Nouvelles

Le rapport sur le marché de À voilure fixe aéronefs militaires fournit la situation actuelle, les opportunités, les contraintes, les moteurs et également les prévisions de croissance du marché d'ici 2023. Analyse approfondie concernant le statut du marché de À voilure fixe aéronefs militaires, le modèle de concurrence des entreprises, les avantages et les inconvénients de la marchandise d'entreprise, les tendances de développement de l'industrie de À voilure fixe aéronefs militaires, les caractéristiques d'implantation industrielle régionale et les politiques économiques, les nouvelles de l'industrie et les politiques par régions ont été jointes en annexe. Les experts prévoient une croissance du marché À voilure fixe aéronefs militaires au TCAC de XX% d'ici 2019-2023. Obtenez un exemple de rapport PDF sur – www.precisionreports.co/enquiry/request-sample/13102602 Le rapport final contient l'impact de COVID-19 sur l'industrie Entreprises clés sur le marché À voilure fixe aéronefs militaires: – Boeing Company, Lockheed Martin, Bae Systems, Airbus, Embraer, Dassault Aviation, Russian Aircraft Corporation Mig, Sagem, Pilatus Aircraft Limited, Alenia Aermachhi, Saab, Eurofighter Typhoon, Kawasaki Heavy Industries Limited, Sukhoi, Turkish Aerospace Industries, Cassidian, Hindustan Aeronautics Limited, Cobham Dynamique du marché: – > Pilotes > Entraves > Opportunités Pour toute question, contactez à – www.precisionreports.co/enquiry/pre-order-enquiry/13102602 Principaux développements du marché:: Janvier 2018: la France cherche à ajouter des avions militaires à voilure fixe pour réduire les coûts d'exploitation helicoptor. Portée du rapport sur le marché À voilure fixe aéronefs militaires: – La chaîne industrielle approfondie comprend l'analyse de la chaîne de valeur, l'analyse du modèle Porter Five Forces et l'analyse de la structure des coûts. Ce rapport sur le marché À voilure fixe aéronefs militaires décrit la situation actuelle, le contexte historique et les prévisions futures. Il fournit des données complètes sur les ventes, la consommation, les statistiques commerciales et les prix de À voilure fixe aéronefs militaires au cours des dernières années. Le rapport À voilure fixe aéronefs militaires indique une mine d'informations sur les fournisseurs de À voilure fixe aéronefs militaires. À voilure fixe aéronefs militaires Les prévisions du marché pour les cinq prochaines années, y compris les volumes et les prix du marché, sont également fournies. Les informations sur l'approvisionnement en matières premières et les consommateurs en aval sont également incluses. Réponses aux questions clés dans ce rapport: – – Quelle sera la taille du marché en 2023 et quel sera le taux de croissance? – Quelles sont les principales tendances du marché? – Qu'est-ce qui anime ce marché À voilure fixe aéronefs militaires? – Quels sont les défis de la croissance du marché? – Qui sont les principaux fournisseurs de cet espace de marché? http://tribune-tours.fr/2020/05/07/marche-a-voilure-fixe-aeronefs-militaires-dici-2023-fabricants-regions-types-applications-et-regions-amerique-du-nord-europe-et-asie-pacifique-amerique-du-sud-moyen-orient-et-afrique/

Nathan Strout The Space Development Agency will provide the unifying element in the Defense Department's future Joint All-Domain Command and Control concept, pulling together tactical networks developed by the services with a constellation of low-Earth orbit satellites. With the JADC2 concept, the department envisions an overarching network capable of connecting sensors to shooters regardless of where they are located. That means U.S. Air Force sensors could feed data to U.S. Army shooters, or even National Reconnaissance Office sensors could send information to U.S. Air Force shooters. “Each of the services have their own way to incorporate [tactical networks], and JADC2 is just a way to make sure they all have the same networking infrastructure to talk to one another, essentially,” SDA Director Derek Tournear said at the C4ISRNET Conference on May 6. “We plug directly into [JADC2] as the space layer to pull all of that communication together.” Service efforts include programs like the Air Force's Advanced Battle Management System and the Army's TITAN ground system. What the Defense Department wants to ensure is that programs like these have a way to share data across the armed services. “All of those are reliant on a way to be able to have a back end to go in space to be able to communicate across one another and across back to [the continental United States], etc. That's where the Space Development Agency's transport layer comes in,” Tournear said. “In fact, in the defense planning guidance, Secretary Esper put out the edict that basically said the transport layer will be the integrating aspect of JADC2 to be able to pull all of this tactical communication together in space.” On May 1, the SDA released its solicitation for the first 10 satellites that will make up its transport layer — a space-based mesh network in low-Earth orbit. When fully developed, that transport layer will provide a global network that various sensors, shooters and tactical networks will be able to plug into for tactical communications. A key part of that effort involves ensuring space-based sensors can feed into the services' battlefield networks in near-real time. Once that transport layer is placed on orbit in 2022, the SDA wants to demonstrate space-based sensor data being downlinked to a ground station, then uplinked to the transport layer for dissemination to the tactical edge via TITAN and Link 16 tactical network. But ultimately, the SDA wants to cut out the ground station and move the data directly from the space-based sensor to the transport layer via optical cross links. That's a stretch goal for those first 10 satellites, and the minimal viable product when the second tranche of 150 satellites is added in 2024, said Tournear. Tournear declined to identify the SDA's mission partners on development of space-based sensors, which will need to use optical inter-satellite cross links to plug into the transport layer. https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/space/2020/05/06/how-low-earth-orbit-satellites-will-enable-jadc2/

By: David B. Larter WASHINGTON — The U.S. Navy selected Fincantieri's FREMM design for its next-generation frigate, but as with most new platforms it will be a long time before the first ship hits the fleet. The contract, awarded May 30, is for up to 10 hulls constructed at Fincantieri's Marinette Marine shipyard in Wisconsin. The Navy intends to buy at least 20 frigates. Here's what we know about what the years ahead will hold: 1) The price tag. According to Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development and Acquisition James Geurts, the first hull will cost $1.281 billion, which includes the design money for both the ship and for the work needed at the shipyard to set up a production line. It also includes all the government-furnished equipment, including things such as Raytheon's AN/SPY-6-derivative radar and Lockheed Martin's Aegis Combat System. Of that $1.281 billion, $795 million will go to the shipyard. The next hulls in the buy should cost significantly less. The Navy is aiming for a price tag of $800 million in 2018 dollars, with the threshold at $950 million. But Geurts thinks he can beat both numbers. An independent cost estimate found the follow-on hulls should cost about $781 million if all 20 are built. “The study shows this ship as selected and the program as designed delivering underneath our objective cost per platform,” Geurts said on a May 30 phone call with reporters. 2) The timeline. Detailed design of the future frigate, known as FFG(X), starts right away, Geurts said, and construction will begin no later than April 2022. The first ship should be delivered in 2026 and should be operational by 2030, with final operational capability declared by 2032, Geurts said. The contract should be wrapped up — all 10 hulls — by 2035. The intention is to buy 20 hulls, though it's unclear whether Marinette will build all 20 or if the Navy will identify a second source. 3) What could go wrong? The Navy feels like it did a lot to get this ship deal right, which could be argued was important given a not-so-hot track record with programs lately. Improving the Navy's performance on lead ships, in the wake of the Ford-class debacle, has been a focus of Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Jim Inhofe, R-Okla. Among the steps the Navy took to retire risk with FFG(X) was to adapt many of the mature systems being designed for the Flight III destroyer program, including the latest version of the Aegis Combat System and a scaled-down version of the AN/SPY-6 radar destined for Flight III. “Some of those efforts are still maturing, such as SPY-6, but from my standpoint I'm very comfortable with how that's proceeding,” said Rear Adm. Casey Moton, program executive officer of unmanned and small combatants. Bringing industry in on the process earlier will also help reduce risk in the lead ship, Moton said. “In general, even before the solicitation went out, the fact that we had industry involved in the conceptual design phase, they were there with us in the requirements; they understood the specifications; we worked with them on cost reduction. Many of the things that tend to trip up lead ships, we took proactive steps to reduce the risk there.” 4) Room to grow. The Navy considered the ability to add new, energy intensive systems on to the ship later in its calculus in selecting FREMM as the FFG(X), according to service officials. During the competition, Fincantieri highlighted that it could fairly easily grow the electrical capacity of the ship, and that all the major computer and engine gear could be swapped out without cutting a hole in the ship, as is often necessary with current classes in the U.S. Navy's inventory. Rick Hunt, a retired Navy three-star admiral who is now a senior Fincantieri executive, told reporters that the company's bid was designed to meet the cost specifications while giving the Navy room to upgrade. “Be flexible in what you do right now, surge to more capacity as soon as we get that [requirement] and be able to grow the ship in lot changes should you need something even greater in the future,” Hunt said. Vice Adm. Jim Kilby, the Navy's top requirements officer, said growth will be important in Navy designs as the service seeks to move away from combating missiles with other missiles. “Understanding how fast the threat is advancing made the service-life allowance so important for us,” Kilby said May 30. “We didn't want [to] define discretely where we are going in the future, so having some margin to include things like directed energy and other systems, that's why it was so important. “We have an extensive laser [science and technology] program in the Navy, we have lasers on some of our ships now. We definitely view it as a requirement for the future as we move into a realm where our launchers are reserved for offensive weapons and our point defense systems are these rechargeable magazines that we can sustain for long periods of time.” 5) Lessons learned. The Navy acquisitions boss feels good about the process that produced the FFG(X) award and thinks it can be a model for other programs. “FFG(X) represents an evolution in the Navy's requirements and acquisition approach, which allowed the acquisition planning, requirements and technical communities along with the shipbuilders to develop requirements for the platform ahead of the release of the detailed design and construction request for proposal," Geurts said. “By integrating the requirements, acquisition planning and design phases, we were able to reduce the span time by nearly six years as compared to traditional platforms. All this was done with an intense focus on cost, acquisition and technical rigor so we got the best value for the war fighter and the taxpayer. It's the best I've seen in the Navy thus far in integrating all the teams together, and it's a model we're building on for future programs.” But it's unclear if a similar approach would work on a clean-sheet, new design the same way it worked for FFG(X), which uses already-developed technologies and a parent design. “Having all the folks in the room early in the process helped move the process along and move it along faster,” said Bryan McGrath, a retired destroyer captain who is now a consultant with The Ferrybridge Group. “The question comes when you consider how applicable duplicating such an effort would be if you were trying to do a clean-sheet design that was incorporating revolutionary technologies, untested technologies, perhaps even undeveloped technologies. That's a different story.” The FFG(X) will be a considerable step forward for the Navy in terms of capability, but isn't exactly a revolutionary platform that may require a different process to arrive at a solution, McGrath said. https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2020/05/05/5-things-you-should-know-about-the-us-navys-new-frigate/

By: Joe Gould WASHINGTON ― Raytheon and Lockheed Martin's joint venture for the Javelin has completed production of its first F-Model of the shoulder-fired anti-tank weapon, meant to be more lethal against advanced armor and soft targets, the companies announced Wednesday. Though there's no contract for international customers yet, Poland could be in line to be the first. The European country recently completed negotiations with the U.S. to buy 180 Javelin missiles and 60 launchers for its paramilitary Territorial Defence Forces, launched in 2016 amid tensions with Russia. “I believe that the Poland case actually hasn't been determined which way it's going to go yet, so they could make the F-Model available to them, or they could take the E-Models out of stock,” said Javelin Joint Venture Vice President Dave Pantano. “That would be up to the government-to-government process to make that determination.” The weapon's final assembly takes place in Troy, Alabama, with 511 in the first lot and deliveries to U.S. government set for this fall. The new model, also known as FGM-148F, has an advanced multipurpose warhead that combines charges to defeat explosive-reactive armor, and it has a fragmenting steel case for striking unarmored and lightly armored targets, according to the team. Its new command launch unit boasts a reduction in weight and an improved target tracker. “The warhead now combines multiple effects into one,” Pantano said. “It multiplies fragmentation, as well as the standard high-explosive anti-tank [charge]. So now the war fighters are prepared for any mission, without having to switch out different rounds for different targets.” Taiwan drew an immediate protest from China last year when the former asked to purchase more than 100 tanks from the U.S., along with air defense and Javelin systems. (Several kinds of Chinese-made tanks have been reportedly seen with explosive-reactive armor.) European allies with an eye on Russian armored vehicles are likely to be interested in the F-Model, according to James Hasik, a defense industry analyst and senior research fellow at George Mason University. “This is definitely about Russian armor. The Javelin is, by all accounts I've heard, a great weapon, but recent developments in active protection systems may lend some concern for its continued ability to reliably destroy tanks. I'd encourage any defense ministry in Europe, but especially those along the eastern frontier, to buy a lot of those or a similar weapon," Hasik told Defense News. “I should also note that the dual-purpose warhead is a welcome feature. The infantry ideally should have a single weapon for engaging multiple types of target. That's less essential with other arms, which may have a few more seconds to think about how to react, and more carrying capacity for multiple types of weapons.” The U.S. announced April 2 that it delivered 128 anti-tank Javelin missiles to Estonia. Polish Defence Minister Mariusz Błaszczak announced in a tweet last month that talks to buy Javelins were complete and that Warsaw was working to get more light anti-tank missiles. “This is not the end of strengthening these abilities,” he said. Days earlier, the U.S. Defense Security Cooperation Agency announced that Poland was cleared to buy the Javelin missiles and 79 command launch units for $100 million. The sale will help Poland “build its long-term defense capacity to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity,” DSCA said. Domestically, the Pentagon last year awarded the joint venture a production contract for 2,100 F-Model missiles after passing qualification tests. The full-rate production agreement for the FGM-148F replaced the FMG-148E (Block 1). The president's fiscal 2021 budget request in February asked Congress for $210 million, or 773 Javelin missiles for the Army and 98 for the Marine Corps; that's up from the $163 million Congress enacted in FY20. In October, the U.S. Army delayed plans to integrate the Javelin atop the Stryker combat vehicle over problems were discovered in connecting the weapon to the vehicle's remote weapons station. The Army also plans to mount a 30mm cannon on the vehicle. Officials with the joint venture expect to restart the Stryker efforts this summer or early fall. Also last year, an Estonian robot at Redstone Arsenal Test Center in Alabama test-fired the missile using a Kongsberg remote launcher on an unmanned ground vehicle. The Titan unmanned ground vehicle was built by Qinetiq North America and the Estonian company Milrem Robotics. https://www.defensenews.com/2020/05/06/deadlier-f-model-javelin-antitank-missile-rolls-into-production/

Valerie Insinna Since the coronavirus pandemic began, the Defense Department has seen a small increase in predatory foreign investment in U.S. companies, such as small drone manufacturers, the Pentagon's head of industrial policy said Wednesday. “In general terms, there has been of an uptick, but it's always been pretty high,” Jennifer Santos, deputy assistant secretary of defense for industrial policy, said Wednesday during the C4ISRNET Conference. The Pentagon has become increasingly concerned about what it calls “adversarial capital” — a tactic whereby foreign nations, particularly China, make investments into U.S. technology startups that are part of the defense market. Once those countries make their investments, they could own or have access to unique American technologies, while the Pentagon loses its own access due to security considerations. With the U.S. economy increasingly fragile due to COVID-19, the Defense Department must be vigilant about potential risk to American companies, Santos said. “We simply cannot afford during this period of economic uncertainty the loss of American know-how in critical tech.” But Santos stopped short of saying the uptick in predatory foreign investment was a direct result of the pandemic, instead noting that the Defense Department recently expanded its existing tools to monitor adversarial capital. One tool, known as the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, allows the government to block a foreign investment attempt on national security grounds. The jurisdiction of that tool increased in February, so the Defense Department has seen a boost in the number of cases it is tracking, Santos said. “Twenty percent of our [gross domestic product] is foreign direct investment, which is fantastic. But there's some areas where there are threats associated with some of that capital, and we want to protect those industry partners,” she said. Over the past eight weeks, the Pentagon hosted 25 teleconferences with industry to help guide companies that might be experiencing financial distress caused by COVID-19. Some of that outreach, such as a webinar held last week, centered around avoiding adversarial capital, Santos said. While her comments on adversarial capital did not center specifically on the small drone industry, she noted that the pandemic has made supply chain vulnerabilities in that sector more apparent to the department. “The market for UAS [unmanned aerial systems] in the United States is dominated primarily by foreign companies, especially Chinese companies,” she said, adding that Chinese firms hold 97 percent of the small UAS market, with about 75 percent of sales in the U.S. commercial market coming from Chinese drone maker DJI. “U.S. firms have struggled to compete in this drone area,” she said. "Even commercial drones manufactured in the United States often use components made in China. We don't know what the exact effects of COVID will be on this small UAS sector, but I know one thing: We will emerge from this stronger.” Brent Ingraham, the Pentagon's unmanned systems technical director, pointed to the American Drone Security Act currently under proposal by Congress. If passed, the legislation would apply the same security restrictions on UAS used by the Defense Department to the rest of the federal government, which would secure industrial opportunities for U.S. vendors that have a trusted supply chain, he said. As the Defense Department looks to expand its base of small UAS manufacturers, one of the military's legacy providers offered a word of caution. "We as a community are all in favor in faster, cheaper, better, but we need to have an exercise in caution when you do that,” said Gorik Hossepian, AeroVironment's vice president of UAS product line management. “Our past is full of examples of when we do those kinds of things, we tend to sacrifice one versus the other. We need to not lose sight that what we need is a balance.” "At the end of the day, the war fighter at the edge of the battlefield ... needs to have a product that is trusted,” he said. “Members of some of our community, to some extent, have that as some of our DNA — the DNA of working with the end user to solve those problems.” https://www.c4isrnet.com/unmanned/2020/05/06/pentagon-reports-boost-in-predatory-foreign-investment-to-us-tech-firms-since-pandemic-start/

By: Sebastian Sprenger COLOGNE, Germany — The German government has given Lockheed Martin and MBDA the go-ahead to bid anew on the TLVS air defense program. The latest request for a proposal, transmitted Wednesday, is the third iteration after previous attempts to draft a contract failed. If the vendor team decides to pursue the business, a new offer is expected by the summer. A Lockheed spokesman confirmed receipt of the solicitation but said the company could not comment further. The program, short for Taktisches Luftverteidigungssystem, is meant to wean Germany off the venerable Patriot air defense weapon. Formerly developed in concert with the United States and Italy, TLVS boasts a 360-degree sensing and shooting capability meant to lower its footprint in the field and allow for intercepts against threats from all directions. The Germans want a system that grants its military operators maximum national autonomy, meaning the government wants to own the rights to relevant software and hardware without having to consult with Washington to employ or modify the weapon. That requirement previously turned out to be a major headache in the negotiations with industry, especially relating to the Lockheed-made interceptor known as the Patriot Advanced Capability-3 Missile Segment Enhancement. It also remains to be seen how firmly Berlin sticks to its guns on the issue in the upcoming round of talks. News of movement in the prospective multibillion-dollar program comes as the German Defence Ministry announced another major acquisition decision last month that continues to make headlines. The government has proposed a split buy of Eurofighter and F-18 fighter jets to replace its Tornado fleet by 2030, prompting spirited debates among German lawmakers, industry advocates and analysts. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/05/06/german-government-asks-lockheed-mbda-to-re-bid-on-missile-defense-system/

Françoise Dumas, présidente de la commission de la défense de l'Assemblée nationale, souligne, dans une tribune au Figaro, que l'industrie française de la défense constitue un outil précieux pour relancer l'économie française. «Un plan de relance à la hauteur des enjeux doit (...) surtout donner un stimulus immédiat à notre économie. Voilà qui plaide pour un focus très puissant en faveur de la défense et, par extension, de l'aéronautique et de l'espace, qui lui sont intrinsèquement liés», déclare notamment Mme Dumas. «L'industrie de défense, l'aéronautique et l'espace sont les grands points forts de la France dans la concurrence internationale. Il faut défendre nos atouts existants, en reprenant le travail lorsque toutes les précautions sanitaires seront réunies et, d'autre part, en préservant nos industries stratégiques de la récession qui frappe le reste de notre économie», poursuit-elle, mettant en garde contre d'éventuelles «coupes budgétaires destructrices dans l'exécution ou dans l'actualisation de la loi de programmation militaire» votée pour les années 2019 à 2025. «Investir dans la défense, c'est ainsi créer des emplois, de la valeur ajoutée et de l'innovation technologique dès à présent ; c'est relancer tout de suite, et non pas plusieurs années plus tard. Ne nous privons pas d'un vecteur de relance plus réactif que les autres», conclut Mme Dumas. Le Figaro du 6 mai

«Il revient aux États de définir les mécanismes de protection des entreprises stratégiques de défense face à des investissements de fonds réputés agressifs», a souligné mardi Éric Trappier, président du GIFAS et PDG de Dassault Aviation. «Aux États-Unis, lorsque des fonds étrangers veulent entrer au capital d'une entreprise américaine ou en prendre le contrôle, le projet est étudié par le CFIUS (Comité sur les Investissements Etrangers aux États-Unis) qui vérifie que cet investissement ne menace pas les intérêts stratégiques américains», a-t-il expliqué. «L'Europe pourrait se doter d'un tel outil. Pour cela, il faut regarder les aspects juridiques, les règles de concurrence car nos entreprises travaillent sur des marchés ouverts, et «détourer» ce qu'est une entreprise stratégique». Jean-Charles Larsonneur, député LREM spécialiste du sujet, interrogé par Le Figaro, met également en garde contre les risques de rachat d'entreprises stratégiques françaises, notamment de la part de la Chine et des Etats-Unis. «On parle de résilience et de souveraineté, alors il faudrait que l'Europe investisse dans sa défense», conseille-t-il. Le Figaro du 6 mai

By: Michael D. Brasseur , Rob Murray , and Sean Trevethan Last December, at their meeting in London, NATO leaders declared: “To stay secure, we must look to the future together. We are addressing the breadth and scale of new technologies to maintain our technological edge, while preserving our values and norms.” These two sentences were, in part, a nod to a significant piece of work the alliance is undertaking within the broader mandate of alliance innovation — NATO's Maritime Unmanned Systems Initiative. Granted, on its own this sounds both technical and narrow within the context of emerging technology, a context that includes: artificial intelligence, data, space, hypersonic weapons, bio technologies, quantum research, autonomy and more. So why are maritime unmanned systems relevant now? Simply put, developing the numbers of manned submarines, aircraft and ships required to keep pace with potential adversaries is simply not economically viable (almost $3 billion per Virginia-class U.S. submarine). Not since the Cold War has NATO needed the volume of maritime forces to protect our seas and oceans from would-be foes. NATO's areas of interest are expanding. As climate change affects the Arctic, new maritime routes are being created, which Russia in particular is exploiting with its submarines and ships. This matters because it exposes a new flank on NATO's high-north periphery, and if left unchecked is a potential vulnerability whilst also being a potential opportunity; this, coupled with an increasing need to protect our undersea data infrastructure means NATO's geostrategic responsibilities continue to grow. Therefore, if allies are to reinforce NATO's maritime posture, deter Russian aggression, guard against Chinese activity, and protect both critical national infrastructure and our sea lines of communication, NATO must do things differently and at the speed of relevance. NATO's Maritime Unmanned Systems Initiative was agreed by 13 defense ministers in October 2018. Since then, the initiative's success has attracted the participation of three more allies and garnered significant interest from all of NATO's maritime nations. The political agreement struck in 2018 provided the mandate for NATO to bring together disparate strands of common work ongoing within nations. NATO, acting as a network, enabled allies to become greater than the sum of their parts. The focus is threefold: utilize world-leading research to increase allied interoperability between conventional forces and unmanned drones; establish new tactics for our sailors to truly leverage these technologies; and develop secure digital communications for military drones across all domains (air, sea and land). Addressing these priorities together will enable this effort to be scaled across the alliance, at pace. To date, the speed of this effort has been breathtaking. So much so that even the United States and the United Kingdom — two allies who have invested the most in this area — are using the NATO initiative as a catalyst for their own national efforts. The last 12-plus months has seen the creation of a NATO project office, a governance body, as well as the planning and successful execution of the world's largest and most complex maritime unmanned systems exercise off the Portuguese coast in September 2019. This event brought together the very best from our navies, industry, scientific institutes and academia. The results were hugely impressive, with many “world firsts” including maritime unmanned systems augmenting conventional forces through multiple scenarios. We now have vast swaths of insight and information to start achieving those three goals of improving interoperability, enhancing our tactics and developing secure communications. The goal of improving allied interoperability is actually about enhancing standards. A topic often overlooked at the policy level but critical to the DNA of the NATO alliance. Standards drive interoperability, which in turn drives readiness, which ultimately aids deterrence. As NATO leads the development of new technologies, so too must come new standards that our industries and military can implement. Open architectures will be key, but allies and industry need to realize that we need to solve problems — not address requirements. No perfect solution will ever be delivered on the first attempt. The alliance will need to both innovate and iterate on operations in order to maintain advantage. This may be a cultural shift to some acquisition purists who are used to developing complex warships over 20-plus-year time frames. However, the challenge remains our ability to scale. With this project we have an agile global team functioning across multiple national and allied bureaucracies, each with their own culture and ways of working. Through engagement and investment, this team is yielding disproportionate results. Indeed, 2019 demonstrated what can be done with some imagination, effort and focus. But continual growth at speed will require faith by allies to maintain the course. Such is the nature of true change and innovation. There is a lot to do, and the stakes are high. Near-peer competitors are once again very real. Despite the global lockdown caused by the new coronavirus, COVID-19, the initiative continues to progress through synthetic networks and simulation, driven by passion and intent. Our economy, our data and its infrastructure still need protecting, now more than ever. This effort strives to accelerate maritime unmanned systems into NATO's arsenal to patrol the vast swaths of ocean and offset evolving threats. Success will be seen because it is being built on allied nations' shared values and norms, the same values and norms that NATO leaders recognized in London last year. Michael D. Brasseur is the director of naval armaments cooperation for the U.S. mission to NATO. He is also the first director of NATO's “startup,” the Maritime Unmanned Systems Innovation and Coordination Cell. Rob Murray is the head of innovation at NATO Headquarters. Sean Trevethan is the fleet robotics officer of the British Royal Navy, working in the future capability division at Navy Command Headquarters in Portsmouth, England. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/04/20/natos-start-up-charts-a-bold-future-in-maritime-unmanned-systems