Sep. 23, 2013 - By ZACHARY FRYER-BIGGS – Defense News

WASHINGTON — A small provision in the Dodd-Frank Act meant to create transparency surrounding the use of conflict minerals by publicly traded companies is causing concern in the defense industry, as the magnitude of checking the totality of the supply chain comes into focus ahead of a May 2014 deadline.

The provision does not prevent companies from using minerals mined in countries undergoing conflict, but instead requires that they disclose the use of such minerals to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). For the defense industry, where individual components can have a dozen independent contractors, verifying the source of minerals for all of those contractors is an intimidating undertaking.

Initially, several business groups fought the requirement, including the Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers. But an injunction wasn’t granted, and a successful appeal doesn’t look likely, said Christian Marrone, vice president of the Aerospace Industry Association’s (AIA) national security and acquisition policy group.

“If this were the stages of grief, we’re at acceptance,” he said.

Marrone said the association isn’t focused on fighting the provision, which was the basis for an SEC rule, but rather helping members understand how the rule will work and sorting out its mechanics. To that end, AIA plans to send questions to the SEC to try to clarify how the system will work.

The rule, specifically designed to address concerns about minerals mined in the Democratic Republic of the Congo that have fueled years of conflict, applies only to publicly traded companies, which means many contractors in the defense industry won’t be required to file a report on the origin of the minerals they use. That creates something of a problem for prime contractors in particular, because they must get information from privately held subcontractors in order to verify the origin of all the minerals in the systems they acquire.

“When they ask those questions, a lot of the supply chain is private, so how do you compel those individuals to supply that information when they’re not required to?” asked Micah Edmond, assistant vice president for industrial base policy at AIA.

Edmond said that while the May deadline is fast approaching, companies do have a means to give themselves more time. If they file and say that they essentially don’t know the origin of all of the minerals in the supply chain, they can get an extension that will last another year or two, he said.

Exact numbers on how much compliance will cost and how many companies will be affected are difficult to calculate given uncertainty surrounding implementation of the rule. Some estimates put the cost in the billions for the defense industry alone, and the number of companies affected in the hundreds of thousands.

Despite those costs, the rule serves an important purpose, according to Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash., one of the men behind the clause in the House version of the Dodd-Frank Act.

“None of the authors wanted to create undue burden on business, but any discussion of costs would be remiss without including the high human cost of inaction,” he said in a statement provided by his office. “More than 5 million people have been killed in the Democratic Republic of Congo’s civil war. The mining and trade of these minerals has driven the war for over a decade. Manufacturers understand the supply chain and asking them to obtain a certificate is not an undue burden, especially if it will help cut off the funding for rebel groups and put an end to the millions of deaths, untold number of rapes, and slavery of mine workers.”

McDermott pointed to the need to give purchasers visibility on mineral sourcing.

“The law we passed creates the transparency that consumers and investors deserve and will hopefully move the minerals industry to cleaner sources and curb some of the devastation the conflict has left in its wake,” he said.

How a product is built and sourced does seem to have an impact on the consumer market, as seen in the backlash surrounding certain issues with Apple’s supply chain in the last couple of years. Whether those sourcing issues would cause market problems for companies that build products specifically designed to cause death is another question.

Marrone said industry agrees with the intent of the law, but that it forces companies to swallow what may be a large cost in the middle of a budget-cutting environment already causing fiscal pressures.

“I don’t think you’ll find anyone who disagrees with the idea, but it has unintended consequences,” he said. “If you’d done a cost-benefit analysis you probably wouldn’t have done this.”

September 23, 2013 defense-aerospace.com

(Source: Swedish Defence Matériel Agency, FMV; issued Sept. 20, 2013)

(Issued in Swedish only; unofficial translation by defense-aerospace.com)

FMV Takes Delivery of the First Archer SP Gun

BAE Systems Bofors will deliver the first example of the Archer artillery system to FMV on Monday, September 23. The acquisition of Archer is a joint Nordic project together with Norway, and a total of 24 guns have been ordered for the Swedish Armed Forces from BAE Systems Bofors.

“This is a project that delivers one of the best artillery systems. We have met with both successes and setbacks in the project, but now finally delivered the first four vehicles,” says Lena Erixon, Director General FMV.

“The fact that we can now take delivery of the first units is the result of the efforts of our Norwegian partners at FLO, of supplier BAE Systems Bofors - and for that matter also of FMV -- all have helped to get the pieces delivered to the Artillery. They will now be transported to Boden where FMV, FLO and the artillery will continue with trials and training,” says Lena Erixon.

Formal delivery of the first units by BAE Systems Bofors’ Lena Gillström to FMV's Director General Lena Erixon will take place in Karlskoga on Monday, 23 September at 16.00. It will be followed by a delivery inspection and transportation to the artillery base.

Two M1A2 Abrams tanks of the Saudi Arabian Army

23 September 2013 army-technology.com

General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS) has received a contract for conversion of additional M1A1 and M1A2 Abrams main battle tanks (MBTs) to the Saudi M1A2 (M1A2S) configuration for Saudi Arabia.

Awarded by the US Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command (TACOM) Lifecycle Management Command (LCMC) on behalf of the Royal Saudi Land Forces (RSLF), the $187.5m contract covers conversion of additional 44 M1A1 and 40 M1A2 Abrams tanks.

The latest foreign military sales (FMS) contract also continues the work initiated by the company in 2008 to update M1A1 and M1A2 tanks to the M1A2S configuration, which improves its efficiency and operational capability.

An upgraded version of the US Army and Marine Corps' M1A1 MBT, the M1A2 Abrams is designed to engage and attack enemy forces using enhanced firepower, manoeuvrability and shock effect in the battlefield.

Integrated with manually loaded 120mm M256 smoothbore cannon, the tank can fire a multitude of different rounds, such as M865 TPCSDS-T and M831 TP-T training ammunition against enemy armoured vehicles, soldiers and low-flying aircraft.

Offering enhanced protection to a crew of four, the tank features a gunner primary sight, new Block I second generation forward-looking infrared (FLIR) technology, an eye-safe laser range finder and a blue force tracking (BFT) system for improved effectiveness in the battlefield.

Upgrade work under the contract is scheduled to be carried out at the company's Joint Systems Manufacturing Center in Lima, Ohio, with an estimated completion in March 2015.

General Dynamics spokesman Rob Doolittle was quoted by Reuters as saying that the contract is one of several foreign and domestic awards the company was hoping to secure to ensure continued work at the Lima facility.

GDLS also secured $132.7m and $40m FMS contracts in January and April 2013, for supply of additional M1A2S tanks to the Saudi Arabian Army.

Sep. 23, 2013 by Dave Majumdar – FG

Washington DC - Concerns are being raised within industry about the new direction mandated by the Pentagon for the US Navy’s Unmanned Carrier Launched Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) aircraft programme.

The reason for the concern is because the Pentagon’s Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) has fundamentally altered the requirements for the UCLASS from a long-range penetrating strike platform to something akin to a modestly stealthy carrier-based Predator. “Where it leaves us is developing an alternative that meets the requirements that the navy has outlined,” says one industry source – which means spending even more company money after funding nearly three years of internal research and development designing an aircraft without any guidance from the USN.

“This looks like a giant runaway for General Atomics and Predator, I would not be surprised if the other companies ‘no-bid,’” says Dan Goure, an analyst at the Lexington Institute. Companies such as Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman have spent a large sum of their own money on UCLASS and may not want to dump even more money into what amounts to a stacked deck, he says.

“It does damage to an industrial base that is already fragile,” Goure adds.

Congress is also concerned about the direction of the USN acquisition strategy, which has been described as “atypical”. In a letter to navy secretary Ray Mabus, congressmen Randy Forbes and Mike McIntyre – chairman and ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee’s sea power subcommittee respectively – question the service’s plan to field four carrier air wings worth of UCLASS aircraft before the completion of operational testing or even a formal “Milestone B” decision to enter engineering and manufacturing development.

This is a concern shared by some in industry. “I have had similar concerns regarding the navy trying to procure one to four carriers worth of UCLASS aircraft for early operational capability as part of a technology demonstration phase that is pre-Milestone B,” says another industry source. “The only type of technology development programme which results in ‘residual operational assets or capabilities’ used to be called a JCTD [Joint Capabilities Technology Demonstration] – which the UCLASS programme is not.”

However, more fundamentally for the industry, both industry sources concur that the USN has deviated significantly from the normal process for developing a new aircraft. Typically, the industry would have been developing solutions over the past two years based on an initial set of navy-issued requirements. Those specifications would have been refined and updated as needed, based on various industry-informed trade studies, both sources say. That procedure would likely have yielded more relevant industry investment, more affordable requirements and a better overall competition.

The USN, however, did not issue any aircraft performance specifications or draft requirements until the spring of 2013. That means that for nearly three years, industry teams have been developing potential UCLASS candidates using their own money and based on their own assumptions about the navy’s requirements, both sources agree. That means each competitor is now trying to “force-fit” their aircraft into the UCLASS preliminary design review phase – which is now requiring even more investment, one industry source says.

The lack of industry feedback has had some unforeseen consequences. Superficially, the shift to an aircraft designed for long-duration orbits over permissive airspace would appear to favour General Atomics, which builds the MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper. However, the current requirements are not as simple as they look, says one industry source. “They want to span the deck-cycle, the means the endurance has to be greater than 12h,” he says. “From a carrier that’s pretty significant because you have limitations on wing-span just because of the carrier environment.”

Fundamentally from an engineering standpoint, to achieve better endurance, the aircraft must have a higher aspect ratio wing – which means a longer wing-span. However, on board a carrier, the wing-span is limited to about the same length as a Northrop X-47B. The absolute maximum is probably 70ft (21m), which means – by necessity – weight reduction is the key to meeting the USN’s new requirements.

“If you were allowed to refuel in the air then you might actually have a much broader performance spectrum,” the source says. “With that gone, you’re into designing as light a weight structure as can survive the carrier environment and hold as much fuel as you can.

Although the navy says that the UCLASS is going to be designed to operate in “permissive and low-end contested environments”, one industry source says that the low-observable requirement was not completely removed. “I don’t think the survivability requirements are trivial,” he says. However, he concedes that “the overwhelming design driver now is endurance without refueling”.

An aircraft carrier would be expected to deploy enough UCLASS aircraft to maintain two orbits about 600nm (1,110km) distance from the ship, or maintain a single orbit at a range of 1,200nm. If the UCLASS were called on to conduct a light strike mission, it could attack lightly defended targets at a distance of 2,000nm. As currently envisioned, the UCLASS will have a total payload of 1,360kg (3,000lb), of which only 454kg would consist of air-to-ground weapons.

Either a flying-wing or wing-body tail configuration could meet the requirements, the industry source says. However, the endurance requirement is strenuous enough that the source says that he is not sure that a turbofan engine is a “viable option”.

Boeing and General Atomics appear to have selected a wing-body tail design, while Lockheed Martin has disclosed its RQ-170-derived flying-wing concept. Presumably, the Northrop design will resemble its X-47B demonstrator.

September September 22, 2013: Strategy Page

The first of the Chinese Type 052D destroyers has been recently seen on sea trials in the East China Sea. This new destroyer design appears very similar to the American Aegis equipped destroyers (especially the Burke Class). Three versions of the Type 052 destroyer has, in about a decade, advanced Chinese destroyer design considerably and China now has ships similar in capabilities to the 8,300 ton American Arleigh Burke class destroyers. This is currently the principal American destroyer. The Burke design is the culmination of over half a century of World War II and Cold War destroyer design experience. Even after the Burke was designed, in the 1980s, the design evolved. The first Burkes were 8,300 ton ships, while the latest ones, laden with more gear, and smaller crews, are 10,000 ton ships (what heavy cruisers weighed in World War II). With a top speed of nearly 50 kilometers an hour, their main armament is 90 vertical launch tubes flush with the deck, that can contain anti-aircraft, anti-ship, anti-missile or cruise missiles. There is also a 127mm (5 inch) gun, two 20mm anti-missile autocannon, six torpedo tubes and two helicopters. The Burkes were well thought out, sturdy and they got the job done. They became irreplaceable, and thus this class of warships will last more than half a century. China likes the sound of that is trying to match the Burkes.

Over the last decades two Type 052B and two Type 052C destroyers have entered service. These four ships appear to have been part of an effort to develop something similar to the U.S. Burkes. Not only is one 052D at sea, but three more are under construction and apparently the plan is to build at least eight. These appear to be 7,500 ton ships armed with 64 American style (hot launch) VLS (Vertical Launch System) tubes for anti-aircraft (HQ-9), cruise of anti-ship missiles. There is a single 130mm gun, six torpedo tubes (for submarines), and two 30mm autocannon for anti-missile defense. There is also one helicopter hanger and landing platform.

The older (2004) Type 052B Guangzhou Class Destroyers are 5,900 ton general purpose ships (with anti-ship/submarine/aircraft capabilities). Armament consists of 48 HQ-16 anti-aircraft missiles (range 30 kilometers) and 16 C-802 anti-ship missiles (range 120 kilometers). There is a single 100mm gun and two 30mm autocannon for anti-missile defense. There is also one helicopter.

Type 052C Lanzhou Class Destroyers are 6,500 ton ships that first appeared in 2005. These ships use cold launch VLS (Vertical Launch System) tubes. There are 48 HQ-9 anti-aircraft missiles. There are also eight C-602 anti-ship missiles, in two four-cell launchers. There is a single 100mm gun and two 30mm autocannon for anti-missile defense. There is also one helicopter. These ships are mainly for air defense and use a phased array radar similar to the American Aegis system.

22.09.2013 Polaris Industries - army-guide.com

Polaris Industries Inc., the leading manufacturer of off-road vehicles, today announced the company was awarded a contract to provide MV850 ultra-light tactical vehicles to the German Army.

“Defense forces around the world are seeking Polaris Defense Military vehicles to take advantage of our ability to make modifications to our commercial off-the-shelf technology (COTS), insert customer requirements and quickly deliver an end product that meets their needs,” said Rich Haddad, general manager of Polaris Defense. “It is our goal to match the warfighter’s mission requirements with our best value product.”

The highly-mobile MV850 platform, which was built specifically for the U.S. military and allied forces, allows for the transport of military personnel and gear through extreme off-road terrain. It features a 600 lbs./272 kg capacity metal rack system, 11.75 gal/ 4.5 L fuel capacity, blackout lighting with IR light capability and an optional litter mount.

17/9/2013 IsraelDefense

Future tank development has been halted in the framework of the upcoming multi-year plan and the cuts to the defense budget. A special team will be in charge of examining alternatives

The Israeli defense establishment has decided not to pursue the development of the Merkava Mark V tank, and at this stage, the Merkava Mark IV will be the last tank that will be manufactured.

IsraelDefense revealed nearly a year ago that the Israeli Ministry of Defense decided to establish a team, headed by Brig. Gen. (Res.) Didi Ben Yoash, that would be responsible for developing the IDF's future tank. Senior officials from Israel's defense industries were also asked to provide their opinions on the form of the future tank, along with the IDF Ground Forces branch.

However, it has now been learned that a decision was made not to develop the advanced tank and to examine possible alternatives in the framework of the IDF's upcoming multi-year plan. In the meanwhile, the Merkava Mark IV tank will be the most advanced tank used by the IDF.

HMS Artful, built by BAE Systems, is the the third of the Royal Navy's seven Astute-class submarines

20 September 2013 theguardian.com

Britain's latest nuclear-powered submarine has been unveiled.

HMS Artful, a 7,400-tonne, 97-metre-long attack submarine, was officially named in front of thousands of guests in an event to mark its completion at the Devonshire Dock Hall in Barrow-in-Furness, Cumbria.

Artful, the third of seven Astute-class submarines, has now moved a step closer to joining her sister vessels HMS Astute and HMS Ambush.

The other submarines in the class in various stages of design or build are Audacious, Anson, Agamemnon and Ajax.

The Astute class of vessels, while nuclear powered but not nuclear armed, have greater conventional missile firepower, state-of-the-art communications equipment and advanced stealth technology, making them quiet and harder to detect, according to the Ministry of Defence.

Royal Navy submarines patrol the seas for months at a time, providing a key part of the UK's armed defence.

Built by BAE Systems, the Barrow yard has been working on the Astute programme since 2001.

Friday's ceremony was performed by Amanda Lady Zambellas, wife of the Royal Navy's First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir George Zambellas, inside BAE Systems' giant submarine construction facility.

John Hudson, managing director of BAE Systems Maritime - Submarines, said: "The design and build of a nuclear-powered submarine is as challenging as it is complex, so today represents a significant milestone in Artful's programme.

"It requires real skill and innovation to deliver submarines as sophisticated as Artful and this would not have been possible without the valued contribution of our employees and the collaborative efforts of the whole submarine enterprise.

Sir George Zambellas said: "Today's naming ceremony in Barrow for Artful adds another capable nuclear submarine to the gathering momentum in the Astute class.

"Ahead of her, HMS Astute and HMS Ambush are already being pressed hard towards operational use, contributing to the wider renaissance in the UK's naval equipment programme and adding to the Royal Navy's operational authority."

Artful will remain in the Barrow yard to complete a series of commissioning activities, before being launched in early 2014 for further tests and commissioning.

Le lundi 14 octobre 2013, à  8 h 45
Palais du Luxembourg  -  Salle Clémenceau
15 rue de Vaugirard
75 PARIS 6e

PROGRAMME

La loi de programmation militaire fragilise un millier d\'emplois, selon Patrick Boissier, le patron de DCNS.

20.09.2013 Par Alain Ruello – LesEchos.fr

Les grands industriels sont inquiets des conséquences sociales. Les propos de DCNS devant les députés fortement critiqués à la DGA.

Auditionnés depuis vendredi par la commission de la Défense de l'Assemblée nationale, les PDG des grands fournisseurs de l'armée ont dressé un tableau sombre des années à venir, faute d'une marge de manoeuvre financière suffisante dans la prochaine loi de programmation militaire. Mais l'un d'entre eux a visiblement raté son oral, et pas vis-à-vis des députés.

Au sein de la DGA, les propos tenus mercredi par Patrick Boissier, le patron de DCNS, ont laissé des traces, au point de tendre sérieusement les relations entre le groupe naval militaire et son client numéro un. Défaut d'anticipation, volonté de créer un rapport de forces, manque d'efficacité à l'exportation, absence de projet d'alliance : les critiques fusent. « Mordre la main de celui qui apporte plus de 70 % du chiffre d'affaires, c'est assez peu élégant, mais on est habitué », résume un responsable, passablement remonté.

Diable ! Qu'a dit Patrick Boissier pour mériter un tel retour de bâton ? Il a chiffré les surcoûts financiers et l'impact sur l'emploi des réductions de cadences prévues sur deux gros programmes du groupe, les sous-marins Barracuda et les frégates multimissions FREMM. Au total, la facture peut grimper jusqu'à 1,2 milliard d'euros et menacer un millier d'emplois (« Les Echos » d'hier).

Conséquences sociales

Avec plus ou moins de détails, les autres PDG auditionnés n'ont pas caché non plus que la loi de programmation aura (où a déjà, dans le cas de Thales) des conséquences sociales. Mais pour DCNS, la pilule ne passe pas à la DGA. Déjà, la séance plénière des universités d'été de la Défense, mardi à Pau, avait été l'occasion d'une passe d'armes entre Patrick Boissier et Laurent-Collet Billon, le délégué général pour l'armement.

Même si la LPM préserve les bureaux d'études et entend limiter la casse industrielle, « on a toujours dit que les réductions de programmes entraîneraient des conséquences sur l'emploi. Patrick Boissier aurait dû l'anticiper », poursuit-on au sein de la DGA. En clair, il n'y aura pas un euro de plus. Vouloir défendre son volume d'activité est donc illusoire.

La critique porte aussi sur la performance de DCNS à l'export. La corvette Gowind ne s'est vendue qu'une fois, en Malaisie. Même chose pour la FREMM (lire ci-dessous). Le « percolage » avec Thales, actionnaire à 35 %, n'a pas eu lieu. En clair, DCNS ne s'appuie pas assez sur les équipes de son actionnaire dans le monde. Quant au projet de société de location pour aider à vendre des navires à l'étranger, « c'est complètement bidon. Il y a bien une réflexion, mais c'est uniquement pour voir si la France aurait intérêt à louer certains matériels ».

Contacté, DCNS n'a pas souhaité commenter..

21/09 LesEchos.fr (Reuters)

Le département américain de la Défense a annoncé vendredi la conclusion d'un contrat de quatre milliards de dollars avec Lockheed Martin portant sur la fourniture aux Etats-Unis et aux Emirats arabes unis de composants du système de défense antimissile Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD).

La transaction faisait l'objet de négociations depuis plusieurs années. Elle porte sur 192 missiles intercepteurs destinés aux Emirats et sur 110 pour l'armée américaine.

La mise en commun de ces commandes a permis une économie de 10% environ, a expliqué Mat Joyce, directeur du programme THAAD.

Les Etats-Unis sont en discussions avec le Qatar pour une transaction similaire. L'Arabie saoudite, le Japon et la Corée du Sud ont par ailleurs manifesté leur intérêt, a ajouté Mat Joyce.

L'agence américaine chargée de la défense antimissile a procédé la semaine dernière au premier test opérationnel du système THAAD et a la vérification de sa compatibilité le système de combat Aegis. leur association a permis de détruire deux missiles à moyenne portée tirés quasi-simultanément.

Drone européen Neuron

19 septembre 2013 Par Astrid Gouzik - Usinenouvelle.com

Le secrétaire général de l’Otan, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, a prononcé un discours, à Bruxelles, ce jeudi 19 septembre, sur l’avenir de l’Alliance atlantique. Il a appelé les pays européens à renforcer leur industrie de défense ?

L'Europe "a besoin d'une base industrielle puissante" mais "jusqu'à présent, l'industrie de défense européenne reste trop nationale et trop fragmentée", a déploré Anders Fogh Rasmussen, à l’occasion d’un discours prononcé à Bruxelles.

Il a indiqué attendre "un engagement politique fort" des dirigeants de l'Union européenne au cours de leur sommet de décembre, qui sera consacré notamment à la défense.

Le secrétaire général de l’Otan a, par ailleurs, demandé aux pays européens d’acquérir davantage de drones. "J'aimerais que les Européens jouent leur rôle en acquérant davantage de drones pour renforcer la surveillance, davantage d'avions de grande capacité et d'avions de ravitaillement en vol pour accroître leurs capacités de déploiement, davantage de radars sur les navires", a-t-il détaillé.

Pour rester "forte", l'Otan a "besoin d'une Europe puissante en terme de capacités, d'industrie de défense et d'engagement politique", a-t-il insisté.

IZHEVSK, September 18 (RIA Novosti)

Russian President Vladimir Putin urged his country’s arms manufacturers on Wednesday to produce weapons that are superior to those of possible adversaries.

“Our past successes are no reason to sit back and relax,” he said during a visit to the Kalashnikov gun maker. “We must constantly strive to stay on top of current demands.”

He added that many of Russia’s legendary weapons were “no longer able to make the grade.”

He urged the Defense Ministry and weapons makers to redouble their efforts to develop new models of arms and military equipment, especially precision weaponry and fire-control systems.

Putin’s remarks came soon after a senior Defense Ministry official said Russia’s defense industry technology was largely outdated, lagging decades behind competitors.

Lt. Gen. Alexander Shevchenko said earlier in September that many defense firms were still not ready for mass production of high-tech weapons systems and many military technologies were still at 1980s levels.

There has been a disturbing decline in the quality of weapon production, he said, adding that this was mainly due to obsolete equipment and an extremely low pace of modernization.

The Russian government has reportedly allocated 20 trillion rubles ($640 billion) for the comprehensive rearmament of the country’s Armed Forces. The measure is expected to make the share of modern weaponry rise to 30 percent by 2015, and exceed 70 percent by 2020.

Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said Tuesday that Russia would spend $650 billion for the rearmament and modernization of its armed forces through 2020.