Monthly Archives: May 2021

Estimated reading time 19 minutes, 36 seconds.

It might have started as a relatively straightforward helicopter life extension project, but the plan to see the CH-146 Griffon continue flying into the 2030s has become far more complex than many first imagined. And what comes next to replace the venerable multi-role airframe may be even more so.

On Feb. 15, 2021, Griffon number 467, the first of three CH-146 aircraft, landed at Bell Helicopter Textron Canadas facility in Mirabel, Quebec, to begin a prototyping process that will include the design, development and installation of new cockpit displays and engines, integrate sensor systems, communications and cryptographic equipment, cockpit voice and flight recorders, navigation systems, automatic flight control systems, and control display units.

Known as the Griffon Limited Life Extension (GLLE), the program will eventually return to the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) the CH-146 Charlie Griffon Mark II, what Lt. Col. Andrew Hewitt calls a unique airframe.

The flight path, however, could require a deft touch to navigate. Hewitt, who heads a small team under the director of air requirements (DAR) for tactical aviation, must satisfy the requirements of a diverse set of missions. The CH-146, a militarized variant of the Bell 412, provides not only tactical transport for the army, in particular its light infantry battalions it is also a critical platform for special operations forces, flown by 427 Special Operations Aviation Squadron in Petawawa, Ontario; a domestic search-and-rescue (SAR) asset operated by 424 Transport and Rescue Squadron at 8 Wing Trenton, Ontario; and a frequently deployed utility platform for domestic response operated by combat support squadrons at 3 Wing Bagotville, Quebec, 4 Wing Cold Lake, Alberta, and 5 Wing Goose Bay, Newfoundland. Since the airframe first entered service in 1995, the RCAF has integrated 45 mission kits to meet different user needs.

As we got into the definition phase and we were looking at the complexity of what we are trying to do, I think the mindset shifted, said Hewitt, a CH-146 pilot and instructor with 408 Tactical Helicopter Squadron in Edmonton, Alberta. Hewitt also operated a CU-161 Sperwer unmanned aircraft in 2006 and 2007 in Afghanistan and flew a Royal Air Force Chinook during a three-year officer exchange between 2008 and 2011.

Even though it is a straightforward project in terms of its goals sustaining the current capability until the mid 2030s what we are trying to achieve is a generational upgrade to the aircraft, Hewitt added. Consequently, the developmental process, as we have come to learn, is going to be unique and there will be a lot to do.

Rather than earmark each of the prototypes for different systems such as avionics, mission kits or engines, Bell and the RCAF have adopted an iterative approach that will allow each prototype to build on the lessons from the previous one. If the idiomatic expression third times a charm holds true, the result will be an airframe ready for flight testing by late summer or early fall 2022.

The first aircraft will provide a platform for the basic avionics design and fitting for bespoke flight management and mission management systems, as well as a check on mission kit compatibility and, where necessary, interoperability. The second will incorporate the lessons learned and provide the basis for installation instructions of all systems for subcontractors. With the third prototype, Bell and the RCAF will have a final opportunity to make sure weve got everything right, Hewitt said.

While the RCAF has employed a block approach to upgrade avionics and mission systems on the CP-140 Aurora and complete a structural life extension, the process was conducted over two decades and the maritime patrol aircraft returned to service after each block. This is notably different.

From what I have seen, [the prototype approach] is unique, said Hewitt. I dont know of any other project like it right now, which is why it has been a significant learning curve.

The government, which awarded Bell a contract in January 2019 valued at $90 million, is still finalizing the GLLE agreement with the manufacturer, so the timelines are not fixed. But the objective between now and end of next summer . . . is to go through those three iterations of development so that we can have the aircraft ready for modification in 2023, he said. Initial operating capability would begin by the end of 2024.

Until a new deal is reached, the design work is being completed under an in-service support contract that has been in place since 2011. The Griffon was first acquired from Bell in 1992 and 85 of the original 100 remain in service. All 85 will undergo the full modification.

I tell people it is like pimp my car, joked Donald Falardeau, referring to the MTV series Pimp My Ride, in which the host, rapper Xzibit, oversaw the restoration and hot-rodding of old cars. You take everything out of it, including all the wire harnesses and boxes, and you start from scratch. Some of the boxes will be re-used but there are a lot of new boxes coming in.

A former aerospace engineering officer on the CF-188 fighter program, Falardeau is Bells program manager for GLLE, overseeing all aspects of the upgrade. As much as possible, we are trying to use off-the-shelf products that come from the 412 line, including the latest evolution, the Bell 412EPX, he told a virtual forum hosted by the Vertical Flight Society on May 11.

The overhaul of each CH-146 includes rewiring and installing some 40 wiring harnesses and power cables, a new console and a mix of avionics from the commercial 412, a mission management system integrated with the Wescam MX-15 EO/IR imaging system, which was introduced on the Griffon about seven years ago, and new radios and cryptographic equipment in the nose of the aircraft. Several of the Griffons many antennas will be removed, replaced, or repositioned.

While some systems will be new, many of the mission kit enhancements are software-related, explained Hewitt. Its on the mission kits and the functionality of the flight management and mission management software that we have had most of the changes and we have had to adapt during the definition phase.

In addition to addressing ongoing obsolescence issues with certain components, the avionics improvements will also meet civil air traffic management regulations that now require ADS-B Out for identification, position, altitude, and velocity. Aircrews will also receive tablets for flight planning and systems management.

Parts obsolescence may be less of a concern in the future, with Bell planning to introduce the option for some 3D printed parts with the modifications, said Falardeau.

For pilots who have expressed frustration with the rotorcrafts power, the most significant change might be the introduction of an electronically controlled Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6T-9 Twin-Pac engine.

Once you got to the limits of the performance envelope, you had a little bit of twitchiness in the gauge, and it would just take a little muscle impulse at the wrong time to enter an over-torque condition, said Hewitt of CH-146 performance. With digital engine control, we are much more confident pilots will have a greater degree of fidelity in handling the aircraft at those performance limits. You dont have to have as much of a personal safety buffer to operate at the envelope, which does give you that extra few percent of performance, which makes a big deal in high, hot environments.

Falardeau attributed the manner and speed at which GLLE has progressed to a tight working relationship with the Air Force and government departments. Frequent and productive program review meetings as well as design working groups with significant input from the user communities have steered the project to this point, while a robust risk management system and good processes for change requests have helped eliminate surprises and manage what he called legitimate scope creep as raw estimates have become firm costs and requirements have been solidified.

In line with that approach, Bell, the Aerospace Engineering Test Establishment and the RCAF Operational Test and Evaluation unit intend to form one test team, he added. There will be one document that will guide everything for the execution of tests, for qualification and certification.

Refining the requirements has involved a constant back and forth between the Air Force and the Army and SOF to ensure the modifications meet specific missions, said Hewitt. The project team has pulled lessons from recent operations such as the forward aeromedical evacuation support role in Mali in 2018-19.

Its also monitoring the progress of a CH-149 Cormorant midlife upgrade program that will modernize the RCAFs primary SAR helicopter in a configuration similar to the Norwegian all-weather search-and-rescue helicopter and return the Cormorant to 424 Squadron at 8 Wing Trenton. Until then, the Griffon will remain the SAR rotorcraft for Great Lakes response.

The Bell 412 has been a stellar platform, but it is power-limited to do such a diverse set of roles, Hewitt observed. As a multi-purpose utility helicopter, it can never do one thing perfectly, but it can do a lot of things really well.

More precise army and SOF requirements will have to wait for the eventual Griffon replacement, he added.

Planning for what comes next is now underway. In the summer of 2020, Hewitt officially stood up a unit of one himself to begin the process with others in DAR of identifying the future capabilities needed by user communities. Still in the pre-definition phase, the project is being called the next Tactical Aviation Capability Set (nTACS), a nod to the fact that the eventual solution might not be a platform-for-platform replacement.

The DAR team has engaged with both the U.S. Army Future Vertical Lift (FVL) program and NATOs Next-Generation Rotorcraft Capabilities project, a five-country collaboration announced in November 2020 to modernize multi-role rotorcraft fleets that are anticipated to retire between 2035 and 2040.

In recent presentations, U.S. Army senior officers have suggested the FVL ecosystem they are constructing will fundamentally change tactical aviation. The traditional limitations of speed, range, endurance and payload could all be smashed over the next 15 years, Hewitt noted. And increased options for remotely piloted systems something the U.S. Army is trialing under Project Convergence with a scalable control interface that will allow soldiers to control an UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter could significantly change the calculus of what is possible after GLLE, especially as operations increase in the Arctic.

What we are coming to realize is we are not necessarily looking at a replacement aircraft for this capability, we are looking at a replacement set, Hewitt said. We want to leave the door open for different types of airframes.

In a 2018 interview, Brig. Gen. Michel Lalumiere, then director general of air force development, described the Griffon replacement as a tactical system with the agility, integrated weapons and sensors, satellite connectivity and endurance to fulfill a range of roles.

That thinking still holds true, said Hewitt.

The project was originally called the tactical reconnaissance and utility helicopter concept, but conversations with the Canadian Army and SOF about their future needs suggest a fair amount of diversity in what they will be seeking, he noted.

The Griffons, which each accumulate about 300 flight hours every year, were selected to fill the roles of three helicopters Bell CH-118 Huey, CH-136 Kiowa and Bell CH-135 Twin Huey so combining diverse missions in a single airframe would not be novel.

But are we confident right now that we are going to be able to pick an airframe to come on service in 15 to 20 years like we did with the Griffon in 1995? Hewitt said. Maybe, but maybe not. That is why it is called a set.

Hewitt cautioned against equating Canadian with American requirements as the FVL program advances demonstrators under its Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft (FARA) and Future Long-Range Assault Aircraft (FLRAA) projects. Both the Bell V-280 Valor and the Sikorsky-Boeing SB>1 Defiant offer advanced capabilities of interest to nTACS, but not necessarily the exact solution.

When I look at them, I see developments that check what the U.S. Army is looking for. I dont necessarily see things that check what we are looking for, Hewitt said. We have a smaller force with a more diverse set of things to do, so we have to think of more multi-capable platforms, whereas I think the U.S. Army has the luxury of looking for more bespoke and tailored capabilities. I also understand from the European point of view how they are looking at it. Its too early to tell if it is between the two of them or if there is a third way. I think there is going to be quite a few options we will be able to leverage to provide the best capability we can.

As much as speed, range, endurance, and payload remain central to any future platform, Hewitt is focused on data management and integration with a joint force in an all-domain digital battlespace. The Army operating concept of dispersed operations will require a capability not unlike you would see with the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter or some of the other advanced platforms coming out today, Hewitt said.

Data links, sensor and information management, and interoperability will be among the mandatory requirements.

It is still early days for the project. Preliminary discussions have been held with the Air Force, Army and SOF to make sure we are in agreement with what we are proposing and Hewitt will soon seek Defence Capability Board approval to begin identifying and developing the options for a capability to enter service in the mid 2030s.

Read the original:

The life extension of the CH-146 Griffon and a plan for what comes next - Vertical Mag - Vertical Magazine

STAFF: Ladies and gentleman -- ladies and sir -- hey guys, welcome to the Missile Defense Agency's briefing on our portion of the president's budget for fiscal year '22 -- 2022. On my left are your briefers today. Vice Admiral John Hill is the Director of the Missile Defense Agency, and Miss Michelle Atkinson on his left is the Director for Operations for the Missile Defense Agency.

We'll go through a brief slide deck, and then the Admiral and Ms. Atkinson will take your questions. When the Q&A begins, please wait for me to call on you, and please identify yourself and your outlet when we do so. And I'll ask the Admiral to begin.

VICE ADMIRAL JON A. HILL: Okay, thanks Mark. Good afternoon everybody, thanks for staying late for us on a Friday before Memorial Day weekend. It's great to be here. Again, I'm John Hill, the Director, and my Director for Operations who also owns a human resources and facilities and budget, is the good Michelle Atkinson, and she'll walk you through the brief and then we'll take questions afterwards. So, over to you Michelle.

MICHELLE C. ATKINSON: Thank you, Admiral. Good afternoon everyone, I know that we are the only thing standing between you and a three day weekend, so we'll be -- we'll be quick here. I appreciate the opportunity to brief you today on the Missile Defense Agency's FY '22 budget request. Next chart please. Our current missile defense system can defeat today's ballistic missile capabilities of our adversaries.

However, the threats posed by both ballistic and non-ballistic systems from rogue nations and strategic competitors can deter -- can used -- in gross -- increase and grow in complexity. There are several trends with respect to the nature of this growing threat worth noting.

First, ballistic missiles continue to proliferate, and will be a threat in future conflicts involving U.S. forces. Ballistic missiles have been used in several conflicts over the past 30 years, and will continue to be used.

Second, adversary ballistic missile systems are becoming more sophisticated. Their systems are becoming more mobile, survivable, reliable and accurate, and can achieve longer ranges. New ballistic missile systems also feature multiple and maneuverable reentry vehicles, along with decoys and jamming devices.

Third, as recently emphasized by Secretary Austin, the lines between ballistic and non-ballistic missile threats have become increasingly blurred, as we are seeing with the new hypersonic missile threats. Hypersonic glide vehicles delivered by ballistic missile boosters are an emerging threat. These threats can travel at exceptional speeds with unpredictable flight paths. This poses new challenges to our missile defense systems.

Fourth, the cruise missile threat to our U.S. forces is increasing. The majority of land attack cruise missiles will still be subsonic, but supersonic and hypersonic missiles will be deployed in the future. Land attack cruise missiles will also have increased survivability by minimizing radar signature and also the use of countermeasures.

These are the challenging realities of the emerging missile threats. U.S. missile defense policy, strategy, and capabilities must continue to evolve in order to address these threats. The Missile Defense Agency FY '22 budget request addresses these realities as I will discuss throughout this briefing. Next chart please.

The Missile Defense Agency mission remains unchanged. Our missile defense capability must be able to address the full spectrum of missile threats, both ballistic and non-ballistic. The continual improvement of our missile defense system is especially critical.

Without further development and technology investments, our current system will not have the capability to address the more advanced threat, such as the cruise missiles and hypersonic glide vehicles I spoke of. Next chart please.

The agency's foundations are focused on delivering missile defense capability to our war fighters, and the FY '22 budget request reflects this commitment. This request continues to operate and maintain our fielded systems, such as ground-based midcourse defense, AEGIS, and THAAD to the highest level of system readiness and reliability.

This budget continues to produce and field missile defense cap -- capacity to address the expanding threat, including delivery of additional interceptors and radars.

Finally, this budget prioritizes investments in new capability development and advanced technologies to address the emergence of a new and more advanced threat I spoke of earlier, with efforts such as the hypersonic and ballistic tracking space sensor, or HBTSS, hypersonic defense, and the next generation interceptor, or NGI. Next chart please.

Our total request of $8.9 billion FY '22 strengthens and expands the deployment of defenses for our nation, our deployed forces, allies, and international partners against increasingly capable missile threats. Of the $8.9 billion FY '22 request, $7.2 billion, or 80 percent of our budget, is for research and development efforts.

This budget request balances the numerous requirements and priorities against available budget. Our FY '22 budget request is only slightly lower than the FY '21 budget request of $9.1 billion. Our procurement budget request is slightly lower this year as we prioritize development of new capabilities in order to counter the emerging missile threats. Next chart please.

This chart outlines the highlight of the FY '22 budget request. This request allows us to maintain operations and readiness of deployed missile defense systems, and also our C2BMC network. This request also continues production and fielding of missile defense capability and production of additional SM 3 block 1B and 2A missiles for the Navy, and THAAD interceptors for the Army.

Finally, in response to the increasing threats I spoke of earlier, this request includes several development and technology efforts. Examples of these development efforts include the hypersonic and ballistic tracking space sensor, development on which we are working very closely with the U.S. Space Force and the Space Development Agency. This budget fully funds the next-generation interceptor program to maintain two industry teams through the critical design review. We awarded two contracts in March of this year to this important Homeland Defense program.

This budget also requests funds for the development of a regional hypersonic defense glide phase intercept capability. In response to a request from INDOPACOM, the budget request also includes funding for the defense of Guam. The next set of charts will address some of the specific budget line items in the missile defense agency's FY22 budget requests. The charts are an order of the missile defense system battle sequence - detect, control, and engage. Next chart, please.

As I mentioned earlier, in coordination with U.S. Space Force and SDA, we are developing a hypersonic and ballistic tracking space sensor. This capability meets critical Warfighter requirements and provides fire control quality data to track dim ballistic threats and global maneuvering hypersonic threats. The program is focused on deploying the first two satellites in FY 23. The Space Tracking and Surveillance System, or STSS, remains in orbit now, supporting DoD and the intelligence community.

The budget request supports the passivation of these two STSS demonstration satellites, which operated well beyond their expected service life and provided the foundation for future space-based sensor capability to include HBTSS. We are developing, deploying, and sustaining ground-based radars to counter current and future missile threats, build Warfighter confidence, and increase force structure. The FY22 budget request includes upgrading and sustaining 12 AN/TPY-2 radars, with a 13th radar being procured now with FY 21 funds from Congress. Completing and fielding the Long Range Discrimination Radar, or LRDR, in Alaska.

LRDR construction continued this year despite a temporary work stoppage that lasted several months because of steps taken to mitigate the spread of COVID-19. This advanced radar is a critical midcourse sensor that improves the missile defense system threat discrimination capability and also allows for more efficient use of the ground-based midcourse defense system. The Sea-Based X-Band Radar, or SBX, provides precision midcourse tracking and threat discrimination to protect our homeland.

The FY22 request continues operations in support of this critical radar. We will continue to sustain and provide updates to the Upgraded Early Warning Radars or UEWRs and continue to Cobra Dane radar refurbishment and life extension effort in partnership with the U.S. Air Force. C2BMC is the integrating element of our missile defense system. The FY22 budget request sustains the fielded C2BMC capability across 18 time zones with hardened networks supporting all of the combatant commands. The budget request also integrates new capabilities into C2BMC, such as LRDR. Next chart, please.

The department is committed to improving U.S. homeland missile defenses to counter limited missile threats from rogue states. The Ground-based Midcourse Defense system, or GMD, serves as a continuously available homeland missile defense capability for defending against today's rogue state ballistic missile threats. To ensure continued operability of the GMD system, we have requested funding to continue with the service life extension program that will include upgrades and replacement of ground system infrastructure, fire control, and co-vehicle software to improve reliability, capability, capacity, availability, and cybersecurity. The request supports the currently deployed Ground-Based Interceptors, or GBIs, and completion of the additional missile field in Alaska to enable future fielding of the next generation interceptors.

As I mentioned earlier, the FY22 budget request includes funding for two NGI industry teams through the critical design review. This plan reduces technical risk, secures competitive production pricing, and creates incentives for early delivery to the Warfighter. The Aegis missile defense request continues to upgrade the Aegis Weapon System and procure additional missiles. 40 Aegis SM-3 Block IB missiles and eight SM-3 Block IIA missiles will be procured for deployment on land at the two Aegis Ashore sites in Europe and at sea on multi-mission capable Aegis ships.

Our request continues the multi-year procurement for the SM-3 Block IB missile. We will continue to develop and implement Aegis Weapon System upgrades to support the Navy's newest Destroyers with the new SPY-6 radar, as well as upgrade sensors on the older ships in the Aegis fleet. Currently, construction is over 90% complete at the Aegis Ashore site in Poland. Jointly with the Army Corps of Engineers, we recently installed four SPY radar arrays and the fire control system there. Aegis weapon system installation and checkout have also commenced.

The THAAD weapons system is a globally transportable ground-based missile defense system, which is highly effective against short-range, medium-range, and intermediate-range threats. In FY22, we will procure 18 THAAD interceptors, obsolescence mitigation efforts, and training support. We will also continue the development and integration of multiple independent THAAD software builds to address the evolving threat, improve the Warfighters defense planning and improve system capability. The FY22 budget request includes funding to continue testing of THAAD and Patriot interoperability to improve the overall missile defense capability and increase the defended area. As I mentioned earlier, we were responding to requests from INDOPACOM to begin the development of a defense of the Guam system. Next chart, please.

The FY22 budget request includes investment in innovative technologies to address the emergence of new and more advanced threats. The budget request continues our advanced research program to explore innovative and disruptive technologies and also to develop emerging capabilities to enhance our missile defenses. This budget also includes funds for system engineering to continue to provide critical products and processes needed to combine element missile defense capabilities into a single, integrated and layered system. Testing is a critical aspect of the Missile Defense Agency mission. Validating system performance through flight and ground tests is paramount to building Warfighter confidence in our system.

To that end, the FY22 request includes flight, ground, and cybersecurity testing and the development of threat representative targets used during testing. FY22 test highlights include FTX 26, which is the LRDR Operational Acceptance Test, and FTM-46 which is required for the SM-3 Block IIA missile full-rate production decision. We are taking steps to develop and deliver regional layered hypersonic defense capability to the Warfighter. We are developing a glide phase intercept capability for a future demonstration, leveraging our existing missile defense systems.

In response to USNORCOM's requirement for cruise missile defense of the homeland, the FY22 request includes funding to develop the systems architecture and to conduct a demonstration of cruise defense capabilities using the joint tactical integrated fire control capability. Missile Defense Agency and the Israel Missile Defense Organization continue to cooperate on engineering, development, co-production, testing, and fielding of the Israeli missile defense system. The FY22 funding request remains consistent with a memorandum of understanding between the United States and Israel. Next chart, please.

In summary, the Missile Defense Agency's FY22 budget request is $8.9 billion. An important part of the department's strategy to defend the nation, this budget request prioritizes funding for the development of new capabilities to counter the expanding threats. This budget request continues the development, rigorous testing, and fielding of reliable, increasingly capable state-of-the-art missile defenses. It focuses on the readiness, capability, and capacity of fielded homeland and regional missile defense systems. The FY22 budget request enables the Missile Defense Agency to outpace future offensive missile systems in order to defend the United States homeland, our deployed forces, our allies, and international partners.

Thank you. The admiral and I will now take a few questions.

STAFF: Steve, lead us off, please.

QUESTION: So back in February, MDA published an RFI for a pulsed laser that could be air or space, or even ground operated. So is anything like that in the fiscal 2022 budget? Or if not, where do you see that going? And also, for that matter, air-launch kinetic intercept, if that's in the FY22 budget anywhere?

ADM. HILL: Yeah, the second one I know is not in the budget. I do remember when we put out the pulse laser work, and that was to get that feedback from the industry for potential investment in the future. Michelle, do you have anything to add?

MS. ATKINSON: We also received an FY21 congressional toss-up for the DPAL laser program.

QUESTION: That was supposed to be eliminated last year, but I didn't realize there was a plus-up? Oh, OK. I see.

STAFF: Sandra?

QUESTION: Thank you. Can you clarify what is the request for BBTSS and for SKA? You had it in the chart, but I couldn't tell there. There were two numbers there.

MS. ATKINSON: OK. So the -- let me find it. The HBTSS budget request is roughly $260 million this year.

QUESTION: OK. So and then SKA was $32 million? Is that what...

MS. ATKINSON: No, it was what the other number was.

QUESTION: OK. So does that funding fund the two prototypes, the two satellites? And do you plan to downselect and only launch one satellite? Or do you plan to launch both?

ADM. HILL: Thanks, a great question. You're talking specifically about hypersonic ballistic tracking (space) sensors. So yeah, HBTSS is on the path to launch two interoperable satellites that are built by two separate industry partners. So the idea is to keep competition in early, given the complexity of the mission. It is the only program within the space portfolio that provides fire control quality data down to a weapon system like Glide Phase Interceptor.

QUESTION: And are these payloads going to be also the payloads that SDA will use in the tracking layer?

ADM. HILL: They'll be interoperable with the tracking layers. So if you look at the overall architecture, what SDA is doing with the transport layer, and what they're doing with a wide field of view, a queuing source for HBTSS as an example, they're connected that way, but they are separate.

QUESTION: So, you will not be developing payloads for them. Will they be doing their own payloads?

ADM. HILL: Yes. We have different missions, and so each HBTSS fire control, wide field of view for early warning that would then queue those satellites. So they're connected within the architecture, but they are separate.

QUESTION: OK. Thank you.

ADM. HILL: Thank you.

STAFF: And let's go to our online folks. Do you have a question?

QUESTION: Yeah, thanks for doing this. I just wanted to clarify. I see the MDA requested $248 million in defenses against hypersonic speed weapons, and you mentioned the Glide Phase Interceptor. But are there other projects within that $248 million, or is that all for GPI?

ADM. HILL: Do you want to talk about it?

MS. ATKINSON: Yeah, so GPI is the majority of that funding. We also have engineering, and we're starting to plan for the targets and testing of that capability in the future.

QUESTION: Thank you.

STAFF: Okay, Jen, please.

QUESTION: (inaudible) I wanted to ask a little bit more about defense of Guam effort. Is that now sort of in lieu of -- I know originally you were looking at a radar at -- somewhere in the Pacific, a Hawaii radar. They were talking about like a 360 Aegis Ashore-like capability. What are you looking at for Guam, a defense of Guam capability? And what's on the timeline, it looks like you're investing a $100 million on that, but if you can give a little more detail on what the architecture may be looking like for this effort (inaudible)

ADM. HILL: So we're not really positioned to do that yet. So you referred a little bit to what's in the INDOPACOM Pacific defense initiative. So, there's that and the request from INDOPACOM, but right now we're in the middle of doing that architecture analysis with the CAPE and with the joint staff and others to make sure that we have the options on the table, so that we can make use of the resources that we have to give the best defense possible for Guam. And so we're working through that now.

And part of that -- the real focus on those dollars in the '22 budget is to do things like spectrum analysis in the area because we know we the sensing capability. We know that we have varying topology there across the island so how would you place those sensors? Where would the fire control systems go? Where would the weapons go? So there's work there and there's likely some long lead material items that we'd want to procure. But we're keeping that option space open now within the Department until we've come through all of those trades.

QUESTION: OK. Can you provide a little more detail in terms of what systems might be on the table in terms of what you're looking at? I mean, especially if you're already looking at long lead items I'd imagine you have some sense of maybe where you want to go?

ADM. HILL: Sure. Yes. What I think we'll do, and I say I think because it's still in the trade space, but we're going to focus heavily on the regional systems today that are prudent, that have program of record that can be evolved. And so when you look at that, there's a fair amount of capability by which we can construct a really great architecture. We're just doing that work now and this funding helps us to robustly go after that so we can meet the timeline.

QUESTION: OK. Are you hoping to have a more fleshed out plan of this, you know, by some time in FY '22

ADM. HILL: Yes.

QUESTION: so then you can fund a path forward more robustly in FY '23? Is that sort of the plan?

ADM. HILL: Yes. Yes. That's -- that is the plan.

STAFF: OK. And let's go back to our remote audience. Mr. Peter Loewig.

QUESTION: Hi, thanks very much. My Guam question got covered, so can you talk about other -- are there other -- are there other missile defense initiatives in the Indo-Pacific? And then specifically because Aegis Ashore has been mentioned so much with Guam, has there been anything done to reflect the fact that the Japanese public has slowed, delayed, stopped, the Aegis Ashore in Japan?

ADM. HILL: Great -- great question. So, I'll answer specifically to the missile defense for Japan. We're working very closely with the Japan Ministry of Defense to assess options. And you're absolutely right, a decision was made by the government of Japan to no longer pursue the two Aegis Ashore sites.

And so what we're doing now is answering questions for the Ministry of Defense to help them make their decision on what the configuration would be for the equipment that they have procured through FMS and through the direct commercial sales programs tied to Aegis Ashore, but how can you take those and make them sea based. So that's in the Japanese trade space now and we're in full support.

QUESTION: Thank you. And no other -- no other missile defense elsewhere in the Indo-Pacific in this request?

ADM. HILL: If you -- if you look at the details of the capability that we bring forward into Aegis ships as an example, and when we talk about the investments going towards a hypersonic missile-defense regional glide based capability, that would have a contribution in the -- in the INDOPACOM theater, HBTSS as a space asset. When we get those two satellites built by two different companies into space in the '23 timeframe, they're meant to be in an operational position. We will use those up for testing in the region initially and based on the how we characterize their performance they could be used operationally.

QUESTION: Great, thank you very much.

ADM. HILL: Great, thank you.

STAFF: Jen, please.

QUESTION: So what's not super clear in the document that we've received so far on the budget is your plans for the homeland where, you know, looking at potentially incorporating that or you just -- some of these other systems? So could you walk us through how that is taking shape for you now and what we might be able to expect in FY '22 budget for potential plans for this?

ADM. HILL: So for '22 that -- the real focus would be to pick up where we -- we did a feasibility test for FTM-44, an aegis ship engaging an ICBM outside the requirement space, so operated outside the combat system's requirements space, outside the missile's requirement space. It was a congressionally directed test to be done last year, we completed that in November. And so what that does is that now, you know, leads you to questions about how would the system perform against a more complex type target.

So when you look into the budget, which you'll see is that look at the command control battle management, what would it take to bring together the homeland defenses and incorporate an Aegis capability? What can be done within the THAAD program, terminal high altitude air defenses system, and how would you link all those together to give options to the combatant command?

Those decisions have not been made to-date, what we're really doing is coming through the feasibility and the technical approaches of bringing those together as a layered homeland defense perspective.

QUESTION: OK. So in FY22 we would -- the funding to look at this would be in terms of the things you mentioned.

ADM. HILL: Yes.

QUESTION: OK.

STAFF: And let's go to our remote audience, Jason Sherman from Inside Defense please.

QUESTION: Thanks. Hill, I wondered if you could say a little bit more about the Hypersonic Defense Program and walk us through this shift that MDA when through when thinking with the -- the program that you kind of re-designed and then sort of repackaged as the GPI. Could you talk to us about the timing of that program and your efforts to accelerate it? Sort of what -- what's the -- what -- what -- what was the -- the time that -- that -- that you -- under the old program? What is the target for fielding under the new program? And could you say something about the interceptors?

Will you basically be using off-the-shelf or a modified variants of what already available for that in the first iteration and then going to a completely new design for something further down the road? And -- and -- and when does the terminal capability begin to come online? I'm -- I'm -- I gather that's not in this budget but you have a request (inaudible) industry. So you could talk us through all of that, sort of the change for the program, what interceptors the interceptors are that you -- you are looking at the near-term, far-term, and yes, thanks.

STAFF: Lets just let him go ahead and get to those questions...

ADM. HILL: You know, Jason, I thought you did a great job outlining the -- the strategy. So -- so the way I'll answer it is I'll kind of give you a sense of where we are today and then I'll kind of walk you forward, all right.

So -- so where we are today from a protection of sea base, Sea-Based Terminal, you mentioned that. And that's tied in and controlled by the Aegis Combat System, leveraging off-board sensors to protect the high-value units set within the sea base. That -- that capability is designed to handle what I will call the advanced maneuvering threat, right. So that's sort of that first layer of defense against hypersonics - a pretty important capability.

Now, how do we build on top of that? Where we were a couple years ago, it was a science and technology focus that the Regional Glide Phase Weapon System -- so when we say weapon system that covered everything from sensors through fire control through weapons systems -- and what technology needed to be matured.

So when you're in the glide phase -- which is higher up from the terminal, right, where a hypersonic vehicle is likely in its most vulnerable phase -- that's actually a pretty tough environment to be in. And you can't take an air defense weapon and operate it there nor can you take a space weapon like an SM-3 and operate there, it's just a different environment.

And so we are risk-reducing and maturing technologies to operate there -- things like seekers and coatings and materials for operating in that area, propulsion techniques, divert techniques. That was the focus of that and it was a much longer term -- you know, it wasn't set for transition into a firm development program so that would have delivered something for hypersonic defense in the glide phase out in the '30s.

So based on real-world data collections, we were able to take our system models, Aegis models, sensor models, ground-based systems and run the -- the data collected from actual live fires. And we found that we can close the fire control loop with an Aegis ship that has already proven queuing launch-on-remote and engage-on-remote capability.

So what the ship needs is an early look at a threat flying through the glide phase and leveraging its engage-on-remote or launch-on-remote capabilities in order to have -- and build that track. Then it needs a weapon to get there.

So when you talk about that change from the Regional Glide Phase Weapon System into, now, the Glide Phase Interceptor program, in order for us to accelerate and deliver something faster -- because that threat exists today, as you know -- we have the terminal system, the Sea-Based Terminal which is in a state of evolution that's got more increments coming downstream to get even better at what it does, but we want to engage further back into the trajectory, into the glide.

So we looked at a number of different propulsion systems and front-ends and we released a broad area announcement recently. And we just received the industry responses to that and so we'll be evaluating those. And so I can't give you a firm timeline on what the acceleration is until we evaluate the industry concepts and then move forward.

What we're really doing in '22 is preparing ourselves for a very firm Systems Requirements Review. So what -- what we get from industry today helps us to set those requirements and get them right before we commit towards going to a more -- you know, a development program.

And so I think that may answer your question, I'll just give you a couple more. So if you understand where we are today, where we want to go in the future from a weapons perspective -- we talked about HBTSS, right -- so right now we can leverage seaborne sensors, we can leveraged land-based sensors, we have incorporated the ability to track hypersonic threats, but as you know it's a globally maneuvering kind of threat so you need to be up in space looking down.

So in coordination with Space Force and with SDA -- you know, the question going back to the use of the Transport Layer and the great work that SDA's doing for communications, you know, within the low-Earth orbit -- we're going to have a very robust and resilient space capacity to get data down to that ship from space if we can't catch it with our land-based or sea-based sensors.

And so, HBTSS, C2BMC moving data to weapons systems, initially Aegis ships, we want to make sure that what we do within the confines of a Mark 41 Vertical Launching System for a ground -- for a Glide Phase Interceptor can be transported and be used at a land-based battery.

So Jason, how's that for a long answer to your long question?

Visit link:

Department of Defense Press Briefing on the President's Fiscal Year 2022 Defense Budget for the Missile Defense Agency > US DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE...

By Luke Muggy, Catherine Cohen and Kristie Gore

Saturday, May 29, 2021 | 2 a.m.

When President Joe Biden recently presented Congress, and Americans, with his vision for an Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H), the acronym may have sounded familiar. It should have.

The new health agency would be modeled on the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, known as DARPA, a Department of Defense research and development agency. DARPA is responsible for such life-altering technological advancements as the computer mouse and packet-switching the foundation for todays internet (and conceived in partnership with the Rand Corp., where we work).

The purpose of ARPA-H would be to pursue groundbreaking research to develop cures for diseases such as Alzheimers, cancer and diabetes. The potential benefits are enormous life extension, economic prosperity, national security but so are the potential challenges to its success.

The federal governments role in scientific advancement is not new or unusual. The National Science Foundation and National Institutes of Health have been funding research for decades. But the emphasis on transformative innovations is new.

The Obama administration was unable to establish ARPA-ED, which would have designed cutting-edge technology for education. Obama was asking for $90 million in 2012 to establish it, but the proposal was cut during congressional budget negotiations. Biden is now asking for $6.5billion to launch his health agency, a relatively modest figure when compared with NIHs annual budget of about $41.7billion.

If successfully funded, ARPA-H and ARPA-E, a new $300 million-per-year research agency focusing on energy, will be the first federal advanced research agencies created since 1958.

It is unclear how long it will take to establish ARPA-H, how it will be structured and to which government authority it will answer. DARPA was formed within a year of the Soviet Union launching Sputnik in 1957, and it was placed within the Defense Department. The parallel move would be to situate ARPA-H within the Department of Health and Human Services. While it might be tempting to place ARPA-H within the NIH, there is some concern that it would be hard to distinguish the purpose of ARPA-H from other high-risk, high-reward initiatives that encourage innovation.

With so many potential research avenues to pursue, ARPA-H could benefit from a clear strategic vision and method for identifying projects that hold the most promise for achieving that vision. Its portfolio of research activities could be developed through a process similar to that used by DARPA, which depends on approximately 100 program managers to develop proposals and to select highly innovative projects for funding.

That would be far more expeditious than the process at NIH, which relies on the broader scientific community to rigorously peer-review proposals over the course of several months. Moreover, NIH proposals require substantial background research, clearly specified hypotheses and preliminary data all things that could stifle innovation at ARPA-H.

Some of the policies that encourage innovation at DARPA may be difficult for ARPA-H to emulate. For instance, DARPA limits tenure for researchers to a maximum of four to five years, to impress a sense of urgency upon them. ARPA-H may need to follow a timeline akin to whats typical in biomedical research, where taking a decade to reach a major breakthrough is common. Any tenure limitations should take this into account.

DARPA also maintains an extremely high tolerance for failure. The modest budgets of the NIH, combined with an enormous pool of applicants, force these institutions to bet on low-risk research that guarantees incremental progress. ARPA-H could take a different approach than NIH by accepting a much higher tolerance for failure, so that researchers are not discouraged from dreaming big.

The scientific methods behind the products of ARPA-H might gain public trust if the agency made a point of being transparent and accessible. Consider how the rapid development of the COVID-19 vaccine was met with incredulity and suspicion, slowing progress toward herd immunity. An investment in ARPA-H could accelerate the time it takes to get innovative ideas from bench to bedside, but it could benefit from informing the public about incremental advancements in a way that is easy to understand.

The presidents vision for ARPA-H could help get more medical treatments to market sooner. Building on lessons from DARPA and NIH, the proposed health agency has the potential to pursue the kind of high-risk research that can lead to high-reward results.

Luke Muggy is an operations researcher, Catherine Cohen is a nurse and a health services policy researcher, and Kristie Gore is a senior behavioral scientist at the nonprofit, nonpartisan Rand Corp. This column originally appeared in the Los Angeles Times.

Link:

Proposed new health agency would emphasize innovation - Las Vegas Sun

New officers are making their way to the Salina Salvation Army next month, but their predecessor has left behind a legacy and opportunity for these next leaders to thrive in the community.

Capt. Lynn Lopez received her marching orders and will be moving to Nebraska for a new role with the Salvation Army at the end of June, but she said she will miss everything about her time in Salina and the corps here.

"I have loved, loved, loved meeting so many wonderful people here," Lopez said.

She also said she has had great experiences teaming up with those in the corps here in Salina and working with other people in the community.

Lopez said her new role will be in Beatrice, Nebraska, where she will serve as Western Division/Divisional Headquarters/Service Extension - 360 Life Center Coordinator.

"What that really entails...is that I will be opening this 360 Life Center," Lopez said.

Just like in Kansas, Nebraska has a lot of rural areas that the Salvation Army serves with Service Extension Units.

"I'll be planting this (in Beatrice)," Lopez said. "I'll be their corps officer and their pastor."

She said this site will have everything that the Salvation Army can provide in one location, with social services, thrift store, food and meal programs, and other needs.

"It's for people to come in and get help for everything in one place," Lopez said.

More: Aaron Peck sworn in as Salina city commissioner

Lopez is thankfulthat the Salina corps will be in good hands, no matter who comes in as new officers, thanks to the work that has been done by her team the last few years.

"This corps right here...is up and running, it is smooth programming and I'm sure our new officers will be able to just pick it up and run with it," Lopez said.

She said she feels like a lot has been done in the four and a half years she's been here.

"Things are on track to move into the future," Lopez said.

Lopez isn't yet sure who will be coming in as officers at the Salina corps, but she and the rest of the community will find out in just a few weeks as the Salvation Army will have a commissioning ceremonyon June 13. Lopez said anyone can watch the service by registeringatusccongress2021.org.

Some of the current captains have spouses in training to become officers themselves so it will be a team coming to Salina to lead here.

More: Salina City Commission repeals COVID-19 mask mandate in unanimous vote

"It'll very likely be a family, but we don't know which type of family yet," Lopez said

She did say that no matter who comes, the trajectory for the Salina corps will continue upward and the mission will continue to be to serve and reflect the community it calls home.

"This will be a bilingual corps," Lopez said. "It's important thatwe continue with our Hispanic ministry as well as our English ministry."

Lopez said the corps in Salina isn't the Salvation Army's, it isn't hers and won't be the new officer's corps either. It'll instead belong to the people who live here.

"We operate it, but, for the (people in the) city of Salina and Saline County, this is your community center," Lopez said.

The way Lopez talks about howmany of the values of the Salvation Army are reflected in thiscommunity makes her believe it will be a great place for the new officers and that theyare sure to be welcomed into their new home

"This is the most wonderful community to live in," Lopez said."People are kind and they care and care about others. It's not a selfish community. They're just an extraordinary example of what a community looks like when they make a difference."

Read more here:

'Extraordinary example of community:' Capt. Lopez looks to the future of Salina's Salvation Army as she moves to new role - Salina Journal