03 July 2012 by defenceWeb

Nigeria’s Federal Executive Council has allocated more than 3 billion Naira (US$18 million/R150 million) for the purchase of six security vessels in an ongoing effort to improve security along the nation’s waterways.

On June 27 the Federal Executive Council (FEC), presided over by President Goodluck Jonathan, approved N3.238 billion (US$19.7 million/R161 million) for the purchase of the six vessels, which, according to information minister Labaran Maku, include three Manta ASD littoral interceptors. The origin of the other three boats was not specified.

Minister of Transport, Idris Umar, told reporters that a contract was approved for the acquisition of three boats for the security of vessels and ships, while the other three boats for the patrol of inland waterways would be procured for N233.6 million (US$1.4 million/R11 million).

Maku said three of the vessels would be used to secure ships within ports jurisdiction and would be operated by the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) in conjunction with the Nigerian Navy.

The other three boats would be used for the security of inland waterways and would be operated by the Marine Police in conjunction with the National Inland Waterways Authority.

“The purchase of these boats will empower the Navy and the Nigerian Ports Authority to guarantee safety of vessels that come into our waterways, particularly in the Lagos area,” Maku said.

“The ministry also brought proposal to buy additional boats for inner waterways security. Looking at the memorandum that were submitted and the importance of these boats to secure both inner water ways and coastal areas, the Federal Executive Council gave the go ahead to the Ministry of Transport to purchase the boats to reinforce our maritime security.

“We find it very important because piracy has been in the increase and the issue of oil theft and several other criminalities in our waterways has been there for a while. Government is desirous of addressing this by equipping our security forces, particularly to guard our waterways to bring down the level of criminalities and all those who ply our coasts should feel secured,” Maku concluded.

Illegal bunkering and refining and oil theft are other major challenges facing Nigeria, particularly in the delta region. According to the Nigerian Oil Producers Trade Section (OPTS), crude oil theft stands at around three million barrels per month – an improvement over the theft of nine million barrels per month as at January last year. This drop was due to the establishment of a special task force to combat the issue.

Piracy and maritime insecurity are also big issues in the delta region and off the Nigerian coast. The International Maritime Bureau (IMB) in its global piracy report for the first quarter of this year, warned that West Africa remained a worsening piracy hotspot, with Nigeria being a noteworthy flashpoint.

Attacks in the Gulf of Guinea have increased in recent months as the area, spanning a dozen countries, is a growing source of oil, cocoa and metals being shipped to the world's markets. The IMB said there were ten attacks off Nigeria in the first quarter of this year.

"Nigerian piracy is increasing in incidence and extending in range," said IMB director Pottengal Mukundan. "While the number of reported incidents in Nigeria is still less than Somalia, and hijacked vessels are under control of the pirates for days rather than months, the level of violence against crew is dangerously high."

Meanwhile, the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA) recorded a total of 83 piracy and sea robbery attacks, including other unlawful acts at sea, in 2011.

Late last month the Chief of Naval Staff, Vice Admiral Ola Saad Ibrahim said that the vast area of Nigeria’s territorial waters and an inadequate number of ships was challenging the ability of the navy to patrol and secure the country’s maritime domain. “The ships we have are tired old warhorses that are dilapidated beyond economic repairs. This is due to serial negligence of national security institutions over the years. The House Committee on Navy is aware of the state of the Navy. In other climes, the Navy is supposed to take delivery of new ships almost every year.

“For the Nigerian Navy to be efficient, we must talk about recapitalisation. In simple terms, we need to change the face of the Navy by buying new and more vessels for our operations,” he said.

The Nigerian Navy and security forces are, however, re-equipping. On May 3 the Nigerian Marine Police took delivery of two Armacraft Croq 1270 patrol vessels from China while a month ago Kobus Naval Design (KND) received a contract to supply two 24 metre P249 patrol craft to the Nigerian Customs Service, which will use them to combat smuggling and piracy.

Nigeria’s 2012 Defence Budget Proposal makes provision for three Shaldag Mk III fast patrol craft, three 24 metre coastal patrol craft and six 17 metre Manta Mk II ASD littoral interceptors. The FY2011 defence budget approved the acquisition of two offshore patrol vessels, the refurbishment of six coastal patrol craft by TP Marine and the delivery of nine Manta Mk II ASD craft. The Suncraft Group is expected to construct the six Manta Mk II ASD vessels, bringing the total ordered over the last several years to 21. The Manta Mk II first entered service with the Nigerian Navy in 2008.

French shipbuilder OCEA is building the three 24 metre coastal patrol craft and commenced sea trials of the first vessel on March 13.

Nigeria’s Navy is seeking government approval to acquire up to 49 ships and 42 helicopters over the next ten years to police the nation’s territorial waterways and Gulf of Guinea.

Some of these vessels will be built locally. Jonathan on June 1 commissioned the NNS Andoni, Nigeria’s first locally built warship, and laid the keel for a second Seaward Defence Boat, which will be commissioned next year.

Jonathan recently approved the purchase of two new 1 800 t Offshore Patrol Vessels (OPVs) for the Nigerian Navy, which will use them mainly for maritime surveillance, patrol and response tasks. The contract for the two OPVs was signed on April 18 this year, with China Shipbuilding and Offshore International Limited, the trade arm of China Shipbuilding Industry Corporation (CSIC). They will be delivered in around three years time and will be partly built in Nigeria.

June 25, 2012 by Nitin Gokhale - ndtv.com

New Delhi: Last fortnight, Vikramaditya, formerly Adm. Gorshkov, a 45,000-tonne displacement aircraft carrier built in Russia began its sea trials, six months before it is handed over to the Indian Navy on December 4, the Navy Day.

Last week, four frontline warships finished a port call in Shanghai at the end of a sustained overseas deployment as part of India's 'Look East' Policy. The four Indian Navy ships, Rana, Shivalik, Karmukh and Shakti, under the command of Rear Admiral P Ajit Kumar, Flag Officer Commanding Eastern Fleet are on an operational deployment to the South China Sea and North West Pacific. Earlier in the deployment, the first bi-lateral maritime exercise between India and Japan 'JIMEX 12' (Japan India Maritime Exercise) was conducted, coinciding with the commemoration of 60 years of diplomatic relations between India and Japan.

According to the Indian Navy, even as the four ships of the Eastern Fleet are in the South China Sea, another ship, INS Savitri is currently in Port Victoria, Seychelles. INS Savitri will participate in the National Day celebrations of Seychelles and thereafter be deployed for about two months to undertake surveillance of the Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ) of Seychelles and Mauritius.

The Indian Navy continues to maintain one Dornier aircraft in Seychelles to provide aerial surveillance for the Seychelles EEZ.  Another Dornier aircraft is actively flying from Maldives to meet Maldivian requirements of EEZ surveillance and anti-piracy patrols.

INS Tabar, is on a sustained deployment in the Gulf of Aden on convoy escort and anti-piracy patrol.

Four ships of the Western Fleet have just begun on an overseas deployment to Horn of Africa, Red Sea and the Western Mediterranean under the command of Rear Admiral AR Karve, Flag Officer Commanding, Western Fleet.

Suddenly, the Indian Navy is the service to watch out for.

Quietly, it has gathered pace in acquisition and modernisation together. Currently it is in the middle of a planned expansion designed to cater to emerging maritime security challenges in the Indian Ocean Region and beyond.

For instance, in April, India's latest naval base, INS Dweeprakshak(Island protector) was put into operation at Kavaratti in Lakshawadeep, the tiny island chain, southwest Kerala. Although the Indian navy has had a small presence on the strategically important islands for the past decade, its decision to open a permanent base emanated from recent incidents of piracy very close to these islands. At least 100 pirates were caught and several piracy attempts foiled in the vicinity by the Indian Navy in recent times.

In a statement, the Navy said: "Indian Navy has been operating a detachment at Kavaratti since early eighties. With the commissioning of INS Dweeprakshak, the island territories would see calibrated strengthening of assets in step with their growing relevance to the security calculus of the Nation. A firmer footing in the islands, which are spread outside some of the busiest shipping lanes of the world, would provide the necessary wherewithal to the Indian Navy to discharge its responsibilities suitably. Indian Naval Warships on patrol would now extend their reach farther with base support from INS Dweeprakshak." 

The establishment of this base is in keeping with the announcement made by the Chief of Naval Staff, Adm.Nirmal Verma.  "The Navy is also in the process offsetting up Operational Turn Around (OTR) bases, Forward Operating Bases and Naval Air Enclaves along the coast which would enhance the reach and sustainability of our surveillance effort. In 2011the Navy has provided a renewed impetus and focus towards creation of operational and administrative infrastructure in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands and the Lakshadweep and Minicoy Islands. These islands are the country's strategic outposts and augmentation of the facilities would enhance our reach and enable extended presence in the area," he had said in December2011.

The Navy's long-term Maritime Capabilities Perspective Plan in fact has identified a mix of two major roles for the force: One, the traditional blue water operational capability and two, a plan to effectively counter threats closer to the coast.

According to the report of the Standing Committee on Defence, tabled in Parliament in the last week of April, the Navy's short-term plan has the following objectives:

- Augment airborne maritime surveillance, strike, Anti Submarine Warfare and air defence capability through induction of shore-based aircraft, integral helos, carrier based aircraft, space based AIS and UAVs, along with suitable weapons and sensors.

- Develop ASW (anti-submarine warfare) capability through induction of suitable platforms, weapons and sensors.

- Build adequate standoff capability for sea lift and Expeditionary Operations to achieve desired power projection force levels, influence events ashore and undertake Military Operations Other Than War.

- Induct assets and develop suitable infrastructure to augment forces available for Low Intensity Maritime Operations (LIMO), protection of off- shore assets and Coastal Security framework.

- Induct force multipliers like satellite based global communications, reconnaissance and network enabled platforms to achieve Battle-Space dominance capability and perform network centric operations.

- Induct state-of-the-art equipment and specialised platforms for Special Forces to enhance niche capabilities to conduct Maritime Intervention Operations and other envisaged roles.

- Develop support infrastructure in island territories to support the planned force levels as well as support infrastructure for ships/submarines/aircrafts at ports and airbases.

Given the extensive plans presented to the Parliament, it is evident now that the Indian Navy is in the middle of its most ambitious expansion plan in the past three decades. Senior officers point out that the Indian Navy's perspective-planning in terms of 'force-levels' is now driven by a conceptual shift from 'numbers' of platforms -- that is, from the old 'bean-counting' philosophy -- to one that concentrates on 'capabilities'. 

Naval HQ says 50 modern ships are currently on order with majority being built Indian shipyards. The Parliament's Standing Committee on Defence was informed last month that while Indian shipyards have made remarkable progress in building hulls and associated equipment but still lags behind in building and manufacturing weapons and sensors.

Traditionally the Indian navy has sourced most of its ships from the former Soviet Union but over the past decade, defence planners have leaned hard on Indian shipbuilding yards to deliver a variety of warship for the Indian Navy.

Two stealth ships-INS Shivalik and INS Satpura-- commissioned recently have been designed and built by public sector Mazgaon Docks Limited. The order books of India's oldest government-owned shipbuilders are full with the Navy wanting four more such guided missile frigates over the next five years.

There are more acquisitions in the pipeline. They include: four anti-submarine corvettes, four guided missile destroyers, three stealth frigates, six Scorpene submarines (being built at Mazgaon Docks with French technology and help) and two nuclear-powered submarines.

India's conventional diesel-powered submarine fleet is down to single digits right now but with  the Russian-built Nerpa class nuclear submarine (leased for a decade) joining service earlier this year, the submarine arm has got a major boost. But the biggest force accretion in recent years has come in the form of Boeing Pi-8long range maritime reconnaissance (LRMR) plane that gives the Indian Navy a reach and capability to mount surveillance way beyond its traditional areas of influence.

According to its near-term plans, the Indian Navy has ambitions to become a three Battle Carrier Groups force by 2020.

While it's most prestigious acquisition-Russian Aircraft Carrier Admiral Gorshkov, to be renamed INS Vikramaditya-is likely to be inducted into the fleet latest by March 2013, one more carrier being built indigenously will most likely join the service by 2015.

Currently India operates a lone Aircraft Carrier, INS Viraat, a British-built 1960s vintage ship that is on an extended lease of life thanks to the Navy's innovative engineers and planners.

Vikramaditya, once inducted, will give India the much needed edge in its maritime capabilities since it will come with the latest MiG-29 K series of aircraft. Indian Naval Aviators are already hard at work training themselves on the planes but away from the ship.

Defence Minister AK Antony in fact told the Naval Commanders conference last month: "India's strategic location in the Indian Ocean and the professional capability of our Navy bestows upon us a natural ability to play a leading role in ensuring peace and stability in the Indian Ocean Region."

Little wonder than the US wants India and especially the Indian Navy to play a major role in its quest to form new and lasting regional alliances in Asia as articulated by visiting secretary of defence Leon Panetta.

(This article was originally written for a defence magazine 'Purple Beret')

25 June 2012 army-technology.com

General Dynamics UK has received a contract from the UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) to supply the first systems information exploitation / health and usage monitoring system (SIE/HUMS) to the British Army.

Under the £4m deal, the company will install the systems in a total of 578 vehicles, including six protected patrol vehicle (PPV) variants in the operational training fleet to help enhance their availability and operations.

Armoured vehicles to be equipped with SIE/HUMS include the Mastiff, Ridgback, Husky, Jackal, Coyote and Wolfhound.

According to GD, the selection was based on the cost-effectiveness of the solution and also took into consideration the company's previous work, which included integration of more than 15,000 vehicles from the British Army's fleet.

The SIE/HUMS system is designed to enable operators and fleet managers to optimise vehicle use and minimise maintenance by providing accurate performance data, obtained through monitoring of onboard systems.

"The SIE/HUMS system is designed to enable operators and fleet managers to optimise vehicle use and minimise maintenance by providing accurate performance data, obtained through monitoring of onboard systems."

Data gathered will also help the personnel to enhance fleet availability, which will deliver an improved army vehicle fleet-management capability, in addition to allowing conditioned-based maintenance where lightly-used vehicles receive less work, which will eventually reduce maintenance costs.

The data collected and analysed by the system will range from engine management-system data, such as oil and water temperature, speed, distance travelled, and performance, to information about shocks and vibration, excessive vehicle speed or high fuel consumption.

Once the data is collected, operators conduct a statistical time-based analysis to identify potential problems; as more information is gathered, prognostics will also allow for better preventative maintenance practices, which contribute to increasing fleet availability.

The system is designed to be generic vehicle architecture (GVA) compliant and can plug-and-play with other GVA devices to improve onboard capabilities, as well as being modified through software configuration to record data as required.

June 25, 2012 by Shiv Aroor LIVEFIST

Wanted to write about this, but I just got back to Delhi from a weekend in Bangalore, and I'm rushing off to work, so I'm putting it up anyway. It's from a recent DRDO presentation and perhaps the first that depicts the LCA, AMCA and FGFA in an operational scenario. Comment and tell what you think this slide tells us.

June 19, 2012: Strategy Page

Israel is now exporting its 75mm Mini-Spike lightweight guided missiles. Three years ago an Israeli firm introduced this lighter, smaller guided missile system for Israeli forces. This is the smallest member of the Spike guided missile family, which all share many common components and technologies.

The Mini-Spike was designed for company and platoon size units in need of a lightweight precision attack weapon. Mini-Spike weighs 12 kilograms (26.4 pounds) and is designed for operation by one man. Max range is 1,200 meters. The missile uses a "fire and forget" guidance system. That is, once the operator gets the target in the CLU crosshairs and fires the missile the computer and seeker in the missile warhead memorizes the target and homes in on it. The infantry love this because it allows them to take cover once the missile is fired. The operator can also order the missile fly straight, high or low towards the target. The CLU has night vision and video recording capability and can be used just for surveillance.

Mini-Spike consists of two components. There is an 8 kg (11.6 pound) CLU (Command and Launch Unit), for indicating the target and sending radio signals to the missile. Individual missiles come in firing containers weighing 4 kg (8.8 pounds) loaded. A soldier typically will carry the CLU and two missiles. There is also an optional tripod available. The missile warhead is designed to kill or injure people and destroy structures, not penetrate armor. The operator can deactivate the warhead after launch, to minimize collateral damage.

Mini-Spike is meant to provide a cheaper and smaller (and more portable) alternative to missiles like the U.S. Javelin. Introduced in 2002, Javelin weighs 22.3 kg (49 pounds, with disposable launch tube and battery/seeker coolant unit) and is fired from a 6.4 kg (14 pound) CLU (command launch unit). The CLU contains a 4x day sight and a 9x heat sensing night sight. The missile has a tandem (two warheads to blast through reactive armor) that can hit a target straight on or from the top. This latter capability enables the Javelin to destroy any existing tank (including the U.S. M1) with its 8.2 kg (18 pound) warhead. Maximum range is 2,500 meters. Best of all, the seeker on the missile is "fire and forget." Mini-Spike costs about half what Javelin systems go for and are easier for infantry to carry around. Infantry rarely need a missile as powerful as Javelin. More frequently the demand is for something smaller like Mini-Spike.

Jun 18, 2012 ASDNews Source : Ministry of Defence (United Kingdom)

The first of the British Army's new Foxhound vehicles have arrived in Afghanistan.

Foxhound is at the cutting edge of protected patrol vehicle technology and provides unprecedented levels of blast protection for its size and weight.

After being flown out from RAF Brize Norton in a C-17 aircraft, these patrol vehicles are currently undergoing final testing in the dusty and hot conditions of the Helmand desert before being deployed on operations later in the year.

Foxhound has been specifically designed and built in Britain to protect against the threats our troops face in Afghanistan. However, this is an agile and versatile vehicle that will be a mainstay in the Army for years to come.

Being lighter and smaller than other protected vehicles such as Mastiff and Ridgback, Foxhound brings a whole new capability to the Army and is ideal for soldiers operating in mentoring and partnering roles as it makes it easier for them to engage with Afghan National Security Forces and the local Afghan population.

General Dynamics Land Systems: Force Protection Europe (GDLS:FPE), who produce Foxhound, have worked with engineers from the World Rally Championship, McLaren F1, Ricardo and BMW to incorporate Formula One racing technology so it has a top speed of 70mph (113km/h), but can still protect against improvised explosive devices thanks to its v-shaped hull.

The MOD is also able to confirm today that a £90m contract for an additional 100 Foxhounds has been signed. It means a total of 300 vehicles will now be delivered to the Army as part of a deal with GDLS:FPE worth £270m that is sustaining around 750 highly-skilled jobs across the UK.

Other innovative design features mean that the Foxhound's engine can be removed and replaced in just 30 minutes and it can drive away from an ambush on only three wheels.

Defence Secretary Philip Hammond said:

"Foxhound's arrival in Afghanistan is great news for our soldiers. This Government has spent £270m on 300 of these hi-tech, British-built vehicles to help keep our troops properly protected. Our servicemen and women deserve the best protection we can get them."

Chief of the General Staff, General Sir Peter Wall, said:

"Foxhound gives the British Army the very latest level of protection on operations. This has been a well-run programme that will play a key role in equipping the Army of 2020."

Jun 11, 2012 ASDNews Source : Thales Group

Thales Australia’s Hawkei vehicle is on display for the first time in Europe at the Eurosatory exhibition in Paris this week, drawing the interest of visitors from around the world.

The 7-tonne lightweight vehicle is built for rapid airmobile deployment, and is both modular and scalable, with command, reconnaissance, liaison and utility variants. A compelling choice for operations with limited point-of-entry options, the Hawkei offers operational flexibility across a wide range of mission profiles.

A mission-ready combination of survivability, mobility, payload and high levels of protection, the Hawkei features an innovative B-kit armour application that can be installed by troops on operations in less than 30 minutes, without the need for specialist tools. This straightforward and effective approach has been developed with Plasan, a recognised leader in specialized armour solutions, while Boeing Defence Australia is providing overall vehicle through life support services.

On board, visitors to the show will see an innovative Vehicle Electronic Architecture (VEA) that is the result of an extensive joint development program between Thales in France, the UK, Switzerland, the Netherlands and Australia. This allows the vehicle to be mission systems configurable, with surveillance, communications and Battle Management System able to be displayed on a single screen and out to meet rapid re-tasking at minimal cost and effort.

The vehicle will also be displaying Thales’s SOTAS vehicle communications system, Sophie thermal imager, MBITR radios, as well as Polaris GPS.

Hawkei crews will benefit from the vehicle’s Health and Usage Monitoring System (HUMS) which uses touch screens to display vehicle performance data on engine status, systems, power management, weapons and sensors.

Chris Jenkins, Thales Australia’s CEO, said: “The Hawkei is a versatile vehicle ideally suited to meet contemporary and future operational challenges. It incorporates high levels of protection in a compact and versatile platform, and builds on our experience with the Bushmaster program and its success on operations in Afghanistan and Iraq against IEDs and small arms ammunition.”

“We have also future-proofed the Hawkei in regard to the increased use of networked technologies on operations, and this has driven our development of a supplier-agnostic VEA that can be used to integrate an array of third-party equipment. This gives users genuine choice when deciding which technologies to deploy for any given task.”

Thales Australia recently signed a contract with the Australian Department of Defence to deliver six prototypes under the LAND 121 phase 4 programme, which will acquire 1,300 new light protected vehicles to replace the current Land Rover fleet.

16 juin 2012 Par Rédacteur en chef. PORTAIL DES SOUS-MARINS

Le royaume scandinave s’intéresse au sous-marin espagnol dans le cadre d’une étude préliminaire sur ses besoins futurs.

La Norvège rejoint la liste des pays qui s’intéressent au sous-marin espagnol S-80 de Navantia. Celle-ci remettra prochainement des informations techniques demandées par la marine norvégienne. Cette demande d’informations intervient dans le cadre d’une étude préliminaire destinée à définir ses besoins en sous-marins pour le futur.

Selon certaines sources, la Norvège pourrait prendre une décision en 2015 ou 2016. Plusieurs possibilités sont envisagées, entre la prolongation de la vie opérationnel de ses sous-marins actuels jusqu’à leur remplacement — complet ou partiel — par de nouveaux sous-marins. Outre les S-80 espagnols, les norvégiens sont aussi intéressés par des sous-marins suédois, allemands et français.

Référence : La Verdad (Espagne)

12/06/2012 DGA Actualité

La direction générale de l’armement (DGA) a livré début juin 2012 son 993e petit véhicule protégé (PVP) à l’armée de Terre. 1 133 PVP avaient été commandés à la société Panhard General Defense.

Le PVP est un véhicule 4x4 moderne, équipant les cellules de commandement des unités d’artillerie et de génie, ainsi que certaines unités spécifiques de l’infanterie parachutiste et alpine, de la circulation et du renseignement. Aérotransportable, blindé et très mobile, il peut transporter jusqu’à 4 passagers. Il dispose d’une mitrailleuse de 7,62mm qui, pour certains emplois, est installée sur un tourelleau téléopéré de l’intérieur du véhicule. Le PVP a été déployé en Géorgie, au Liban et en Afghanistan.

Les PVP sont produits sur les 2 sites industriels de Marolles-en-Hurepoix (Essonne) et Saint-Germain-Laval (Loire). Le programme PVP représente environ un million d’heures de travail pour Panhard et ses sous-traitants.

Paris, Eurosatory exhibition, June 12, 2012 Sagem DS

French defense procurement agency DGA has awarded Sagem (Safran group) a contract for five Sperwer Mk II drones, which will join the fleet of SDTI tactical drones already in service with the French army. These new systems will be delivered between the second half of 2012 and mid-2013, and will enable the French army to maintain its tactical drone capability.

At the same time, the DGA announced another contract award for Sagem, this time to modernize the GPS code P(Y) module on all Sperwer drones in service. Developed by Sagem for the Rafale multirole fighter, this GPS module is coupled to the drone's navigation system, enabling very precise geo-location of ground targets by the Sagem Euroflir 350+ optronics pod.

The Sperwer tactical drone system has been deployed in Afghanistan since 2003 to support NATO troops. For France, the 61st Artillery Regiment has deployed this system since November 2008.

The drones themselves are produced by Sagem's Montluçon plant. Sagem has produced over 25 complete tactical drone systems to date, including 140 aircraft.

(1) Système de drones tactiques intérimaires.

* * * *

Sagem, a high-tech company in the Safran group, holds world or European leadership positions in optronics, avionics, electronics and safety-critical software for both civil and military markets. Sagem is the No. 1 company in Europe and No. 3 worldwide for inertial navigation systems (INS) used in air, land and naval applications. It is also the world leader in helicopter flight controls and the European leader in optronics and tactical UAV systems. Operating across the globe through the Safran group, Sagem and its subsidiaries employ 7,500 people in Europe, Southeast Asia and North America. Sagem is the commercial name of the company Sagem Défense Sécurité.

07.06.2012 By Galrhan - informationdissemination.net

Today's guest is Christopher Cavas, Journalist at Defense News and Navy Times.

"You have covered the Littoral Combat Ship program from inception to present, and know the history of the program as well as anyone. You have written a story on virtually every newsworthy event related to the Littoral Combat Ship from the beginning. You are one of a handful of people outside the Navy and Industry who has both a deep history and familiarity with the program. Some suggest the LCS program should be canceled. Others say the LCS program has merit. What is the Littoral Combat Ship in your words, and what should LCS be looking to the future?"

The Littoral Combat Ship is, in a word, a challenge. A challenge to understand, a challenge to develop, a challenge to build. The program is a challenge to manage, to defend, to get to sea. To train for and crew, to support, to maintain. To develop mission modules for, to perfect and operate dozens of new technologies in those modules, to control those technologies in an operational environment. A challenge to develop a concept of operations for, to convey to the fleet what it should be used for, to keep from being misused.

For a decade now, the program has struggled to explain its purpose. It remains an incomplete story, constantly threatened, continually under attack, and desperately anxious to prove itself. The challenge to validate the program is repeated with every annual budget cycle, inside the Pentagon and to Congress.

The political challenge is constantly repeated as lawmakers come and go. Recently, several politicians relatively new to the program or to Capitol Hill have called for stronger oversight and more government reports.

But LCS has never suffered from a lack of oversight. Questions about the program’s progress were a regular feature of every Navy posture hearing beginning in 2004. The House Armed Services Committee, particularly Seapower subcommittee Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md.) and his successor Rep. Gene Taylor (D-Miss.), routinely held LCS hearings featuring not only Navy and industry reps, but all the strongest LCS critics, including government oversight experts from the Congressional Budget Office, Congressional Research Service, and the Government Accountability Office, along with a host of think tank witnesses (including Bob Work, then a Washington analyst, now, as Navy under secretary, the ship’s cheerleader-in-chief). A series of Pentagon oversight entities constantly reviewed the program’s purpose and performance, usually with strong criticisms and guidance. For years, every budget bill report from the House and Senate appropriations and armed services committees has contained strong language expressing concerns about the program’s performance, even while continuing to support the LCS concept.
 

US Navy Photo

Most of this discussion centered on the two LCS ship designs. Yet the mission modules -- the key to the LCS concept of a platform able to change missions with a swap of equipment -- continue to be a problem area, often poorly articulated by presenters and misunderstood by listeners. LCS discussions still focus on the ships, something perhaps not hard to understand given that the makeup of the mine module has changed, the equipment and the very concept of the anti-submarine module has been fundamentally altered, and the surface module lost its surface-to-surface missile -- the most powerful element it had going. All of this compounded by the fact that none of the modules is in service, or even been operationally demonstrated.
With two ships in commission, another about to be delivered, and more on the way, the LCS is now moving into an entirely new phase, transitioning from a development, acquisition and shipbuilding program into an operational mode. The center of LCS discussion is moving outside Washington to Norfolk and San Diego. Next year it will jump across the world’s largest ocean and drop squarely in Singapore, where the western Pacific press, from a variety of viewpoints, will be taking great notice.

The fleet is only tentatively picking up the LCS drumbeat. Inside the beltway, Work is today the type’s primary champion, staunchly and often emotionally defending and explaining the ship to any and all comers. The Navy’s top leadership and the flags at NAVSEA continue to talk up the program and the Pentagon’s surface directorate is joining in. U.S. Fleet Forces commander Adm. John Harvey in Norfolk has been a key advocate, particularly in his admonitions last year to fleet commanders not to use the ship in roles for which it isn’t intended. Vice Adm. Richard Hunt, commander of naval surface forces in San Diego, now is speaking about the Freedom’s potential to be an effective fleet unit.

But years of over-reaching promises followed by long production delays have eroded confidence among mid-level officers and experienced sailors in the program’s future. O-4s and O-5s, E-7s and E-8s seem to be routinely advising their juniors to bypass LCS and aim for more established programs. O-6s who five years ago were enthusiastic LCS supporters have turned away.

Even the voice of industry has become somewhat muted. Lockheed Martin remains out in front in many LCS promotion efforts, joined now by the Italian firm Fincantieri, which purchased the Marinette Marine shipyard that builds LockMart’s ships. But General Dynamics has gone virtually silent, a consequence of a 2010 decision to split from its Austal USA shipbuilding partner to position itself for future LCS ships, only to see that possibility slip away with yet another Navy change-of-concept for the program’s construction. Austal USA, a small-time operation compared with the GD behemoth, has not come close to matching its former partner’s PR efforts.

Adding to a lack of cohesiveness, both LCS primes still convey a sense of competition, even though the Navy is committed -- for the moment -- to building equal numbers of each type. The “ours is better than theirs” attitude might be good for one or other of the designs, but it is not helping the overall LCS effort.
 

US Navy Photo

This is a frustrating time in the program’s development. The two prototype ships have yet to take effective mission modules into action. The adolescent concept is starting to look real -- both LCS ships finally joined together at the beginning of May in San Diego -- but it will still be some time before an LCS is doing something the Navy really needs it to do.

From the mid-2000s when the LCS construction schedule started to slide and zoom up in cost, the program acquired a widely-acknowledged reputation as a troubled (that’s a nice word for it) effort. Navy mismanagement, changing priorities, overzealous and unrealistic expectations, shipyard and contractor inexperience all piled on to give the program an aura of unrelenting chaos. People might not understand what it was, but lots of folks -- particularly on Capitol Hill -- knew it was a mess. It took years for the service to work its way through numerous issues. Many problems remain, but it seems now the worst has been overcome, at least from a programmatic standpoint. In fact, from many aspects -- steady schedule, fixed pricing, stable design, increasing shipbuilding experience -- the LCS program is entering into a new era of maturity.

But widespread negative perceptions remain, and everyone involved in the effort remains challenged to demonstrate it can do what it is supposed to do. Still without any concrete missions accomplished, the LCS continues to be the target of often withering criticisms. The past few months in particular have seen a dramatic rise in the number of negative media stories, followed by attention-craving Congressmen calling for more oversight and more hearings and more reviews.

Problem is, none of these recent negative reports has offered anything new. More information about old problems, in some cases, but no new issues. Eternal hand-wringing about old problems is fun for some, but is it productive? Who is questioning the questioners? Or is it just a familiar tune that everyone’s used to?

Junior lawmakers new to the game or those who never sat on the relevant committees calling for new hearings about things they missed is nothing new. But that they do so is not always related to good oversight -- sometimes it’s just good old-fashioned grandstanding. (Imagine, politicians trying to call attention to themselves!)

Reporters writing shallow or repetitive stories, and editors calling for similar stories because everyone else is doing them, is not good journalism, even when it comes from leading publications. Sometimes it’s an honestly elusive story, sometimes it’s just plain lazy.

Leakers who offer deeper information about situations already reported don’t always have great new stuff, sometimes they just have more stuff.

Think tanks who jump on these reports as indicators of true developments, rather than media and political frenzies, don’t help by granting an aura of learned pretentiousness to the discussions.

Critics who simply don’t like the LCS concept – and aren’t going to change their minds -- aren’t always describing real problems. Sometimes they’re just talking about their personal preferences. Sometimes they just don’t want to take the time to really find out what’s happening, repetitively recycling great rants from yesteryear.

On the other side of the argumentative aisle, Navy leaders describing the LCS as a mature, well-thought out and operationally proven system do the entire effort a disservice by getting ahead of the game. Talking about four ships in Singapore, eight ships in Bahrain, or meaningful contributions to the art of mine sweeping and anti-submarine warfare and surface actions and drug hunting isn’t very helpful when you try and make it sound like you’re out there right now doing that sort of thing.
 

US Navy Photo

With the primary acquisition challenges now dealt with, with the Navy beginning to focus on the effort to get these ships into service, here’s the crux of LCS from here on out: change.

To be sure, there are plans in place for everything the Navy’s planners can think of. But chances are exceptionally high that everything will change as the ships and their crews take them to sea.

LCS is not a done deal. It is not a mature, final design. It does not have a fully proven concept of operations. It is not clear how many sailors should crew the ship, or if a group of manned and unmanned off-board vehicles can be simultaneously and effectively operated, or if those systems will work, or what effect having an LCS with any particular module will truly have on an operation. It is not known whether either of the combat systems will be completely effective (probably not), what specific changes should be made, or how they can be made to both ships. It is not clear which module handling system work efficiently and not break down when you need it. It is not known if the networked communications, computer and control systems will work effectively. It is not known what the final costs will be to buy the modules and operate the ships on a forward-deployed basis. It is not known if the supply, maintenance and parts support systems will be effective. Heck, it is not known if they should begin painting the aluminum superstructures and hulls. It is not known -- well, you get the idea.

Anyone calling for a halt in the program while definitive answers are found to any of these questions is demonstrating a deep absence of understanding what the program is about. That is not the point, sir. Yes, there is a plan, there is a concept, there is a certain direction, but the end result in many cases may well not be what is currently envisioned.

The ships were designed with a main battery unlike anything ever carried by a combatant ship: empty space. Big, empty mission bays ready to accept large containers of equipment and systems, along with flight decks much larger in proportion to other surface fighting ships.

Will some of the mission equipment not work well? Probably. Have something better? No problem. Change it. Bring stuff in and install it, ship stuff out, bring in different stuff.

You can’t do that on other warships. Can’t do it on Arleigh Burke or Zumwalt destroyers, or new British or French or Italian or Chinese or Russian destroyers and frigates. Forget about other 3,200-ton frigates or corvettes, they’re already packed with gear. When those systems age or become obsolescent, the ships will age with them. But an LCS is designed to grow, change and morph over time, adapting to changing requirements and priorities in -- it is hoped -- an efficient and effective manner.

No navy has ever had a ship like this. The Danes tried the modular concept on a much lower level, but the LCS takes the idea significantly further. If it works, it will mean the Navy has gotten a new minesweeper, a new inshore ASW ship, a new brown water surface combatant, a new special operations platform, a new maritime interdiction ship, all in one platform. If it doesn’t work -- well, it won’t be the first time a type of ship entered service and then faded away after a few years. That’s not good, but it certainly happens.

A little history. In 1927, two of the biggest ships in the world were commissioned into the U.S. Navy. The huge aircraft carriers Lexington and Saratoga dwarfed the fleet’s battleships and represented an enormous investment, particularly in a peacetime Navy that faced no urgent threat. One might have presumed the Navy had really thought out this aircraft-carrier thing, knew how to design the ships, operate the systems and planes, fit them into fleet battle concepts and tactics. But that might be presumptuous.

Many people know that the Navy designation for an aircraft carrier is CV. What many people don’t know is what that originally stood for -- cruiser, heavier-than-air. Those enormous aircraft carriers were cruisers, or scouts. They had eight-inch guns to fight off the other guy’s scouts, and their aircraft were largely intended to scout the enemy so the big battlewagons could move into position.

It was another 16 years or so before the modern concept of an aircraft carrier matured. Years of experimentation, trial-and-error work, technological development, a huge tactical leap demonstrated by a skilled enemy, and the loss in five months of four of the fleet’s seven fleet carriers produced lessons learned that resulted in a combat system far removed from 1927. But many of those matured concepts of 1943, through many technical evolutions, are still at the core of today’s carrier strike group concepts.

Hopefully it won’t take that long, or cost that much in blood and bucks, to mature the LCS concept into an effective naval unit. But the challenge facing today’s Navy is to make the system work, to find its weak points and come up with changes, to find out what it can really do and stay away from what it won’t. To adapt what you’ve got to what you need.

And yes, government testers, oversight committee members, critics and reporters, there won’t be final answers to many of these questions for some time. Get used to it. Roll with it. That’s the idea.

NOTE: All views expressed herein are my own, and are not connected to, nor do they represent in any way, Defense News or Gannett Government Media.

La FREMM Aquitaine suivant le BPC Dixmude

photo DCNS

06/06/2012 MER et MARINE

Des partenariats industriels, des frégates multi-missions (FREMM) ainsi que des bâtiments de projection et de commandement (BPC) proposés à la marine... DCNS a de grandes ambitions au Canada. Le groupe français vient, d'ailleurs, d'ouvrir un bureau de représentation à Ottawa, la capitale fédérale, où il a pu présenter ses produits à l'occasion du salon CANSEC, qui s'est déroulé les 30 et 31 mai. DCNS estime que les FREMM et BPC, notamment, répondent parfaitement aux besoins de la marine canadienne, qui va bénéficier d'un vaste plan d'investissement de 35 milliards de dollars canadiens (près de 27 milliards d'euros) afin de remplacer sa flotte actuelle. Le groupe français cherche donc à s'implanter sur place, afin de vendre ses designs pour les futurs bâtiments canadiens, qui seront réalisés localement. Dans cette perspective, DCNS doit s'allier à des industriels nationaux.


La FREMM Aquitaine (© : DCNS)

Des frégates avec le chantier d'Halifax

Pour les frégates, des discussions ont débuté avec Halifax Shipyard, filiale du groupe Irving Shipbuilding. En effet, dans le cadre de la Stratégie Nationale d'Approvisionnement en matière de Construction Navale (SNACN), le gouvernement canadien a décidé de confier à ce chantier la réalisation d'une vingtaine de bâtiments de combat, dont une série de frégates (Canadian Surface Combatant - CSC) destinée à remplacer les 12 unités de la classe City et les 3 destroyers du type Iroquois. L'ensemble des contrats que doit signer Halifax Shipyard s'élève à 25 milliards de dollars canadiens (17.8 milliards d'euros). Dans cette perspective, DCNS cherche à placer son design de frégate multi-missions, déjà retenu par la France (11 exemplaires) et le Maroc (1 unité) et dont la tête de série, l'Aquitaine, sera livrée cette année à la Marine nationale. Longue de 142 mètres pour un déplacement de 6000 tonnes en charge, la FREMM a été conçue comme un bâtiment très automatisé (équipage d'une centaine d'hommes seulement), à la maintenance réduite (un grand carénage de six mois que tous les 10 ans) et aux capacités très polyvalentes. Le bâtiment peut, ainsi, mener à bien des missions de lutte anti-sous-marine grâce à un sonar de coque, un sonar remorqué, des torpilles MU90 et un hélicoptère. Dans le domaine de la lutte antinavire, il est doté du MM40 Block3, le dernier-né de la famille Exocet, alors que la FREMM sera le seul bâtiment de surface européen à mettre en oeuvre des missiles de croisière (Scalp Naval), d'une portée de plus de 1000 kilomètres (une capacité que la France devrait pouvoir proposer au canada). En matière de défense aérienne, la frégate française est également solidement pourvue, puisqu'elle peut embarquer des missiles Aster 30, Aster 15 et VL Mica. Enfin, les FREMM peuvent embarquer un hélicoptère de 10 tonnes, des drones à voilure tournante ainsi que des forces spéciales, avec leurs embarcations commando. Côté électronique, la FREMM dispose notamment du radar multifonctions Herakles de Thales, ce dernier étant déjà présent au Canada, où il participe à la modernisation des frégates du type City. Si un accord est conclu entre Français et Canadiens autour des FREMM, les frégates seraient construites à Halifax, en transfert de technologie.


Le BPC Dixmude (© : MARINE NATIONALE)

Les BPC et les besoins de soutien logistique

Dans le même temps, DCNS propose au Canada de se doter de BPC, dont trois exemplaires sont en service dans la marine française et deux autres ont été commandés par la Russie pour une livraison en 2014 et 2015 (deux autres pourraient être construits ultérieurement à Saint-Pétersbourg). Longs de 199 mètres et affichant un déplacement de 21.000 tonnes en charge, ces bâtiments, extrêmement polyvalents, sont à la fois des porte-hélicoptères d'assaut, des transports d'engins de débarquement, des hôpitaux flottants et des bases de commandement pouvant diriger une opération interarmées et interalliés d'envergure. Depuis 2006 et la première mission du Mistral au Liban, avec l'évacuation de milliers de ressortissants, jusqu'à l'intervention en Libye l'an dernier avec la mise en oeuvre d'hélicoptères de combat contre les forces pro-Kadhafi, en passant par des missions humanitaires, les BPC ont démontré leur énorme potentiel. De quoi séduire de nombreuses marines, notamment celle du Canada, qui ne dispose pas encore de ce genre d'outil. La commande de deux à trois BPC pourrait être décidée alors qu'un précédent projet de bâtiments de projection a avorté. Il s'agissait des Joint Support Ships (JSS) étudiés avec les Néerlandais de Damen, qui proposaient des navires hydrides, à la fois pétrolier-ravitailleurs et transporteurs de troupes (concept qui a finalement donné naissance au Karel Doorman, actuellement en construction aux Pays-Bas). Si les Canadiens choisissent finalement de se doter de BPC, il conviendra néanmoins, pour leur marine, de solutionner la problématique du soutien logistique des bâtiments de combat, une capacité indispensable à tout déploiement lointain d'une force navale. En effet, les deux pétroliers-ravitailleurs canadiens, les HMCS Protecteur et HMCS Preserver, qui ont été admis au service actif en 1969 et 1970, doivent être remplacés rapidement. Or, DCNS, pour répondre à ce besoin, peut proposer ses nouveaux bâtiments logistiques du type Brave, qu'elle présente à la Marine nationale pour le remplacement des Durance.


Le concept de bâtiment logistique Brave (© : DCNS)

Enjeux stratégiques et industriels

La SNACN a une double vocation. D'abord redonner au Canada une puissance navale cohérente avec ses ambitions maritimes, notamment protéger et faire respecter sa souveraineté dans les territoires arctiques, dont les richesses seront probablement de plus en plus disputées à l'avenir, mais aussi sa capacité à déployer partout dans le monde des moyens puissants, à même de participer à des opérations internationales. La marine canadienne est, en effet, souvent impliquée dans des déploiements outre-mer, notamment dans le cadre de l'OTAN. Elle a d'ailleurs participé à l'opération Unified Protector en Libye l'an dernier. En dehors de ces aspects stratégiques, il s'agit, également, de relancer la construction navale nationale, avec de grands programmes structurants permettant de moderniser les chantiers canadiens et de développer, autour d'eux, les capacités d'ingénierie et de production les plus modernes, sans oublier les milliers d'emplois générés par la construction de la nouvelle flotte. Dans cette perspective, trois chantiers doivent être impliqués dans le SNACN. Halifax, on l'a vu, a été retenu pour les bâtiments de combat. Vancouver Shipyards, qui appartient au groupe Seaspan Marine, a quant à lui été choisi pour réaliser 8 grands bâtiments destinés à la garde-côtière, ce qui représente un investissement de 8 milliards de dollars (5.7 milliards d'euros). Alors que le plan de renouvellement de la marine canadienne prévoit également la commande de 116 petits navires (pour 2 milliards de dollars, soit 1.5 milliard d'euros), il reste le cas du chantier Davie, situé à Lévis, au Québec.


Le chantier de Lévis (© : CHANTIER DAVIE)

Davie à la recherche d'un investisseur

En difficulté ces dernières années, le constructeur québécois avait été repris, en juillet 2011, par SNC-Lavalin et Upper Lakes. Mais, ces derniers jours, les choses se sont précipitées et les repreneurs, qui avaient pris la barre de Davie dans l'espoir de remporter l'un des deux gros contrats finalement attribués à Halifax et Vancouver, ont, d'après la presse canadienne, décidé de jeter l'éponge. Davie, qui a dans son carnet de commandes trois navires offshores inachevés pour la compagnie norvégienne Cecon et deux ferries pour la société des traversiers du Québec, est donc à la recherche d'un nouvel investisseur. Pourquoi pas DCNS, via la création d'une filiale canadienne ? L'an dernier, son concurrent Fincantieri, déjà implanté aux Etats-Unis où il possède plusieurs chantiers (dont Marinette Marine où sont réalisés les LCS du type Freedom), avait fait part de son intérêt pour Davie. Certes, le groupe italien visait alors, lui-aussi, les gros contrats de la SNACN. Mais le constructeur québécois, s'il n'a pas été retenu, a peut-être encore des cartes à jouer, notamment au niveau de ses infrastructures. Car il dispose de vastes cales sèches suffisamment grandes pour assembler des BPC et pétroliers-ravitailleurs. Par conséquent, il y a peut-être là une opportunité d'implantation pour DCNS, qui pourrait ainsi s'installer au Canada, tout en réalisant un beau coup politique, en solutionnant le « casse-tête » que constitue Davie pour le gouvernement québécois. Pour l'heure, rien n'a été annoncé en ce sens, mais la question peut logiquement se poser.


Le Brésil va construire des Scorpène (© : DCNS)

L'Amérique du sud au nord

Le groupe français joue, en tous cas, une partie très intéressante au Canada, un pays auquel l'industrie tricolore (DCNS mais aussi ses partenaires Thales et MBDA), et derrière elle la France, peut proposer un véritable partenariat stratégique, avec d'importants transferts de technologie, ainsi qu'une autonomie stratégique par rapport aux Américains, tout en conservant des matériels interopérables. C'est d'ailleurs cette aspect qui avait convaincu les Brésiliens, en 2009, de choisir l'offre de DCNS pour développer à Itaguai, en partenariat avec Odebrecht, un chantier de construction et une base navale pour quatre sous-marins conventionnels de type Scorpène et le premier sous-marin nucléaire d'attaque brésilien (conçu avec l'assistance des ingénieurs français sur les parties non nucléaires). Ayant déjà réalisé avec succès plusieurs programmes complexes en transfert de technologie, comme celui des frégates Formidable (classe La Fayette) à Singapour ou des sous-marins Agosta 90B au Pakistan, DCNS peut, clairement, apparaître comme un partenaire crédible aux yeux de l'industrie et du gouvernement canadiens. Après le contrat au Brésil, couronnant une série de succès en Amérique latine (Chili, Colombie, Venezuela...), le leader européen de la navale militaire se verrait bien poser un pied en Amérique du nord, où il pourrait s'installer durablement en proposant non seulement ses services pour la construction de futurs bâtiments, mais aussi pour d'autres prestations, comme le maintien en condition opérationnelle. Sans compter que la marine canadienne devra aussi, d'ici la fin de la décennie, commencer à penser au renouvellement de ses quatre sous-marins du type Upholder, construits en Grande-Bretagne entre 1990 et 1993. D'ailleurs, pour la petite histoire, si le Canada n'est pas jusqu'ici un client de DCNS, c'est avec lui que l'industriel français, du temps de la Direction des Constructions Navales, a failli remporter le plus gros contrat export de l'histoire occidentale. En effet, dans les années 80, avant l'effondrement du bloc soviétique, il avait été sérieusement question que le Canada fasse l'acquisition de 12 sous-marins nucléaires d'attaque du type Rubis... Trente ans plus tard, les Français semblent avoir une nouvelle chance de conclure une coopération historique avec les Canadiens.


La FREMM Aquitaine et le BPC Dixmude (© : DCNS)