Dassault: Looking Forward to a European MALE UAV as FCAS Building Block

02/27/2020

By Pierre Tran

Paris. Dassault Aviation is backing its industrial partner Airbus in budget negotiations for a planned European medium-altitude, long-endurance drone, Eric Trappier, chairman and chief executive of the aircraft builder, said Feb. 27.

“It is Airbus which leads the negotiations,” he told a news conference on 2019 financial results. Those talks relate to analysis and mitigation of risk on an unmanned aerial vehicle.

Dassault “will provide support for Airbus,” he said.

Airbus is due to make a March 2 detailed presentation to the French ministry of the armed forces, setting out the case for a budget in the order of €7.1 or €7.2 billion ($7.7-$7.8 billion), explaining how the company reached the figure, an industry source said.

Dassault will attend that meeting in a support role, a second source said.

Industry had previously sought a budget of €8-10 billion, higher than the four client nations had deemed to be acceptable.

Airbus is prime contractor on the UAV project, with Dassault and Leonardo of Italy  as partners. France, Germany, Italy and Spain are the client nations, with European procurement agency Occar managing the project on their behalf.

Industry seeks to explain to the government the need to factor in provision for risk, as the  program is complex and might turn out to be more expensive, take longer and need know-how not readily available, the first source said.

The government wants to set a budget and stick to it, while industry seeks to include provision to cover the “just in case” bases.

A parliamentary source said, “there is some doubt,” on the European UAV project in view of  cost and lengthy development, while there is “an immediate operational requirement.”

Airbus declined comment.

The procurement office, Direction Générale de l’Armement, was not immediately available.

There is a view in Airbus that the support from Dassault is highly valued and reflects a close cooperation between the two companies.

That link is seen to be unusual in the light of past record, in which the two firms kept distance from each other.

For Dassault, the UAV project posed the question either cooperation between two companies, or one company striking a lone path with little prospect of reward.

Industry sees the risk of governments opting for the General Atomics MQ-9B SkyGuardian, an upgrade to the Reaper, rather than launching a European program.

France set a maximum budget of €7.1 billion for development and production of 21 systems, comprising 63 UAV units, financial website La Tribune reported, drawing on sources who spoke to the financial website in November.

“It is to be hoped that this dossier is favorably concluded, as the European MALE UAV is intended, in a future version, to be part of FCAS,” French senators Cédric Perrin and  Hélène Conway-Mouret said Nov. 21 in a parliamentary report on the 2020 defense budget.

France estimates €8 billion to be spent by 2030 on development of a Future Combat Air System, AFP has reported, based on a briefing by the private office of the armed forces minister.

On export prospects for the Rafale, Finland and Switzerland are expected to decide next year  which fighter jet to pick, Trappier said.

There are talks in India with the air force and navy, and there are other sale prospects, which he declined to disclose.

In Finland, Boeing F/A-18, Dassault Rafale, Eurofighter Typhoon, Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning, and Saab Gripen are in competition.

In Switzerland, those fighters are in a tender, except for the Gripen.

Dassault reported 2019 adjusted net profit of €814 million, up 20 percent from a year ago, on sales of €7.3 billion, up 44 percent. The net profit margin was 11.1 percent of sales, compared to 10.8 percent on a comparable basis.

Dassault expects profit margins to fall, reflecting increased research and development on its Falcon business jet. The company plans to announce this year launch of a new version of the Falcon, which competes with Gulfstream and Bombardier.

The company spent €527 million of own funds on R&D, up from €392 million, reflecting work on its Falcon 6X, due to enter service in 2022.

Orders rose to €5.9 billion from €5 billion, with defense orders accounting for €3.4 billion.

The order book fell to €17.8 billion from €19.4 billion.

Dassault delivered 26 Rafales to export clients, and none to France.

The company expects to ship 13 Rafales to foreign clients this year, and resume deliveries of the fighter jet to France in 2022.

There remains the fifth batch of Rafale orders to be placed in the multi-year budget law, with their deliveries due in 2027.

The featured photo shows Éric Trappier, Chairman and CEO of Dassault Aviation, presenting 2019 annual results on February 27, 2020.

Dassault-Aviation-Financial-Release-Full-year-2019-Results

An Update on Arquus: February 2020

02/26/2020

By Pierre Tran

Paris – Arquus, a builder of light and medium armored vehicles, expects to increase 2020 sales by 10 percent, down from a 38 percent rise in 2019, said chairman and chief executive Emmanuel Levacher.

That “ballistic” trajectory of a forecast dip in sales offers an “opportunity to stabilize activities,” after a sales increase of 72.5 percent over the last two years, he told a news conference.

Arquus built 2,200 vehicles last year, up 47 percent from a year ago, calling 2019 a record year for the company.

The company expects to hit its profit target this year, he said.

Arquus does not publish sales or profit figures, which are reported by the parent company, Volvo, a Swedish truck maker.

Last year’s sales for Arquus were worth some €600 million ($652 million), an industry source said.

Arquus consists of the French brands Acmat, Panhard and Renault Trucks Defense and was formed after the 2018 reorganization of Volvo Group Governmental Sales, a unit of the Volvo company.

Arquus last year booked orders worth €750 million, stable on the previous year. When options of orders in the French Army’s Scorpion modernization program are included, the figure rises to €1.2 billion.

The latter amount gives a book-to-bill, or orders to sales, ratio of 1.

Arquus will receive €240 million in the Belgian order for French armored vehicles in the motorized capability program dubbed Camo, he said.

That Belgian order, worth €1.1 billion, is a government-to-government deal drawing on the Jaguar combat and reconnaissance vehicle and Griffon multi-role troop carrier being built under the French army’s Scorpion modernization program.

Arquus receives 40 percent of value for its work on the Griffon, and some five to 10 percent on the Jaguar, he said. The smaller amount on the latter reflects the high amount spent on weapons on the combat vehicle.

Arquus works with Nexter and Thales in a partnership on the Scorpion program, with the former supplying the remote-controlled machine gun and driveline on the Jaguar.

One of Arquus’s efforts to boost orders lies in a US licensing agreement for its  Bastion troop transport, signed with AM General, the company which builds the humvee vehicle, he said.

That license allows AM General to offer the Bastion in prospective export deals, when the US government buys equipment and sells to client nations under foreign military sales rules.

The success of that license deal requires AM General to win the competition, he said.

Arquus is working on a technology demonstrator dubbed Scarabée, a vehicle which carries the company’s hopes to be the French army’s replacement for the véhicule blindé leger (VBL), a scout car.

There are also expectations of export sales on the Scarabée, which will be commercially launched at the Eurosatory trade show for land weapons, which runs June 8-12. The potential clients are those nations which operate the VBL.

The planned VBL replacement is named véhicule blindé d’aide à l’engagement (VBAE), and is in a later phase of the Scorpion program. The present military budget law, which runs to 2025, does not include funding for development and production of the VBAE.

 

NATO Air Policing

Media got to see what it’s like to be intercepted by Allied fighters on 14 January 2020 during a NATO Air Policing tour of Europe, over various Allied and partner countries.

Climbing aboard a Belgian Air Force Airbus A321-200, they flew from Melsbroek Air Base near Brussels (Belgium) and passed through the airspaces of France, the United Kingdom, Denmark, Finland, Estonia, Lithuania and Poland.

Along the way, jets from Allied and partner countries scrambled to intercept the Airbus as they would during a real Air Policing scramble.

Footage includes shots of French Rafale fighters, British Typhoons, Danish F-16s, Finnish F-18s and Polish F-16s. Interview with German Air Force Lieutenant General Klaus Habersetzer, Commander, NATO Combined Air Operations Centre in Uedem (Germany).

01.15.2020

Natochannel

An Update on the Nigerian Air Force: Anticipated Arrival of JF-17 Fighter Jets

02/25/2020

By defenceWeb

The Nigerian Air Force (NAF) will take delivery of its JF-17 Thunder fighter jets in November this year, and A-29 Super Tucano turboprops in 2022, according to the Chief of Air Staff.

Air Marshal Sadique Abubakar, speaking during the graduation of 2 079 new recruits on 15 February announced the new additions.

He said over the last four and a half years, the Federal Government facilitated an unprecedented increase in the number of aircraft available for NAF operations, bringing the aircraft serviceability rate from 35% in July 2015 up to 82% as at February 2020.

This was brought about by intensive training and retraining of aircraft maintenance engineers and technicians who subsequently played a crucial role in the reactivation of platforms and maintenance of equipment.

“You would recall that 22 platforms were inducted into the NAF since 2015.

“These platforms have since been launched into operations”, he said. Abubakar added the NAF was in the process of acquiring the JF-17 Thunder fighter and the A-29 Super Tucano light attack aircraft. The JF-17 is due to arrive in Nigeria in November 2020, while the Super Tucanos are expected to be inducted into service by 2022.

Highlighting other steps taken by the current NAF leadership, Abubakar noted Special Operations Command was established to address the challenges of asymmetric warfare, such as the one posed by Boko Haram terrorists, while the NAF Regiment Specialty was considerably expanded with majority of personnel trained in Force Protection in Complex Air and Ground Environment (FPCAGE) for enhanced protection of NAF Bases and critical national assets.

The Nigerian Air Force has taken into service armoured vehicles, such as the Paramount Marauder, for example.

Photos posted online in January seem to indicate Nigeria’s Thunders are almost ready for delivery.

The country has three on order but more may be acquired from Pakistan to replace or supplement its F-7Ni fleet – a third of its 15 F-7Ni/FT-7Ni aircraft have been lost in crashes. Nigeria also bought Super Mushshak trainers from Pakistan.

The NAF earlier this month took three new aircraft into service: two armed AW109 helicopters from Italy’s Leonardo and one Mi-171 from Russia. Another Mi-171 is expected, along with two more AW109s (to date, four AW109s have been delivered as the NAF continues to expand its fleet).

This article was published by our partner DefenceWeb on February 18, 2020.

 

 

Indian Air Force to Procure 83 Tejas Jets for ₹39,000cr

02/24/2020

By Jimmy Bhatia

New Delhi: After hard-nosed price negotiations spreading into better parts of two years, HAL has finally agreed to supply Indian Air Force (IAF) with 83 Tejas LCA Mk IA at a cost of Rs 39,000 crore ($5.6 billion approximately).

Earlier, HAL had demanded a staggering Rs 56, 500 crore ($8.1 billion) as the overall cost for the same project. The defence ministry and IAF were initially taken aback at the “exorbitant price” being demanded by HAL to produce the 83 Tejas Mk-1A jets along with the maintenance and infrastructure package.

It may be recalled that in November 2016, the Defence acquisition Council (DAC) had approved the procurement of 83 Tejas Mk-IA jets at a cost of Rs 49,797 crore, but HAL had responded with a quote of around Rs 56,500 crore. This led to a detailed analysis on how the pricing was being done. It was revealed that HAL was also charging profit on imported components. By carrying out item by item scrutiny cost was brought down. The IAF also cut down some of its support requirements to cut costs.

With the contract price now settled at Rs 39,000 crore, the procurement file is being sent to the Cabinet Committee on Security for the final nod. It should be cleared before the end of the current fiscal year, March 31.

In 2016, while offering the Tejas Mk-IA with some much needed improvements, such as, an AESA (active electronically scanned array) radar to replace existing mechanically-steered radar, air-to-air refuelling, long-range BVR (beyond visual range) missiles and advanced electronic warfare to jam enemy radars and missiles, HAL had promised to start inducting the Mk- IA into the IAF by 2019. HAL had also assured IAF that it would improve the maintainability aspects of the jet to ensure better operational availability on the flight-line. However, three precious years have been lost in the bureaucratic quagmire of price negotiations.

Now, once the contract is inked, HAL promises to begin deliveries of the Mark- 1A jets in three years,” said a source. It is hoped that there will be no further slippages in the timelines, as the IAF down to less than 30 fighter squadrons, had pinned its hopes on timely Tejas induction as one of the three pillars for new fighter acquisitions – the other two being induction of Rafale fighters and going ahead with MMRCA-II programme for the acquisition of 114 new jets – to stem any further slide down in its fighter squadrons’ strength and gradually build the strength to 42 jet fighter squadrons required for the requisite deterrence against a dual threat from Pakistan and China.

Notably, the first four Rafale fighters will touch down at Ambala airbase only in May this year, with the remaining 32 following in batches by April 2022 under the Rs 59,000 crore deal inked with France in September 2016.

On the other hand, the perennially slow production rate of the home-grown Tejas jets by HAL, much like its protracted development saga, remains a major concern for the IAF. For example, IAF’s No. 45 ‘Flying Daggers’ squadron at Sulur has till now inducted only 16 of the original – with the earmarked second squadron No. 18 ‘Flying Bullets’ yet to receive anything – out of the original 40 Tejas Mark-1 fighters, which were all slated for delivery by December 2016 under two contracts worth Rs 8,802 crore inked earlier.

The flight testing for Tejas Mark-1A will hopefully be completed by 2022, but the induction of all Mk Is/Mk-IAs would not be complete before 2025/26. After these 123 fighters, the IAF is also looking to induct 170 Tejas Mark-2 or the MWF (medium weight fighters) with more powerful engines and advanced avionics,” another source said.

But the Tejas Mark-2 and the indigenous stealth fifth generation fighter aircraft called the advanced medium combat aircraft (AMCA) are not likely to be available before the IAF celebrates its centenary.

This article was first published by our partner India Strategic on February 17, 2020.

USS Eisenhower Back in Business

The aircraft carrier USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN 69) is ready and open for business.

2.31.2019

Video by Petty Officer 3rd Class Gian Prabhudas and Seaman Apprentice Brianna Thompson

USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN 69)

At the time of the return to sea, Rear Arm. Roy Kelley, Commander,, Naval Air Force Atlantic commented (March 28, 2019:

Today, USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN 69) returned to sea for the first time in more than 18 months, officially marking the end of the ship’s Planned Incremental Availability (PIA).

For Sailor and shipyard worker alike, the conclusion of this maintenance period signifies the completion of many months of teambuilding, hard work, and coordination. In short, the ship is greater today than it was when it first arrived at NNSY in August, 2017.

Completing PIA, however, is only the first step in preparing Ike for being operationally ready. Having completed the maintenance phase of the Optimized Fleet Response Plan (OFRP), this capital warship must now prepare to do what carriers do: train to conduct prompt and sustained combat operations at sea.

This is crucial in our renewed era of great power competition with aggressors that threaten our Nation and our way of life. Mighty Ike being able to head out to sea again is truly a win for us all. It means Carrier Strike Group (CSG) 10 can get after it and be prepared to “fight tonight,” projecting combat-striking power anywhere, anytime.

Ike rejoins the operational waterfront in the company of giants. USS Harry S. Truman (CVN 75) remains in the sustainment phase of OFRP, ready to go when called upon. USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72) is in the integration phase, training with elements of her carrier strike group for their upcoming deployment. Together, they demonstrate the maneuverability, adaptability and strength of the United States Navy.

Our Sailors operate worldwide, quite often far from our Nation’s shorelines. We owe these professional warfighters highly capable ships and aircraft, advanced equipment, and the most relevant training available. Today, I am proud to say Mighty Ike brings one piece of that complex picture into focus. As the ship’s motto goes she is truly, “Greater Each Day.”

 

Development, Training and Learning: Shaping the Skill Sets for the 21st Century Fight

02/23/2020

By Robbin Laird

The strategic shift from the land wars of the past two decades to preparing for the high-end fight is having a significant effect on the dynamics of change affecting the very nature of the C2 and ISR needed for operations in the contested battlespace.

An ability to prevail in full spectrum crisis management is highlighting the shift to distributed operations but in such a way that the force is integrateable to achieve the mass necessary to prevail across the spectrum of operations.

Much like the character of C2 and ISR is changing significantly, training is also seeing fundamental shifts as well. 

For the US Navy, training has always been important, and what is occurring in the wake of the changes in the national security strategy might appear to be a replication of what has gone down for the past twenty years; but it is not.

In fact, it is challenging to describe the nature of the shift with regard to training.

Much like the shifts in C2 and ISR which I have discussed with the Navy’s Air Boss in a recent interview, the shifts in training are equally significant.

Indeed, when I visited San Diego last Fall, I had a chance to talk with Vice Admiral Miller about how one might conceptualize the nature of the shift in training for the US Navy.

In that article, the discussion highlighted a number of the changes underway but the target goal was highlighted by the Air Boss as follows: Training is now about shaping domain knowledge for the operational force to ensure that “we can be as good as we can be all of the time.”

With the focus on ensuring the capability of the distributed fleet to deliver the desired effects throughout the spectrum of conflict and crisis management, the goal is for the sailors, operators and leaders of the combat force to have the most appropriate skill sets available for the 21stcentury fight.

And with the introduction of new technologies into the fleet, ranging from the new capabilities being provided for the integrateable air wing, to the expanded capabilities of the surface fleet with the weapons revolution and the evolution of the maritime remote extenders, to the return to a priority role for ASW with the submarine fleet and the maritime reconnaissance assets working together to deliver enhanced capabilities to deter and to defeat adversarial subsurface assets, the dynamics of training change as well.

For example, with software upgradeable aircraft, the capabilities of the aviation assets you operated with on your last tour are likely to not be the same as you will deploy with in your next tour.

In a visit to Norfolk last Fall, Rear Admiral Peter Garvin, Commander of the Maritime Patrol and Reconnaissance Group (MPRF), we discussed how he saw the training challenge evolving.

There is an obvious return to the anti-submarine mission by the U.S. and allied navies with the growing capabilities of the 21st century authoritarian powers. However, as adversary submarines evolve, and their impact on warfare becomes even more pronounced, ASW can no longer be considered as a narrow warfighting specialty.

This is reflected in Rear Admiral Garvin’s virtuous circle with regard to what he expects from his command, namely, professionalism, agility and lethality. The professionalism which defines and underpins the force is, in part, about driving the force in new innovative directions.  To think and operate differently in the face of an evolving threat. Operational and tactical agility is critical to ensure that the force can deliver the significant combat effect expected from a 21st century maritime reconnaissance and strike force. 

Finally, it is necessary but insufficient to be able to find and fix an adversary. The ability to finish must be realized lest we resign ourselves to be mere observers of a problem.

And it is not simply about organic capabilities on your platform.  The P-3 flew alone and unafraid; the dyad is flying as part of a wider networked enterprise, and one which can be tailored to a threat, or an area of interest, and can operate as a combat cloud empowering a tailored force designed to achieve the desired combat effects.

The information generated by the ‘Family of Systems’ can be used with the gray zone forces such as the USCG cutters or the new Australian Offshore Patrol Vessels. The P-8/Triton dyad is a key enabler of full spectrum crisis management operations, which require the kind of force transformation which the P-8/Triton is a key part of delivering the U.S. and core allies.

How do you train your P-8 team to be to work with the gray zone assets to deliver the kind of crisis management effect you want and need?

Clearly, the training mission is evolving to prepare for the high-end fight, and indeed, preparing to operate across the spectrum of crisis management.

But how best to describe the kind of evolution training for the fleet is undergoing?

To continue further throughout on how best to do so, I had the chance  to visit Norfolk this month to discuss the focus and the challenges with three  admirals who are key players in shaping a way ahead.

My host was Rear Admiral Peter Garvin, and he invited two other admirals as well to the discussion.

The first Rear Admiral John F. Meier, head of the Navy Warfare Development Command, with whom Ed Timperlake and I had met with when he was the CO of the USS Gerald R. Ford.

The second was Rear Admiral Dan Cheever, Commander, Carrier Strike Group FOUR.

The day before Ed and I met with Rear Admiral Gregory Harris, the head of N-98, who introduced into our discussion a key hook into my discussions with the three admirals in Norfolk.

We were discussing the evolving role of Naval Aviation Warfighting Development Center at Fallon and the Admiral referred to Carrier Strike Group FOUR as a “mini” Fallon, which was, of course, suggestive of the dynamics of change within training.

We had a wide-ranging discussion about a number of issues, but I will focus here on our discussion about the dynamics of change revolved around the training concept or construct. 

What I will identify are my take-aways from the conversation, which I am not going to attribute to any one admiral, or even suggest that there was a consensus on the points I will identify.

What I am providing are key takeaways from my perspective of how the Navy is addressing the dynamics of training for the high end fight or in my terms, operating across the full spectrum of crisis management.

For me, the ability to operate across the full spectrum of crisis management highlights the central contribution which the Navy-Marine Corps team delivers to the nation.

Operating from global sea-bases, with an ability to deliver a variety of lethal and non-lethal effects, from the insertion of Marines, to delivering strategic strike, from my perspective, in the era we have entered, the capabilities which the Navy-Marine Corps teams, indeed all of the sea services, including the Military Sealift Command and the US Coast Guard, provide essential capabilities for the direct defense of the nation.

One key challenge facing training is the nature of the 21stcentury authoritarian powers. 

How will they fight?

How will their evolving technologies fit into their evolving concepts of operations?

What will most effective deter or provide for escalation control against them?

There is no simple way to know this.

When I spent my time in the US government and in government think tanks, I did a great deal of work on thinking through how Soviet and Warsaw Pact forces might fight.

That was difficult enough, but now with the Chinese, Russians, and Iranians to mention three authoritarian regimes, it is a challenge to know how they will operate and how to train to deter, dissuade, or defeat them.

A second challenge is our own capabilities.

How will we perform in such engagements?

We can train to what we have in our combat inventory, we can seek to better integrate across joint and coalition forces, but what will prove to be the most decisive effect we can deliver against an adversary?

This means that those leading the training effort have to think through the scope of what the adversary can do and we can do, and to shape the targets of an evolving training approach.

And to do so within the context of dynamically changing technology, both in terms of new platforms, but the upgrading of those platforms, notably as software upgradeability becomes the norm across the force.

The aviation elements of the Marine Corps-Navy team clearly have been in advance of the surface fleet in terms of embracing software upgradeability, but this strategic shift is underway there as well.

The Admirals all emphasized the importance of the learning curve from operations informing training commands, and the training commands enabling more effective next cycle operations.

In this sense training, was not simply replicating skill sets but combat learning reshaping skill sets as well.

Clearly, the Admirals underscored that there was a sense of urgency about the training effort understood in these terms, and no sense of complacency whatsoever about the nature of the challenges the Navy faced in getting it right to deal with the various contingencies of the 21stcentury fight.

The Navy has laid a solid foundation for working a way ahead and that is based on the forging of an effort to enhance the synergy and cross linkages among the various training commands to work to draw upon each community’s capabilities more effectively.

Specifically, NAWDC (Naval Air Warfare Development Center), SMWDC (Naval Surface and Mine Warfighting Development Center), UWDC (Undersea Warfare Development Center), NIWDC (Naval Information Warfare Development Center) and exercise and training commands, notably Carrier Strike Groups FOUR and FIFTEEN, are closely aligned and working through integrated operational approaches and capabilities.

When we visited Fallon in the past, we have seen the evolution not just in terms of naval integration (with surface warfare officers at Fallon) but the working relationships with Nellis (USAF) and MAWTS-1 (USMC).

And given the evolution of the USMC, the Navy teams with Marine Expeditionary Forces (MEFs), Marine Air Ground Task Force Training Command (MAGTAFTC), and Expeditionary Operations Training Group (EOTGs) in order to train the Navy and Marine Corps Team, notably with regard to the activities of CSG-4/15 for exercises.

Naval Warfare Development center is at the heart of Navy training for their all domain focus and efforts. NWDC isthe key Warfare Development Center which bridges the tactical to the operational and even the strategic level.

The synergy across the training enterprise is at the heart of being able to deliver the integrated distributed force as a core warfighting capability to deal with evolving 21stcentury threats.

There are a number of key drivers of change as well which we discussed.

One key driver is the evolution of technology to allow for better capabilities to make decisions at the tactical edge.

A second is the challenge of speed, or the need to operate effectively in a combat environment in which combat speed is a key aspect, as opposed to slo mo war evidenced in the land wars.

How to shape con-ops that master C2 at the tactical edge, and rapid decision making in a fluid but high-speed combat environment?

In a way, what we were discussing is a shift from training preparing for the next fight with relatively high confidence that the next one was symmetric with what we know to be a shift to proactive training.

How to shape the skill sets for the fight which is evolving in terms of technologies and concepts of operations for both Red and Blue?

In short, the Navy is in the throes of dealing with changes in the strategic environment and the evolving capabilities which the Navy-Marine Corps team can deploy in that environment.

And to do so requires opening the aperture on the combat learning available to the fleet through its training efforts.

The featured photo shows the Ohio-class fleet guided-missile submarine USS Florida (SSGN 728) transits the Mediterranean Sea, Aug. 27, 2019. Florida, the third of four SSGN platforms, is capable of conducting clandestine strike operations, joint special operation forces operations, battle space preparation and information operations, SSGN/SSN consort operations, carrier and expeditionary strike group operations, battle management and experimentation of future submarine payloads. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Jonathan Nelson/Released).

This platform illustrates the opportunity and challenge for US Navy training: how to leverage the wide range of capabilities which this platform can deliver to the force. How to provide its capabilities to the integrated distributed force?

Training across the Navy and the joint force is required to do so.

U.S. Navy Biographies - REAR ADMIRAL DANIEL L. CHEEVER
U.S. Navy Biographies - REAR ADMIRAL JOHN F. OSCAR MEIER
U.S. Navy Biographies - REAR ADMIRAL PETER A. GARVIN