enter operational service. The Army hasn't specified how many it ultimately plans to build or for what price. But the Army's Program Executive Officer (PEO) for Aviation, Patrick Mason, told reporters today that “I have no reason to disagree with” widely circulated independent estimates of 300-400 aircraft for $15-20 billion. “We've got a series of gates” over the years, Mason said. “This is a constant assessment as we go through, and this is really the beauty and benefit of the prototyping design of this program: We will get to see both vendors as they go to their final designs and they build their prototype air vehicle, as we simultaneously carry forward [with] the other elements that are part of the FVL ecosystem.” “We're going to see very, very clear indication of the technology maturity, the readiness, and the ability of the prototype aircraft to meet the requirements,” he said. Novel Contracts, Novel Technology, Tight Schedule It's worth delving into some detail on what happened yesterday, when the Army announced that Bell and Sikorsky would get the chance to build competing prototypes of FARA – the Bell 360 Invictus and the Sikorsky Raider-X – while designs from AVX, Boeing, and Karem were rejected. Each of the five companies had received up to $15 million for design work, while Bell and Sikorsky will each get up to $735 million more to build and test their prototypes. The exact figures are competition-sensitive, and each vendor has invested much of its own money in any case. The contracts call for one-third private funding and two-thirds government funding over the design and prototyping phases combined, but the companies have almost certainly outspent the government so far. Technically, FARA program manager Dan Bailey told reporters, “we actually aren't awarding anything at this time.” Instead, last April, all five contenders got Other Transaction Authority Prototyping (OTAP) contracts for both the design and prototyping phases, but with clauses allowing the Army to cut any vendor at any time. It's that option they've just exercised. Rather than making an award, Bailey said, “yesterday, we notified two that we would continue to fund them into Phase 2 and we notified three that we would stop funding them.” (Emphasis ours). This novel approach, among other benefits, is nigh-impossible for losing bidders to appeal against, Rugen said: “There really is no ability to protest per se with the GAO [Government Accountability Office]. There is legal recourse potentially through the courts but, again, our legal team has advised us the risk is low.” That's helpful because – as the JEDI cloud computing contract proves – legal battles can delay Defense Department programs for months. The Army has a tight timeline for FARA, which it sees as essential to fill the gap in its aerial reconnaissance capability left by the retirement of the aging and much-upgraded Bell OH-58 Kiowa. While the competing designs are very different, Army simulations so far show that either would meet the military needs “Both are advanced rotorcraft configurations,” Brig. Gen. Rugen said. “Both did very well with speed, range, endurance at range, in our European scenario.... The power [for] takeoff with payload out of ground effect was also, again, leap-ahead.” The Bell 360 Invictus is basically a conventional helicopter with small wings for added lift, using fly-by-wire and rotor technology developed for the civilian Bell 525. The Sikorsky Raider-X is a compound helicopter with coaxial rotors and a pusher propeller for added thrust, derived from Sikorsky's S-97 Raider – which is a real, flight-testing aircraft – and ultimately the award-winning X2. “The X2 technology continues to impress,” Rugen said. While Bell's design may not have struck some observers as revolutionary, he said, “the efficiency” with which Bell's engineers stripped out every possible bit of drag – allowing much higher speeds – “was truly innovative. “We've got two great competitors ... on a program that we must deliver for the Army,” Rugen said. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/03/fvl-the-armys-10-year-plan-for-fara-scout

New Future Vertical Lift aircraft are just part of the solution. So are new tactics and technology upgrades for existing helicopters. By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR WASHINGTON: Drones. Helicopters. Networks. Revolutionary future aircraft. Pressing current missions. Every week, the seven senior officers of the Army's aviation community get together – in person or virtually – to check their collective bearings on all these issues and adjust their course into the future. Last month, I had the privilege of speaking to all seven as part of that weekly meeting. The “six-pack plus one” represents institutions across the Army: Maj. Gen. David Francis heads the helicopter training “schoolhouse” in Fort Rucker, Ala., formally known as the US Army Aviation Center of Excellence. Maj. Gen. Todd Royar heads Army Aviation & Missile Command (AMCOM), headquartered at Redstone Arsenal, Ala., which supports maintenance and sustainment Army-wide. Brig. Gen. Michael McCurry is director of Army aviation on the Army's headquarters staff in the Pentagon, under the Deputy Chief of Staff of the Army for Operations, Plans, & Training (G3/5/7). Brig. Gen. Allan Pepin leads US Army Special Operations Aviation Command (USASOAC), which handles the unique air support needs of special ops forces. Col. Robert Barrie is the Deputy Program Executive Officer for PEO Aviation, the Army's aviation acquisition organization; he was standing in for the PEO, Patrick Mason. Mr. Geoff Downer directs special operations programs at Army Aviation and Missile Command. He's a member of the Senior Executive Service, making him the civilian equivalent of a general. Brig. Gen. Walter Rugen – the “plus one” added in recent years to the longstanding six-pack – heads the newest organization on the list: the Future Vertical Lift Cross Functional Team (FVL CFT) at the 17-month-old Army Futures Command. “If we have a failure, we have a culture where anybody in the six-pack can raise a red flag of concern,” Brig. Gen. Pepin said. “And if there's concern among the six-pack, we're willing to tell the senior leaders early, so we do not go down the road of lost investments.” We've used choice pieces of this hour-plus interview in our Future Vertical Lift articles so far, but as we wind up our FVL series, we wanted to give our readers the chance to hear from these leaders at greater length, in their own words (edited for clarity and brevity). Gen. David Francis Maj. Gen. David FRANCIS Commander, US Army Aviation Center of Excellence, Fort Rucker, Ala.: Speaking with you here today is what we affectionately refer to as the six-pack-plus-one. It's the senior officers that affect every aspect of Army Aviation. Oftentimes in aviation, we focus on material piece of this, just because of the cost – but you should understand that there are multiple things happening continuously. It's more than just the airframes themselves. There's a whole host of things that we look at, from potentially changing some of our infrastructure in terms of hangers and so forth to accommodate Future Vertical Lift, to how are we going to train? Brig. Gen. Allan Pepin Brig. Gen. Allan PEPIN Commander, US Army Special Operations Aviation Command (USASOAC): Tactics, techniques, and procedures alone won't allow you to fly into a contested environment and survive. And using technology alone will not let you survive. It has to be a combination of both technology and how we train. FRANCIS, Aviation Center: In counterinsurgency operations, the threat has allowed us to operate at altitude, above 1,000 feet, routinely. As we look to large-scale combat operations, we know that the threat will drive us lower [i.e. to evade radar]. That changes the way we train to fight that fight. When we operate in COIN, we operate in smaller elements [i.e. two helicopters or four on a mission]. When we get to large-scale combat operations, we have to operate more at a battalion level [i.e. 18-24 aircraft]. That means that what we have to be able to do, regardless of the platform, is train to that level of proficiency. Not only are we training our aviation forces, we're training as part of a combined-arms team — with ground-maneuver elements, with fires, with cyber, and all of the multi-domain things that we're going to bring to bear in a fight. We are also working, for the first time, on a distinct Aviation supporting concept to talk about how Aviation will fight and contribute in Multi-Domain Operations in 2028. This will all inform the Army concept, which will in turn inform the joint concept that is being written at the joint staff level as we speak. Brig. Gen. Walter Rugen Brig. Gen. Walter RUGEN Director, Future Vertical Lift Cross Functional Team (FVL CFT), Army Futures Command: We are converging with the other services. It's Joint All Domain Operations, no matter the domain. [The official domains of military operations are land, sea, air, space, and cyberspace – ed.]. We need an interface to communicate critical data, whether that data is sustainment or in the tactical operations realm. When you look at our lines of effort – the FARA [Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft], the future UAS [Unmanned Aerial Systems, i.e. drones], FLRAA [Future Long-Range Assault Aircraft] — those are important. But it really is the ecosystem that they bring. FRANCIS, Aviation Center: We know that as we go into a Multi-Domain Operations fight, our enduring fleet – the fleet that we have today, which consists of UH-6OM Black Hawks, AH-64E Apaches and CH-47F Chinooks – stays with us into the 2040s. So not only are we concerned about how we get to Future Vertical Lift, and the capability that brings, we're doing targeted modernization to our enduring fleet. What we have to do is improve our stand-off and our survivability with the introduction of some technology that will be available prior to the actual FVL platform, like the Long-Range Precision Munition and Air-Launched Effects [i.e. multi-purpose mini-drones]. Those combined, we think, will keep us very, very competitive in that [anti-aircraft] environment until we get the increased speed and survivability of our Future Vertical Lift platforms. RUGEN, Futures Command: When we look at ALE and Long-Range Precision Munition, what we're finding, in our modeling and our experimentation at Yuma last year, is you really generate that stand-off and overmatch against threats. We can stay outside their weapon engagement zone and put effects on them. Air-Launched Effects are what is going to find and fix these threats, and then what the Long-Range Precision Munition is going to do is finish that threat. In the Presidents' Budget [request for] 2021, there's $152 million dedicated to getting Spike N-LOS missiles into up to three Combat Aviation Brigades in the swiftest possible manner. We're currently projecting that it would be an FY22 initial capability. We're currently projecting that it would be an FY'22 initial [operational] capability. But that's just our initial increment of the Long-Range Precision Munition. We will follow that on with more detailed requirements to fix some of the challenges that we see already with Spike [and] improve upon that capability. FRANCIS, Aviation Center: Another example is the ITEP [Improved Turbine Engine Program]. That's going to be the engine that goes into FARA. It's also going to be retrofitted onto our UH-60 and AH-64 fleet. That's an extremely successful, well-funded program that is going to affect both of those fleets. Another is maintenance. Col. Barrie was the previous program manager for the CH-47. He initiated a process for the CH-47 fleet that is starting to bear results today in reducing the maintenance burden. We're looking to expand that across both our attack and utility fleets as well. Col. Robert Barrie Col. Robert BARRIE Deputy Program Executive Officer, PEO Aviation: We're finding ways that we can better leverage our investment dollars in the future. We balance the imperative that we have to modernize [with FVL] and the imperative that we have to maintain the readiness of the enduring fleet. When we're modernizing towards a future capability, are there opportunities [for spin-offs] that can benefit the enduring fleet? In similarly, shame on us if we are doing anything on our enduring fleet that does not reduce the risk for the development of our future fleet. For example, there's the Aviation Mission Common Server. We can now have processing capability that is government owned and the cost will be significantly reduced. As we go forward, we want to reduce risk on whatever we wind up doing for processing capability on our future fleets, but, in the near term, this allows us a processing capability that we have significantly more control over. Geoffrey Downer Mr. Geoff Downer Director of Special Programs, US Army Aviation and Missile Command (AMCOM): How do we miniaturize components and gain capability on these other aircraft? We're working on degraded visual environments, electronic counter measures, terrain following, terrain avoidance. We're losing a lot of aircraft, and about 49 percent of our fatalities, due to degraded visual environment landings [i.e. when the pilot can't see clearly]. So we're actually working to put a degraded visual environment system on the aircraft. The idea is that they use LIDAR and IR cameras, so when the pilot is landing in a brown-out situation, he can look down and have a synthetic display that shows exactly where the obstacles are, with cues to where he can land and where he can't land. We've done testing, and the feedback from the testing is absolutely remarkable. We believe that this is going to add survivability to our enduring fleet. RUGEN, Futures Command: [That said], at the end of the day, we've squeezed everything we can out of these aircraft that were built in an industrial age, a very analog age. We want survivability in those very contested large-scale combat operations [in the future]. We want to be lethal. We want superior reach, so we want speed, range and endurance at range, in our next generation fleet. That's the aspect that the enduring fleet doesn't bring. In our survivability studies, with these advanced rotor craft configurations, we basically saw large percentage increases in survivability, from 24 percent to, in some scenarios, nearly 50 percent more survivable — just based on physical characteristics of the aircraft [i.e. not factoring in new electronics, tactics. etc.] Once our penetration force moves forward, we will generate joint force freedom of maneuver [i.e. not just for the Army, in other words, but for all the services] and our enduring fleet can now start coming forward to help us. Brig. Gen. Michael McCurry Brig. Gen. Michael MCCURRY Director of Army Aviation, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff of the Army for Operations, Plans, & Training (G3/5/7): Once we've kind of fractured the Anti-Access/Area Denial piece in Multi-Domain Operations, then we're able to exploit using some of our enduring fleet systems. That overlap of new and old capabilities — that's not new. I fought in Desert Storm. I flew in OH-58 Kiowa helicopter [which first entered service during Vietnam] and I was teamed with an AH-64 Alpha [which entered service in the 1980s]. We've got to look at, where are the most critical spots to bring capability to first? We will outfit those units [with FVL] first, and then we'll cascade those capabilities throughout the Army. Gen. FRANCIS, Aviation Center: As we always done as Army Aviation, you can't field it all at the same time. So there's a sequence to the fielding plans that are developed based on priorities leveled by the G3 [staff] and the Army. RUGEN, Futures Command: We want it to be backwards and forwards compatible. We have to be able to extend the network forward and integrate it in a denied environment [i.e. in the face of enemy jamming and hacking]. We've done high-fidelity modeling about how to operate in that environment, with waveforms and architecture that will be resilient. Then we followed that up with an experiment in conjunction with our Special Operations partners up at China Lake. We called it A3I: architecture, autonomy, automation and interfaces. That system architecture [has] open systems, interfaces, and gateways, so we can push data machine to machine. We're refining our data formats to auto-populate nine-lines [i.e. calls for urgent medical evacuation], calls for fires [i.e. artillery and air strikes], our production, exploitation and dissemination of intelligence.” Really, the brains behind this is really been our SOF [Special Operations Forces] partners. DOWNER, Special Programs: We set up this demonstration in September of last year, using a Black Hawk [helicopter], a Grey Eagle [drone], and a Small Glide Munition [guided bomb]. SOF is still involved in this, we're still using our team, our resources, and the technology that we developed [to build] the network in the sky. RUGEN, Futures Command: Then, ultimately, probably one of the hardest things we're going to do is affordability. That gets into our sustainment and logistics concept. Long-term, 68 percent of our total cost of ownership is the sustainment of the fleet. Then-Brig. Gen. Todd Royar during a 101st Airborne Division exercise. Maj. Gen. Todd ROYAR Commander, Army Aviation & Missile Command (AMCOM) In our current systems, Army Aviation has done a phenomenal job of leading the Army on condition-based maintenance. We are pretty far out there about collecting data and knowing when something is going to fail. However, we did that by platform, and each individual platform uses a different system to be able to do that. As we move forward, the intent is to go ahead and make sure that we have a common platform for condition-based maintenance. We think this will fundamentally change how maintenance is done, which will ultimately drive down cost. In the draft documents [on FVL], we have put the hooks in there to make sure that industry knows that that is going to be a requirement. When we send out the proposals to industry, we will direct that certain things be common as far as condition-based maintenance is concerned: what they measure, how they measure it, how the ones to zeros are holding, so that the unit can get that same data, regardless of whether they're looking at FARA, FLRAA, or one of our enduring systems. That effort is a combination, primarily, between the PEO and my office. We have touchpoints with Future Vertical Lift, to make sure that for the new systems, those requirements are written in. This will be a component of MOSA, the Modular Open Systems Architecture. RUGEN, Futures Command: The number one challenge we have with MOSA is discipline and management. What allowed the enduring fleet of aircraft to wind up with different architectures [is] there was not a driving central body that said, “this is the architecture that you are going to go with.” With MOSA, we have that. It really comes down to defining that government standard, and defining that government interface, and then holding to it. The PEO has led the charge with the architecture control working group, meeting quarterly, with industry participating. This is aligned with the Network CFT [Cross Functional Team]. PEPIN, Special Ops: We have to be able to adapt quickly, and that MOSA environment is key. We have to break away from just doing more hardware add-ons to platforms, because it takes an incredible amount of time. [With the Modular Open Systems Architecture], all that's just a software upgrade, you reboot and turn it back on again. You can do it at the speed of need. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/03/fvl-qa-7-leaders-on-the-future-of-army-aviation

By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — Lockheed Martin, the world's largest defense contractor, announced a series of steps Friday to bolster the defense-industrial base to keep it humming along and to assist in the broader effort against the new coronavirus outbreak. In a statement posted on Lockheed's website, CEO Marillyn Hewson said the company recognizes “that the rapid spread of COVID-19 and its wide-ranging impacts have caused severe disruption across society and tragic loss of life around the world. We also recognize that the global pandemic has created a need for urgent action by government, business, communities and citizens.” “We will do our part to use our know-how, resources, and leadership as a company to assist our communities and our country during this period of national crisis,” Hewson wrote, before laying out a series of moves she called an “initial contribution” to the COVID-19 relief efforts. The company plans to advance “more than $50 million” to small and medium-sized companies in its supply chain to “ensure they have the financial means to continue to operate, sustain jobs and support the economy.” Pentagon officials and outside experts alike have raised concerns about risk to small companies in the supply chain. Lockheed is also dipping into a $6.5 million disaster relief fund to assist employees and retirees who are impacted by the disease, and will donate $10 million to nonprofit organizations involved in outbreak relief efforts, with an emphasis on veteran and military family issues. Additionally, Hewson pledged the use of the company's corporate aircraft and vehicle fleet for the delivery of medical supplies and for logistical support. She also offered the use of company facilities for “crisis-related activities including critical medical supply storage, distribution, and COVID-19 testing, where needed and practical,” as well as the company's technical and engineering skills if states or the federal government require assistance. The company plans to continue recruitment and hiring despite the current economic downturn, using virtual technology and other social distancing tools. Lockheed brought in more than $53.7 billion in revenue in fiscal 2018, 94 percent of which came from defense contracts, according to the annual Defense News Top 100 rankings. https://www.defensenews.com/news/coronavirus/2020/03/27/lockheed-offers-cash-to-supply-chain-use-of-private-jets-for-covid-19-fight

By: Jill Aitoro WASHINGTON — The merger between two defense giants got the green light from the U.S. Department of Justice, under the condition that divestitures already in the works move forward and another piece of business is shed. According to a March 26 announcement from the DOJ, United Technologies Corp. and Raytheon will need to divest Raytheon's military airborne radios business as well as UTC's military global positioning systems and large space-based optical systems businesses in order to proceed with the proposed merger. The divestitures would satisfy a proposed settlement from the department's Antitrust Division of a civil antitrust lawsuit to block the proposed Raytheon-UTC merger. BAE Systems agreed in January to buy Collins Aerospace's military global positioning system business — which is owned by parent firm UTC — for $1.93 billion and Raytheon's airborne tactical radios business for $275 million. “Today's settlement protects the American taxpayer by preserving competition that leads to lower costs and higher innovation in critical military and defense products,” said Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim of the Antitrust Division. “The merger, as originally proposed, would have eliminated competition in the supply of military airborne radios and military GPS systems, and would have positioned the merged firm to harm rivals capable of making key components for reconnaissance satellites. These horizontal and vertical concerns are resolved by the Division's structural remedy, which includes the divestiture of three separate business units.” Under the terms of the proposed settlement, the companies need to divest Raytheon's military airborne radios business, including facilities in Fort Wayne, Indiana, and Largo, Florida; as well as UTC's military GPS business to BAE Systems or another approved acquirer. The proposed settlement would also require the divestiture of UTC's optical systems business, including a facility in Danbury, Connecticut, to an approved acquirer. Raytheon and UTC announced in June 2019 plans to officially merge into a new entity called Raytheon Technologies Corporation, with the deal at the time expected to close during the first half of 2020. https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2020/03/27/raytheon-utc-look-to-shed-segments-to-win-merger-approval

Jen DiMascio President Donald Trump signed a $2.2 trillion stimulus bill into law March 27, aimed at shielding the U.S. economy from damage done by COVID-19-related closures, and that will also provide assistance to the aerospace and defense industry. In addition to giving businesses numerous incentives to retain employees, the act offers $17 billion in loans and loan guarantees to national security contractors such as Boeing, which had appealed to Congress for $60 billion in relief for itself and its suppliers. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act does attach strings to the loans, restricting companies that accept the money from share buybacks, making increases to executive compensation and instituting layoffs. In a statement issued March 26, Boeing said its CEO and board chairman are giving up their pay, and that the company is extending its dividend and will pause share repurchasing “until further notice.” The law also provides $10.5 billion in new defense spending – primarily for personnel and operations – along with $2.5 billion aimed at maintaining the industrial base. The act “confirms that there is no risk that fiscal 2020 and prior appropriations would be raided to pay for pandemic response costs,” said Byron Callan of Capital Alpha Partners in a note to investors. But he cautioned that analysts and planners have to factor the changes made by the new law when looking toward budgets for fiscal 2021 and beyond. Another stimulus package is likely to follow in April or May, which may include additional funding for defense, Callan added. Industry groups cheered passage of the act. “We encourage federal government officials and lawmakers to continue to support the aerospace and defense industry through the duration of the pandemic and to ensure sector stability during the economic recovery phase,” said the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. “The aerospace and defense contribution to the economy on the other side of the COVID-19 crisis will be crucial for restarting and building the economic engine to its pre-crisis momentum.” The legislation offers “tools and incentives” that will provide support to many small businesses and the supply chain, said Eric Fanning, president and CEO of the Aerospace Industries Association. And David Berteau, president of the Professional Services Council, which represents federal government contractors, is looking to the future, saying that as the impact of the pandemic continues, the council will focus on keeping the government working, keeping contractors working and ensuring that contractors and their employees are paid. Lockheed Martin President and CEO Marillyn Hewson made a related announcement about the company's plan to help with COVID-19 relief, saying it will advance $50 million to small- and medium-sized suppliers, donate $10 million to non-profit COVID-19 relief organizations and set aside a $6.5 million relief fund for its own employees. The company will also offer engineering and technical assistance to government officials, and donate corporate aircraft and vehicles for logistical support, facilities for medical supply storage, distribution and COVID-19 testing. “Finally, during this time of economic uncertainty, we will continue our planned recruiting and hiring,” Hewson said. “Given the requirement for social distancing, Lockheed Martin will deploy virtual technology and other techniques to sustain our hiring activity during this crisis period.” https://aviationweek.com/aerospace/covid-19-stimulus-includes-aerospace-defense-industry-assistance

Steve Trimble The design of the Northrop Grumman B-21's trailing edge has led to speculation about a high-altitude role for the secretive stealth bomber, and new U.S. Air Force statements appear to confirm that analysis. As the U.S. Air Force enters a legally required environmental impact review process for basing the new bomber, service officials disclosed a few new details about the design on large poster boards displayed at public meetings since February. The posters are now available on B21EIS.com, a clearinghouse web site set up by the Air Force to share data during the year-long process to complete the final environmental impact statement. “The B-21 is not expected to use low altitude training routes,” the Air Force poster says. The B-2 was originally conceived as a high-altitude bomber, but a last-minute requirements change during the development phase forced Northrop Grumman to redesign the bomber for a low-altitude mission. As a result, the trailing edge was transformed from a simple W-shape to the sawtooth design seen today. The B-2, like the preceding B-52 and B-1B fleets, need low-altitude training routes. The renderings of the B-21 released by the Air Force so far reveal a trailing edge that resembles the original, high-altitude design for the B-2. The Air Force has never confirmed operational details about the future stealth bomber. Another comment on the Air Force's poster provides the first official description of the B-21's acoustic signature, as well as the performance of the engines. “The B-21 engine noise is expected to be quieter than the B-1B and about the same or quieter than the B-2,” the poster says. Previously, the only detail released by the Air Force about the B-21's engines is that Pratt & Whitney is named as one of seven of Northrop's suppliers. The poster data appears to confirm expectations that the B-21 would use a non-afterburning engine, like the similarly subsonic, flying wing-shaped, B-2. The supersonic B-1B is powered by afterburning engines. The Air Force has selected Ellsworth Air Force Base in South Dakora as the site for the first B-21 operational squadron, followed by Dyess AFB in Texas and Whiteman AFB, Missouri. The environmental impact review is evaluating Ellsworth and Dyess for the main operating beddown 1 location. https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/aircraft-propulsion/new-usaf-materials-hint-high-altitude-role-b-21

Irene Klotz United Launch Alliance (ULA) CEO Tory Bruno is keen on competition, even if that means losing a government contract every now and then, as happened in February when NASA chose a SpaceX Falcon Heavy to launch a science probe to the metal asteroid Psyche in 2022 for $117 million. ULA had offered Psyche mission launch services aboard its workhorse Atlas V for an undisclosed price. “Can't win them all,” Bruno tells Aviation Week. “We win about half, but that's OK. That's how competition is supposed to work. “It's healthy for the government. It's healthy for the industry . . . because we try to be as efficient as we can and to differentiate ourselves, which ultimately usually results in more value for the customer, either in capabilities or in prices,” he adds. Bruno's mettle is being put to the test. This summer, a heated two-year competition to provide national security space launch (NSSL) services through 2027 concludes with the U.S. Air Force deciding whether to retain incumbents ULA and SpaceX or replace one or both with Northrop Grumman and/or Blue Origin. The Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center, in partnership with the National Reconnaissance Office, plans to award firm fixed-price, indefinite-delivery contracts to two domestic launch service providers for procurements in fiscal 2020-24, with work split 60/40%. The NSSL Phase 2 Launch Service Procurement (LSP)—the first such solicitation since 2005—is designed to end dependence on Russian rocket engines for national security space launches, reduce launch costs and spur competition for current and future national security space launches. Unlike its competitors, ULA's business plan rests on winning a Phase 2 award. “We have an entire business plan that presumes we are going to win Phase 2,” Bruno said during a March 10 media roundtable at the Satellite 2020 conference in Washington. If ULA does not win, he added, “We'd have to go evaluate that.” Based on satellite orders compiled by several industry association surveys, Bruno figures there is enough business for two domestic medium-to-heavy-lift launch service providers, and he is confident ULA will be one of them. “There isn't much rocket science to this,” Bruno said. “The launch service provider is at the end of a 5-7-year-long chain. It's going to be about 30-35 launches a year for the next several years,” he said during a March 11 panel session at the conference. “We all need about 8-12 launches a year, at least, to be a sustainable, viable business. That makes room for four [launch service providers]. “The Russians will always have one—it is state-sponsored—they will make sure. Ariane will always exist, the Europeans will make sure. That leaves two for the U.S. because we want to ensure space access via two providers. So that is the right number, and that's why the Air Force will select two very shortly this summer,” Bruno says. The SpaceX View SpaceX looks at the launch market pie with a different eye. First, the company expects more than half of its projected 35-38 Falcon launches this year to carry Starlink satellites manufactured, owned and operated by SpaceX into low Earth orbit (LEO), a project intended to provide global high-speed, low-latency internet service. SpaceX's sixth batch of 60 Starlinks reached orbit on March 18, bringing the constellation head count to about 360. When that number doubles, SpaceX expects to be able to provide seamless internet coverage covering latitudes about 25 deg. north and south of the equator. After 24 launches, with approximately 1,440 Starlinks in orbit, the network will be capable of full global coverage, according to SpaceX President and Chief Operating Officer Gwynne Shotwell. Ultimately, SpaceX plans to operate approximately 12,000 satellites, with a possible expansion to 42,000. The company is still working with the International Telecommunication Union for spectrum allocation and with individual countries for permission to transmit data to and from non-U.S. territories. Starlink's raison d'etre is to bring in enough revenue to carry out the space colonization dream of tech entrepreneur Elon Musk, who founded SpaceX in 2002 with the goal of creating technologies for interplanetary transportation, with a particular eye on Mars. Toward that end Musk, who also serves as SpaceX CEO and chief engineer, is focused on developing the Starship, a two-stage, fully reusable transportation system capable of placing 110 tons (100 metric tons) into LEO. By comparison, the 1960s-era single-use Saturn V Moon rocket could put 154 tons into LEO. SpaceX is counting on revenue from the Starlink constellation to fast-track Starship development. Flying cargo and crew to the International Space Station and launching commercial and government satellites on the existing Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy fleet can bring in up to $3 billion a year, Musk said during a March 9 keynote address at Satellite 2020. Providing broadband should generate an order of magnitude more revenue, probably about $30 billion a year—a fraction of the current $2.8 trillion value of the telecommunications industry, Musk says. “Starlink is not some huge threat to telcos. In fact, it will be helpful to telcos because Starlink will serve the hardest-to-serve customers that telcos otherwise have problems with,” using landlines or cellphone towers, he adds. Shotwell says that even without Starlink, SpaceX is profitable. “Starlink is additive to our business,” she told reporters during a media roundtable in October. “We make money on the core business of SpaceX, which is Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy and Dragons. “We could do Starship just on our own operating income, on our revenue, if we were to spread it out over time,” she added. “But Elon wants to get things done quickly, and so we're spending a lot of money on advancing Starship and Starlink. SpaceX does not need Starlink to be a healthy business.” In support of Phase 2, SpaceX has unveiled plans for a movable tower at its Falcon launch base at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The 284-ft.-tall gantry features 11 floors and doors to shield Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy rockets from rain and wind, while providing a controlled environment to hoist payloads on top of the vehicles as they stand vertically at the pad. SpaceX currently installs payloads horizontally inside hangars near its three launchpads. Some of the national security missions, however, require vertical integration. SpaceX also is working to qualify a longer payload shroud, which likewise is required for some NSSL missions. Starry-eyed SpaceX's passion for the Starship, previously known as the Big Falcon Rocket, caused a rare misstep in the company's quest for U.S. government launch contracts when it included a small role for the megabooster in its LSP developmental Launch Service Agreements (LSA) proposal, a precursor to the ongoing competition for launch services. In 2018, the Air Force awarded three LSA contracts, collectively worth about $2 billion, to ULA, Northrop Grumman and Blue Origin to help defray the costs of developing launch-system prototypes aimed at fulfilling various national security payload delivery requirements. SpaceX's LSA bid included use of the Starship for launch of some of the heaviest payloads and most challenging missions in 2025 and beyond, a scenario the Air Force deemed “high-risk.” SpaceX responded in May 2019 with a federal lawsuit, challenging the Air Force's procurement process. The lawsuit is under consideration in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. An LSA award was not necessary for companies to compete for the LSP Phase 2 program. Ironically, iconoclastic SpaceX, which previously sued the Air Force to speed up the breakup of ULA's 2006-16 monopoly on national security space launch services, is the only Phase 2 contender offering an existing and certified family of launchers. The company, which publishes base pricing on its website, has not disclosed what it would charge for NSSL missions, but SpaceX is well-known for undercutting its competition. Ten years ago, Iridium shopped for launch services to put its next-generation network of 75 communications satellites into orbit. It signed with SpaceX, which at the time was preparing for the first flight of the Falcon 9. SpaceX's bid for the Iridium Next launch campaign—which consisted of eight flights from January 2017 to January 2019 from Vandenberg AFB in California—was $500 million. “My next price from there was $1.2 billion to launch the same 75 satellites,” says Iridium CEO Matt Desch. “Thank God for SpaceX . . . . I'm not sure I could have afforded the second-best price.” Six years later, SpaceX broke ULA's monopoly on the Air Force's launch business with an $83 million winning bid to fly a GPS 3 satellite, undercutting the government's cost estimate, based on previous GPS launches by ULA, by about 40%, the Space and Missile Systems Center said at the time. Price and performance may tip the scales in SpaceX's favor for the upcoming Phase 2 LSP awards. With its March 18 launch, SpaceX has carried out 83 Falcon 9 missions, with one inflight failure and one accident during a prelaunch static test fire that cost another booster and payload. The Falcon Heavy has flown three times, all successfully. The Rocket That Scrum Built One company hoping to wrest the NSSL business away from the incumbents is Northrop Grumman, which presents a very different view of launch market viability. “The Air Force's intent from the beginning is to make sure that our business case didn't depend on them with large numbers of launches,” says Northrop's Charlie Precourt, vice president of propulsion systems. “We're not a launch vehicle searching for lots of different payloads,” he adds. “We're a launch vehicle that is built on existing manufacturing lines, facilities and workforce infrastructure.” Northrop's Phase 2 offering, the Omega, can close its business case with just 3-4 launches per year, far below ULA's estimate of what it takes to sustain a viable medium- to heavy-lift launch service program. Northrop is heavily leveraging investments and existing work for NASA and the defense community to develop the Omega, a family of two-stage, solid-propellant boosters topped with an Aerojet Rocketdyne RL10 upper stage. ULA also is using an RL10 for the upper stage of the Vulcan. “The core of the Omega rocket is in form, fit and function the same as a segment of the SLS [Space Launch System] booster,” says Precourt. “What we're doing is a little bit different than what a launch vehicle company would normally do, which is to pursue lots of different payload customers. We meet that business need for the Air Force in a different way.” But the Omega also is a departure from Northrop's current programs, which include the five-segment solid-rocket motors for NASA's SLS, the air-launched Pegasus booster, the Minotaur and Antares. Northrop used an agile development system called scrum—initially developed by teams to write software in sprints—to design and manufacture the Omega. “We like to call Omega the rocket that scrum built,” says Precourt. “Scrum is about moving faster, how to innovate to go faster and do more in less time.” Between the May 2019 and February 2020 static test firings of the Omega's first and second stages in Promontory, Utah, engineers used scrum methodologies to apply lessons learned, such as determining what the environments were like inside the motor and how it behaves when fired, Precourt says. Both static firings were successful, completing full-scale engine testings planned prior to the Omega's debut launch in 2021. However, the May test, during which the Omega's two 31-ft. solid-propellant rocket motors were ignited, ended with the booster's 18-ft.-long nozzle breaking apart, a function of atmospheric conditions during testing and not an issue for certification or flight, Northrop says. “The nozzle was just one part of the design we analyzed. Our engineers ran in sprints, with the customer as part of the team, to assess data, anchor models and optimize the design,” says Precourt. “By taking a little extra time between the two tests and utilizing scrum, we were able to fully test design improvements without any impact to our launch-readiness date. We're deploying scrum more broadly across the plant as we go.” Under terms of Northrop's $792 million LSA agreement, awarded in 2018 for Omega development and certification work, the company plans to conduct two more full-duration static tests of the first and second stages after the Omega's first two flights, which will be used to certify the booster for national space security missions. Northrop is developing the Omega primarily to provide launch services to the Air Force, but it is also offering the rocket commercially. In December, the company announced it had a customer for the Omega's first flight, one of two missions required prior to flying high-value national security payloads. The debut mission will carry one or two Saturn NationSat geostationary communications satellites. Northrop said it is “converging on an agreement” with a customer for the Omega's second flight, which is expected to launch next summer, says spokeswoman Jennifer Bowman. Winning a follow-on Phase 2 contract is a high priority for Northrop. “We've been working really hard on that,” Precourt tells Aviation Week “Northrop as an entire company is focused on national security space. “We do threat assessment, mission planning, mission control and operations, satellite design and manufacturing [and] direct support of information to the warfighter,” he says. “Launch is a piece of that full-value stream of delivering to the warfighter, so NSSL fits right into the DNA of the company. We're really determined to deliver for the Air Force.” As to what it will take to dethrone an incumbent, Precourt says it is not that unusual: “It all comes down to who is best-prepared and best meets the need. That's what we're working hard to do.” Getting a Toehold Among the four contenders for the Air Force's launch business, Blue Origin's New Glenn offering may be the longest-shot, but even if it does not win a Phase 2 contract, it fully expects to be a key part of the team. That is because the company's BE-4 engines will power the first stages of both ULA's Vulcan rocket and Blue's New Glenn. Company founder Jeff Bezos has invested $2.5 billion in the New Glenn, including a new $200 million, 350,000-ft.2 factory and office complex in Huntsville, Alabama, where BE-4 engines and the New Glenn's BE-3U upper stages will be manufactured. Blue Origin also is expanding New Glenn manufacturing facilities adjacent to Kennedy Space Center. In March, the normally low-profile company displayed videos of the New Glenn's newly completed mission control center, a first-stage fuel tank, which is the rocket's largest structure, and the first completed 23-ft.-long payload fairing. At nearby Cape Canaveral AFS, a launch complex for the New Glenn is under construction, with the booster's debut expected in late 2021. Like SpaceX and Northrop, Blue Origin's future does not hinge on winning a Phase 2 contract. The company won LSA funding, which it says it is using to cover NSSL certification costs and program requirements to develop a West Coast launch site for polar orbits. Blue Origin has signed New Glenn launch contracts with at least five customers—Eutelsat, mμ Space Corp. of Thailand, Sky Perfect JSAT, OneWeb and Telesat—several of which are buying multiple flights. Powered by seven BE-4 engines on its reusable first stage, the New Glenn is designed to carry nearly 50 tons to LEO. “And that is the smallest orbital vehicle we are planning to build and launch,” says Clay Mowry, Blue Origin vice president of sales, marketing and customer experience. Like SpaceX's Musk, Bezos aims to parlay his company's space transportation technology into a future that more closely resembles the science fiction novels both men hold dear. Bezos' vision is for millions of people to be living and working off Earth. ULA and Northrop, meanwhile, seek only to serve the national security mission. The Air Force has never had such ripe pickings. https://aviationweek.com/shows-events/space-symposium/four-bidders-square-over-two-coveted-us-air-force-contracts