Nouvelles

Olivier Gosset L'offre française de partenariat stratégique n'a jamais été étudiée dans le détail. La version complète n'a d'ailleurs pas été déposée auprès des autorités du pays. La proposition de partenariat stratégique mise sur la table par Paris pour le remplacement des F-16 n'a jusqu'ici pas été examinée en détail par la Belgique, dont les autorités ne sont même pas en possession de l'offre complète, a-t-on appris d'une source proche du dossier. La France a décidé de ne pas participer à l'appel d'offres (Request for Government Proposal ou RfGP) lancé en mars 2017 par la Belgique pour l'achat de 34 chasseurs-bombardiers de nouvelle génération. S'engageant dans une autre voie, Paris a fait parvenir le 6 septembre 2017 au cabinet du ministre belge de la Défense, Steven Vandeput, une lettre proposant un "partenariat approfondi et structurant" fondé sur l'avion de combat Rafale. Une coopération allant bien au-delà de la seule fourniture d'avions de combat, selon les responsables français. La proposition française est restée cantonnée au niveau du cabinet de la Défense. Quelques éléments de cette offre ont filtré, principalement en ce qui concerne les retombées industrielles potentielles si la Belgique achète le Rafale. Des retours économiques que la France chiffre à 20 milliards d'euros sur 20 ans. Ensuite, plus rien! Du moins jusqu'au 15 mai dernier, lorsqu'une délégation de membres du cabinet de la ministre française des Armées, Florence Parly, s'est rendue à Bruxelles – pour la première fois en huit mois – dans le but d'expliciter auprès de leurs homologues belges l'offre française. Mais la proposition n'a pas été réellement scrutée à la loupe ni examinée sous tous les angles, puisque le document complet, qui fait plus de 3.000 pages, n'a jamais été formellement déposé en Belgique. À l'exception de la Défense, aucun cabinet belge n'a été autorisé à recevoir des représentants de l'Hexagone, et encore moins à réceptionner le volumineux dossier. Que ce soit au niveau du Premier ministre ou des Affaires étrangères. Aucun contact, même informel, ne semble avoir eu lieu non plus avec le SPF Économie ou le cabinet qui le chapeaute. Bref, la proposition française – ou du moins son résumé – est restée cantonnée au niveau du cabinet de la Défense qui, de son côté il est vrai, était tenu de travailler dans le seul cadre de l'appel d'offres en l'absence de décision politique du gouvernement remettant cette procédure en cause. Rien de nouveau? Dans ces conditions, il n'est pas étonnant que ce même cabinet ait toujours jugé non pertinente l'offre française. Ou qu'il ait indiqué n'avoir "rien entendu de nouveau" lors de la visite des émissaires français il y a quelques semaines. Que les experts militaires de l'équipe Accap, chargée d'évaluer les deux offres finales considérées comme juridiquement valables, n'aient pas pris en compte la proposition française, rien de plus normal. Pour rappel, les deux candidats qui ont remis des offres en bonne et due forme sont les Etats-Unis avec le F-35 Lightning II de Lockheed Martin et l'Eurofighter Typhoon du consortium européen éponyme. Le rapport de ces experts se trouve désormais sur le bureau de leur ministre, qui doit le transmettre au kern. Par contre, que le contenu du partenariat français n'ait jamais été examiné de près à un autre niveau en l'absence de tout engagement, voilà qui a de quoi surprendre. D'abord parce qu'il contient visiblement des éléments intéressants, comme une éventuelle participation au programme de Système de combat aérien du futur (Scaf) franco-allemand, ou encore, selon nos informations, une période très courte (sur moins de trois ans) pour la livraison des 34 appareils, quel que soit le moment où le contrat serait signé. Par ailleurs, le gouvernement belge serait bien avisé de garder plusieurs fers au feu. Parce que le résultat de l'appel d'offres risque de se heurter à des obstacles géopolitiques imprévus. Il ne va pas être très aisé en effet de justifier l'éventuelle acquisition d'appareils américains alors que l'administration Trump a déclaré une guerre commerciale au Vieux continent et que Paris et Berlin tentent de relancer l'Europe de la défense. https://www.lecho.be/entreprises/defense-aeronautique/la-belgique-a-survole-l-offre-de-dassault-pour-le-remplacement-des-f-16/10021780.html

U.S. President Donald Trump's tirade against Canada and threats to punish the country could undermine efforts by American firms trying to sell fighter jets and other military equipment to the Canadian Forces, warn defence and industry analysts. One European firm, Airbus, has already been talking with Canadian officials to pitch its plan to build fighter jets in Quebec as it positions itself to win the $16-billion deal to replace CF-18 aircraft. An Italian aerospace firm, Leonardo, is looking at building helicopters in Nova Scotia as it moves towards negotiations for a search-and-rescue aircraft modernization project the Department of National Defence says will be worth between $1 billion and $5 billion. Trump has hit Canadian aluminum and steel with tariffs, claiming their import is a threat to national security. After the weekend G7 meeting and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's reaffirming that Canada would reciprocate with tariffs on specific U.S. products, Trump vowed more economic grief that will “cost a lot of money for the people of Canada.” Trump's move comes at a time when European firms are courting the Canadian government, particularly on big-ticket defence items such as aircraft and warships. Billions of dollars in new purchases are potentially at stake and European firms had a strong presence at the recent CANSEC military equipment trade show in Ottawa. “Trump certainly isn't helping U.S. defence companies who want to sell to Canada,” said Martin Shadwick, a defence analyst in Toronto. “It would be very difficult at this point from a political optics point of view for the government to announce awarding contracts to any American firm.” Shadwick said whether that situation will continue for the next several years, when for instance the decision on new fighter jets is supposed to be made, would depend on any further actions by the president. Two U.S. aircraft, the Boeing Super Hornet and the Lockheed Martin F-35, are among the top contenders in that jet competition. The other three aircraft are from European companies. An earlier trade dispute with Canada has already backfired on Boeing and the Trump administration, costing the U.S. billions in fighter jet sales. Last year Boeing complained to the U.S. Commerce Department that Canadian subsidies for Quebec-based Bombardier allowed it to sell its civilian passenger aircraft in the U.S. at cut-rate prices. As a result, the Trump administration brought in a tariff of almost 300 per cent against Bombardier aircraft sold in the U.S. In retaliation, Canada decided against buying 18 new Super Hornet fighter jets from Boeing. That deal would have been worth more than US$5 billion. Christyn Cianfarani, president of the Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries, said it is too early to determine the impact of the U.S. tariffs on the domestic defence industry. “Tariffs are never good for trade or business,” she added. “CADSI is monitoring the issue and consulting our members to better understand the potential impact to Canadian firms, both in terms of the direct impact of any tariffs and the more indirect, long term impact on supply chains and market access,” she said. There is growing concern that Canadian aviation firms could be hurt by Trump's aluminum tariffs. The Aerospace Industries Association of Canada did not respond to a request for comment. But its counterpart in the U.S. has voiced concern that American aerospace companies could feel pain. In March, the U.S. Aerospace Industries Association noted it was deeply concerned about Trump's tariffs on steel and aluminum as it “will raise costs and disrupt the supply chain, putting U.S. global competitiveness at risk.” “There is also a significant threat for retaliation from other countries towards American made products,” the association noted in a statement. Canada is the largest exporter of aluminum and steel to the U.S. http://nationalpost.com/news/politics/trade-dispute-could-leave-u-s-firms-out-of-the-running-to-sell-military-equipment-to-canada

WASHINGTON — Pratt & Whitney is developing upgrades to the F-35's engine that will give it the power and cooling necessary to make the U.S. Defense Department's most sensor-heavy fighter jet even more of a powerhouse. The new Growth Option 2.0 upgrade for the F135 engine, launched on Tuesday, adds a more advanced power and thermal management system that could be used to help the F-35 incorporate new weapons and sensors, the company said. It also integrates a new compressor and turbine technologies that yield greater thrust and fuel savings, which were part of the Growth Option 1.0 concept unveiled in 2017. In a June 12 interview with Defense News, Matthew Bromberg, president of Pratt & Whitney's military engines unit, said the company decided to work on improvements to the F135's power and thermal management system, or PTMS, based on feedback from the F-35 Joint Program Office. Pratt in 2017 tested an early version of the Growth Option 1.0 motor called the fuel burn reduction demonstrator engine, which demonstrated that the upgrade could improve thrust by up to 10 percent and reduce fuel consumption by up to 6 percent. But while the community that flies the F-35B short-takeoff-and-vertical-landing variant was gung-ho on the thrust improvements, the JPO said that better power and cooling was what was really needed — especially as the program transitions from the development phase to modernization, also known as Block 4 or Continuous Capability Development and Delivery, Bromberg said. Pratt has already begun testing some technologies from the Growth Option 2.0 suite in various rigs and demonstrators. Bromberg called the upgrades “relatively low risk” and said it could probably be proven out in a four-year technology demonstration program. But he declined to talk about completed testing or to quantify the new power and cooling improvements, saying only that they were “significant.” Although the Defense Department hasn't signed onto an upgraded F135 engine as part of the Continuous Capability Development and Delivery effort, Pratt executives have been hopeful that it will do so as it finalizes that strategy. “As the F-35 program moves forward with the Continuous Capability Development and Delivery strategy, we strive to stay in front of propulsion advances needed to enable F-35 modernization,” Bromberg said in a statement. “We're continuously assessing customer needs and responding with technology options to keep them ahead of evolving threats.” https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2018/06/13/pratt-whitney-is-pitching-a-new-version-of-the-f-35-engine/

The U.S. House of Representatives issued a rebuke to the Air Force's long-awaited space object tracking system in the annual defense authorization bill, which passed May 24. An amendment to the fiscal 2019 National Defense Authorization Act restricted all funding to theAir Force's Joint Space Operations Center (JSpOC) Mission System (JMS) until the Pentagon can show Congress that the program's contract embraces “best-in-breed” technology to fill gaps in current space situational capabilities. The White House objected to the decision from Congress, arguing that excessive oversight will impose a burden on the Air Force, further delaying the already time strained program. “This provision will add additional cost and schedule to [JMS] and delay delivery of a critical space situational awareness capability to the warfighter,” administration officials said in a statement. A final version of the bill must pass both chambers of Congress. The Government Accountability Office released a report May 24 detailing the continued setbacks of the second increment of JSpOC JMS. The report says the program has been delayed by two years and 11 months and attributed the slip to the $18.9 million in funding reductions through fiscal years 2013 and 2014. The GAO has said the total cost of the second increment of the program is about $320 million. The JMS will replace the Air Force's Space Defense Operations Center (SPADOC), a system long begrudged by officials as dilapidated and difficult to maintain. Gen. John Hyten, the former head of Air Force Space Command, once described the legacy system as “that ancient engine that can't take data from anywhere unless it's one of ours.” Despite continued calls for system upgrades, the new system is currently scheduled to be launched in June 2019, almost three years later than its original schedule date of July 2016. In the GAO's analysis of the program, the congressional watchdog was unable to obtain performance data from JMS because the program is still in an “early development” phase. In September 2016, after missing a key deadline, the Air Force issued to Congress a critical change report regarding the JMS, formally eliminating several of the program's capability goals and delaying its estimated delivery date from July 2016 to May 2019. The JMS is part of a larger effort from the Air Force to modernize the Joint Space Operations Center, the processing center of U.S. military space operations. The program aims to replace or upgrade the hardware and software currently used for space surveillance, collision avoidance, launch support, and providing more precise and timely orbital information from data gathered the service's object tracking system, known as Space Fence. https://www.c4isrnet.com/it-networks/2018/05/31/house-wants-better-tech-at-the-air-forces-space-ops-center/

WASHINGTON — The U.S. government is proceeding with plans to deliver the first F-35 to Turkey, with the country set to accept its first jet on June 21 despite opposition from some in Congress. A Lockheed Martin spokesman confirmed to Defense News that it's still gearing up for a rollout ceremony at its production facilities in Fort Worth next week. “The F-35 program traditionally hosts a ceremony to recognize every U.S. and international customer's first aircraft. The rollout ceremony for Turkey's first F-35 aircraft is scheduled for June 21,” the spokesman said in a written statement to Defense News. “The aircraft will then ferry to Luke Air Force Base, Arizona, where Turkish pilots will join the F-35A training pool.” The Senate is set to vote this week on the annual defense policy bill, which includes language that would prohibit the U.S. government from “transfer of title” to Turkey until the time that the Defense Department submits a report to Congress on removal of Turkey from the F-35 program. But even if that language succeeds in the Senate, the defense policy bill will proceed to conference, where a group of armed services committee members will hammer out differences between the House and Senate versions to emerge with a single, final piece of legislation. That process could take months. Congress's opposition to allowing Turkey to purchase the F-35 hovers around two points: the country's detainment of American pastor Andrew Brunson and a deal to purchase the Russian S-400 air defense system. But for now, it appears that the Defense Department has no plans to keep Turkey from getting its first F-35 or to put restrictions on its use at Luke AFB. Thomas Goffus, the Defense Department's deputy assistant secretary of defense for Europe and NATO, acknowledged during an Atlantic Council event Wednesday that Turkey's acquistion of the S-400 could present the U.S. military and NATO alliance with added technical risks. But he would not go as far to spell out what actions the Defense Department is considering or could consider later down the road — perhaps a sign that the Pentagon is waiting to see how this legislation shakes out. “We have a process to evaluate the risks to Western technology that that [procurement] would present. Our preference is that they do not acquire the S-400,” Goffus said. “Given that, they are a sovereign nation, and they are trying to take care of their defense needs,” he added. “What restrictions are placed on them and what Congress will eventually pass, I can't even speculate on it on this point.” By the time Congress passes legislation that could curb Anakara's F-35 ownership, the country will likely have already started building up its first squadron at Luke AFB. There, Turkish pilots and maintainers will train alongside U.S. ones, moving from academic courseware to live flights. NATO and U.S. Defense Department officials have warned Turkey that if it continues down the path of purchasing the S-400, it will not be able to plug it in with NATO technologies like the F-35. SASC, in its policy bill, echoed those concerns, saying that Turkey's purchase of Russian hardware would “degrade the general security of the NATO alliance [...] and degrade interoperability of the alliance.” After a meeting in Washington with U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo earlier this month, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu expressed confidence that the United States would not only deliver the first F-35 to Turkey as planned, but that it would ultimately decide to continue F-35 sales to Turkey. “Turkey rejects threatening language from the U.S. on the issue, it is not constructive,” Çavuşoğlu said on June 4, according to a report from the Turkish newsgroup Anadolu Agency. Turkey plans to buy 100 F-35As. As a partner of the program, its domestic defense industry helps build the Joint Strike Fighter. Most notably, Turkish Aerospace Industries' serves as a manufacturer of the aircraft's center fuselage. It has also been chosen as a sustainment hub for the international F-35 community. https://www.defensenews.com/smr/nato-priorities/2018/06/13/despite-some-opposition-us-on-course-to-deliver-f-35s-to-turkey-on-june-21/

By EMILY HAWS Department of National Defence deputy minister Jody Thomas says she'll work through the summer to review how the Canadian government buys defence equipment, with a view to paring down the procurement process to get projects out the door quicker. That could even mean more use of sole-source contracts, when it doesn't make sense to hold a competition. She says the department wants to ensure the money outlined in Strong, Secure, Engaged—the government's 20-year defence policy unveiled last year—is spent. The department took flak earlier earlier this year for not having the capacity to push procurement projects outlined in the plan through the system at the expected pace. Speaking at a June 7 conference organized by the Canadian Global Affairs Institute think-tank in Ottawa on the first anniversary of the defence policy, Ms. Thomas suggested switching up the rules around sole-source contracting. She discussed the idea on a panel with other top DND executives Gordon Venner and Bill Matthews, moderated by CGAI defence procurement expert David Perry. “I think what we want to do and what is expected of us is to have an honest conversation,” Ms. Thomas told the audience. “Where we know there's one supplier in the world that is compliant, Five Eyes-compliant, NORAD-compliant, whatever compliancy we need—to run a competition [in that case] where there is no hope of multiple bidders wastes [everyone's] time; it's kind of disingenuous and dishonest,” she said, referring to security alliances of which Canada is a member. “We have to talk to ministers about that, and ministers are open to that conversation.” Mr. Perry said in a separate interview that the change in process would be a big deal, but it would only happen if the government decides its priority is to spend money. The department is trying to determine a better balance between spending and oversight, he said, but it needs to keep in mind that the “objective is to spend money, not follow a thousand steps and do multiple dozens of reviews.” Sometimes government officials try overly hard to make the bid process competitive, said Mr. Perry, so they end up sending to Treasury Board for review some bids that clearly don't meet requirements. This leaves Treasury Board officials with only one compliant bidder, which in turn leads these keepers of the public purse to ask more questions and perhaps conduct reviews. For example, the government is looking at buying one or more tanker aircraft, and is narrowing down the list of eligible companies, said Mr. Perry. There are basically only two companies that sell tankers, Airbus and Boeing, he said. “You set it up so that everyone has a chance, but that doesn't actually mean that you can actually have a really competitive environment that have at least two bids that actually meet all of the mandatory things you need to meet to submit a bid,” he said. Depending on the extent the rules shift, they may require approval from not just Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan (Vancouver South, B.C.), but Treasury Board and the larger cabinet, he added. Conservative MP James Bezan (Selkirk-Interlake-Eastman, Man.) and NDP MP Randall Garrison (Esquimalt-Saanich-Sooke, B.C.), defence critics for their respective parties, said they support streamlining the procurement process, but Mr. Bezan said the Liberals just need to be more decisive. Industry representatives are also supportive, with the Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries (CADSI) calling the move “refreshing” in an emailed statement. DND is trying to increase its procurement workforce, said Ms. Thomas, adding that the procurement process is the same regardless of whether the contract is worth $1-million or $1-billion. Ms. Thomas, who has been in her role since October, said the rules were put in place after the department received criticism from the auditor general. “We've been risk-averse and we've been criticized, so a deputy's normal reaction to criticism or recommendations from the auditor general is to put process in place,” she said. “I absolutely understand that; we need to make sure it's appropriate to the complexity of the project.” She said she's going to work through the summer to analyze the number of steps in the procurement process to determine the value they serve and where they can be reduced. Ms. Thomas said she will create “sort of a lean methodology of the number of hands something has to touch, how long do we spend in project definition, [and] how long we spend in options analysis.” Byrne Furlong, a spokesperson for the defence minister, said in an emailed statement the review will accelerate approvals and delivery. “Ensuring our Canadian Armed Forces [are] well-equipped to deliver on what Canada requires of them is a significant undertaking,” she said, adding the government is committed to doing so. New defence policy ups procurement spending Earlier this year, Mr. Perry authored a report suggesting the procurement plans laid out in Strong, Secure, Engaged could be threatened by long-standing process problems. The new policy would see procurement ramp up from about $3.5-billion to $4-billion annually, in 2018-19 dollars, to $12-billion. Defence procurement budgets were cut from about 1990 until the mid-2000s, he said. Now Prime Minister Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Que.) is trying to play catch-up, but there's a bottlenecking of purchases. The government both doesn't have enough people to approve the projects, nor the quality of experience to work the larger, more technical jobs, Mr. Perry said in a previous interview. There are five critical steps to procuring defence equipment which spans from identification to close-out. Most work is done by DND to determine what it needs, said Mr. Perry, but the actual competition is run by Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC). The change in rules Ms. Thomas is contemplating would only apply to DND, she said, as that's her jurisdiction. CADSI president Christyn Cianfarani said, to her knowledge, a review in such a systematic way hasn't been done for some time. She said she sees the move as positive, allowing the government to properly balance risk and acquisition. “With the launch of SSE and the Investment Plan, the deputy minister's call to review the system is timely,” she said. “In this critical period of recapitalization, we simply cannot expect to move four times the volume of procurement through the same old procurement system.” When asked about the sole-sourcing of contracts, Ms. Cianfarani said competition is just one tool to meet policy objectives. She wants more sole-sourcing to Canadian firms and more Canadian-only competitions between companies with similar capabilities, price, and proven roots in Canada. Liberals just need to decide, says Conservative critic Mr. Bezan said sole-source contracting is almost impossible to do when the country isn't at war because one must argue it's in the best interest of national security and the taxpayer. The Liberals need to be more decisive on what equipment they want to buy, he added, saying they are risk-averse. “Fighter jets is a good example. They have punted the close of the competition—making the decision—until 2021,” he said. “Most countries run these competitions in around a year, and this was launched three to four months ago ... they should be able to close this off and make a decision within six to nine months.” The Conservative government before it tried and failed to procure fighter jets for several years too, incurring political controversy along the way, with accusations of conducting a flawed process of the purchase of billions of dollars. Mr. Garrison said the NDP welcomes efficiencies in the procurement process that benefit the armed forces and support Canadian industry, as well as meet DND targets. https://www.hilltimes.com/2018/06/13/defence-deputy-minister-begin-reviewing-procurement-rules-summer/147489

FORT WORTH, Texas, June 13, 2018 /PRNewswire/ -- Lockheed Martin [NYSE: LMT] selected Raytheon [NYSE: RTN] to develop and deliver the next generation Distributed Aperture System (DAS) for the F-35fighter jet. The result of a Lockheed Martin-led competition, the selection will enhance capability and reduce cost. The F-35's DAS collects and sends high resolution, real-time imagery to the pilot's helmet from six infrared cameras mounted around the aircraft, allowing pilots to see the environment around them – day or night. With the ability to detect and track threats from any angle, the F-35 DAS gives pilots unprecedented situational awareness of the battlespace. "The supply chain competition for the next generation F-35 Distributed Aperture System resulted in significant cost savings, reliability and performance improvements," said Greg Ulmer, Lockheed Martin vice president and general manager of the F-35 program. "We are aggressively pursuing cost reduction across the F-35 enterprise and this initiative is a clear demonstration of our unrelenting commitment to reduce costs and deliver transformational capabilities for the warfighter." Reduce Costs, Increased Performance The Raytheon-built DAS will be integrated into F-35 aircraft starting with Lot 15 aircraft, expected to begin deliveries in 2023. The next generation DAS system is estimated to generate the following results compared to the current system: More than $3 billion in life cycle cost savings Approximately 45 percent reduction in unit recurring cost Greater than 50 percent reduction in operations and sustainment cost 5 times more reliability 2 times performance capability improvement The new system will also indirectly benefit aircraft readiness and service manpower requirements "Raytheon's solution delivers next generation capability for the fifth generation F-35," said Roy Azevedo vice president of Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Systems at Raytheon Space and Airborne Systems. "Our focus is on providing pilots every tactical advantage imaginable while ensuring taxpayers receive the best value possible." With stealth technology, advanced sensors, weapons capacity and range, the F-35 is the most lethal, survivable and connected fighter aircraft ever built. More than a fighter jet, the F-35's ability to collect, analyze and share data is a powerful force multiplier enhancing all airborne, surface and ground-based assets in the battlespace and enabling men and women in uniform to execute their mission and come home safe. For additional information, visit www.f35.com. About Lockheed Martin Headquartered in Bethesda, Maryland, Lockheed Martin is a global security and aerospace company that employs approximately 100,000 people worldwide and is principally engaged in the research, design, development, manufacture, integration and sustainment of advanced technology systems, products and services. About Raytheon Raytheon Company, with 2017 sales of $25 billion and 64,000 employees, is a technology and innovation leader specializing in defense, civil government and cybersecurity solutions. With a history of innovation spanning 96 years, Raytheon provides state-of-the-art electronics, mission systems integration, C5I™ products and services, sensing, effects, and mission support for customers in more than 80 countries. Raytheon is headquartered in Waltham, Massachusetts. Follow us on Twitter. https://news.lockheedmartin.com/2018-06-13-Lockheed-Martin-Selects-Raytheon-to-Deliver-Next-Generation-F-35-Sensor-System

WASHINGTON — As priorities in Europe evolve, particularly with the threat of Russia growing more profound, industry partners are left to adapt. Defense News spoke to Kim Ernzen, vice president of land warfare systems in Raytheon Missile Systems, to find out the company's approach to meeting customer expectations. EU and NATO cooperation on defense is evolving. As they work out roles, is it challenging for industry? From an international or global footprint, we are looking to continue to expand in international marketspaces. As we look particularly to EU and NATO starting to cooperate more, the EU brings some capabilities to the table. Obviously NATO is typically backed more from the U.S. [But] it's how we merge the capabilities together so the fighting forces have what they need when they go into harm's way. From a U.S. defense industry perspective, we like to make sure we protect the latest and greatest. When we look to international, we work through the normal releasability channels to make sure we can release our products. I think there is going to be increased opportunity, because the threats are continuing to evolve. From a pure RMS perspective, we're well positioned to support [combatting] those threats. We continue to work closely not only with the U.S.-based customer, but through them, the international partners to look at the capabilities they may need. Missile defense remains a huge priority in Europe, but how have hybrid warfare tactics, particularly from Russia, influences defense strategies and as a result the investments? As we as a nation look at how to pivot from urban warfare of the last two decades to what many would consider more traditional warfare, but with added complexities of things like cyberattacks, EW. So now you go into overmatch capability, a long-range standoff capability. Army is focused on how to get long-range precision fires that supports the [combatant commands] in the international footprints, being able to protect the European front against advancing Russia threats. And it's got to have that standup capability, they also have to be able to see further. From a company perspective, we're involved in the PRSM [program] — the new Long Range Precision Fire competition between us and Lockheed Martin. And we're also working to enhance the sighting capability on the vehicle, so they can see farther and identity threats sooner. We see a lot of exercises in Europe. Does industry have enough of a seat at the table? We don't necessarily engage one-on-one with the exercising activities that go on; we'll get feedback through customer communities. This is something we talk with our customers about continually: the more we can be engaged, the more we can bring to bear, whether company investments, a spin on the product; the more we can partner with the customer community, sooner, the better it is for them and us as well. We just haven't necessarily always done that. We've seen a great deal of emphasis on increased defense spending of our European allies. Have you seen a bump up? Or if not, where do you see them focusing in on in terms of spending? We have seen a modest increase, particularly across the munitions fronts. Everyone [is looking] in the cupboard drawer, wanting to make sure they have the right stockpiles should they need to go into any engagement with the enemy. We're also continuing to see internationally more system integrated solutions. Not just coming forward with a product, but how a system would work and operate so they can be more nimble in the battlefield. That's a transition we're seeing. The FMS system can be painful to work through. Have their been improvements? We need to look at [whether we] can start converting more programs to direct commercial sales, depending on where we're at in a lifecycle of a product, and what it is we're trying to protect or throttle. FMS is a slow an laborious process. It hinders industry from capitalizing on market opportunities. The more we can change the paradigm and partner with the government side to do more [direct sales], the more they will benefit long term because they get the volume to drive down prices, and allow us to recoup funds to invests in future technology. But there are challenges, because each branches has organizations that support foreign military sales. There's a balance. As more and more countries seek indigenous capacities as well as a return on defense investments domestically, has the nature of partnership changed? Part of partnering with some of these countries involves offset requirements. Often as we start to partner with indigenous capable industries, it used to be ok to [offer up] basic machining. But there is more pull for being able to put high levels of noble work into these countries. Some are more advanced in capabilities, and as we look to partner, how to do we strike that balance, leveraging some technology they may bring to bear, with what we're trying to keep domestically and protected? It's an interesting paradigm. And a tipping point with how U.S. industry deals with going international. https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/eurosatory/2018/06/12/as-european-defense-evolves-heres-how-industry-is-responding/

Boeing subsidiary Insitu just inked a $117 million contract to provide small unmanned aircraft systems services across the fleet of U.S. Coast Guard National Security Cutters. The award for the Insitu ScanEagle UAS was finalized late last week and announced on Monday. The contract covers installation and deployment of the system, and provides 200 hours of flight time per 30-day patrol, according to the company. The contract marks the end of what had become a multi-year testing process for the Coast Guard to find an unmanned aircraft to assist with its ongoing mission to stop drug smuggling and human trafficking. “The UAS has already proven itself to be a transformational technology, and the deployment of this capability to the entirety of the [National Security Cutter] fleet is an incredibly important first step in realizing the Coast Guard's vision of fleet-wide UAS implementation,” Cmdr. Daniel Broadhurst, unmanned aircraft systems division chief in the Office of Aviation Forces, said in a statement. A draft request for proposal was released in March 2017 after the service hadn't found an existing platform that met the Coast Guard's needs, USNI News previously reported. The RFP had stated the Coast Guard was looking for a “persistent, tactical airborne intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capability that can remain airborne for at least twelve hours per day.” The Coast Guard had been using ScanEagle in a limited basis when the system deployed aboard USCGC Stratton (WMSL-752). The Coast Guard credits ScanEagle with helping Stratton's crew interdict an estimated $165 million worth of cocaine during a two month period in 2017. “When ScanEagle initially deployed with the Stratton, we recognized what an incredible opportunity we had to partner with the U.S. Coast Guard to bring dynamic improvements to mission effectiveness and change aviation history,” Don Williamson, Insitu Defense vice president and general manager, said in a statement. ScanEagle can remain aloft for more than 24 hours, can cruise at 55 knots with a maximum speed of 90 knots, and has service ceiling of 15,000 feet, according to Insitu. The system is shot from a pneumatic launcher and recovered using a hook and arresting wire. ScanEagle is 8.2-feet long and has a 16-foot wingspan. Insitu plans to start installing ScanEagle hardware on USCGC James (WMSL-754) this fall, then on USCGC Munro (WHEC-724) in early 2019, and on USCGC Bertholf (WMSL-750) in late spring or early summer 2019. https://news.usni.org/2018/06/12/34300