In an effort to be in compliance with GDPR we are providing you with the latest documentation about how we collect, use, share and secure your information, we want to make you aware of our updated privacy policy here
Enter your name and email address below to receive our newsletter.
2016-09-24 With traditional Japanese taiko drums providing a dramatic aural backdrop, Kenji Wakamiya, State Minister of Defence, Japanese Government, came to the stage to discuss the significance of the rollout of the first F-35 for Japan.
“With its low observability and network capability, the F-35 is the most advanced air system with cutting-edge capability as a multi-role fighter.
As the security environment surrounding Japan has become increasingly severe, because of its excellence, it is very significant for the defense of Japan to commit to acquiring the F-35 year by year.
Given that the United States Government has designated Japan as a regional depot in the Asia-Pacific area, introduction of F-35A to Japan is a perfect example, enhancing the Japan-US alliance.”
He then concluded with a core point about the F-35 in the context of evolving Japanese defense industrial relationships as well:
“Today is not simply the roll out of a new fighter aircraft but it is an historic new step in the partnership between Japan and the United States and our Air Forces and our defense industries.”
Then Gen. Yoshiyuki Sugiyama, JASDF Chief of Air Staff, spoke and noted that: “The F-35A has remarkably advanced system.
This highly sophisticated 5 th generation fighter will bring a great development to air operations as a game changer.
In integration with current JASDF assets, it surely promises to enormously contribute to not only the benefit of our national defense and but also regional stability.”
The press release for the event discussed it as follows:
Senior Japanese and U.S. government officials joined Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT) to celebrate the roll out of the first Japan Air Self Defense Force (JASDF) F-35A Lightning II, marking a major milestone in Japan’s enhanced national defense and strengthening the future of the U.S-Japan security alliance.
The ceremony was attended by more than 400 guests from both governments, militaries and defense industries.
Kenji Wakamiya, Japan’s State Minister of Defense spoke at the event, saying, “With its low observability and network capability, the F-35 is the most advanced air system with cutting-edge capability as a multi-role fighter. As the security environment surrounding Japan has become increasingly severe, because of its excellence, it is very significant for the defense of Japan to commit to acquiring the F-35 year by year.
The F-35A is expected to fulfill an important central role in Japan’s air defense system. Given that the United States Government has designated Japan as a regional depot in the Asia-Pacific area, introduction of F-35A to Japan is a perfect example, enhancing the Japan-US alliance.”
Gen. Yoshiyuki Sugiyama,JASDF Chief of Air Staff, said, “The F-35A has remarkably advanced system. This highly sophisticated 5th generation fighter will bring a great development to air operations as a game changer. In integration with current JASDF assets, it surely promises to enormously contribute to not only the benefit of our national defense and but also regional stability.”
Other distinguished guests attending included: Dr. Hideaki Watanabe, commissioner of Japan’s Acquisition, Technology and Logistics Agency, Frank Kendall, undersecretary of defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, Gen. Terrence O’Shaughnessy, commander of U.S. Pacific Air Forces, and Marillyn Hewson, Lockheed Martin chairman, president and CEO.
“The men and women of Lockheed Martin are honored to bring the exceptional capability of the F-35A to our partners and friends in Japan,” said Hewson. “The security alliance between Japan and the United States has been a cornerstone of peace and prosperity in the Asia-Pacific region for generations, and we are proud to continue that legacy of cooperation with the rollout of the first F-35A to the Japan Ministry of Defense and the Japan Air Self Defense Force today.”
Japan’s F-35 program includes 42 F-35A Conventional Take Off and Landing aircraft, acquired through the U.S. government’s Foreign Military Sales program. The first four aircraft are built in Fort Worth and the remaining 38 aircraft will be built at the Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Final Assembly & Check-Out facility in Nagoya, Japan, where aircraft assembly is underway. Maintenance training for the first JASDF F-35A technicians is underway at Eglin AFB, Florida, and the first JASDF F-35A pilots are scheduled to begin training at Luke AFB, Arizona, in November.
As the article above mentions, the bulk of the Japanese F-35s will be built at the Nagoya facility.
The Nagoya FACO will be the second international F-35 production facility. The other is located at Italy’s Cameri air base. Nagoya has always been the focal point of Japan’s aviation industry. The aircraft being built at the plant will be the fifth one delivered to the Japanese forces.
Additionally, the US Department of Defense selected the Nagoya FACO in 2014 for the North Asia-Pacific regional heavy airframe Maintenance Repair Overhaul & and Upgrade (MROU) facility.
In this video produced by the Japanese Ministry of Defense, the Japanese look back to 2015 and the evolution of the strategic environment and the evolution of the Japanese Self Defense Force.
For a look at the Japanese rethink on defense see the video below which was released by the Japanese MOD on March 14, 2014:
2016-09-23 Exercise KAKADU has come to a close in the north of Australia with 19 ships and submarines showing Navy can rapidly deploy a large number of major fleet units and lead a multinational maritime force.
Navy has a constant presence in the seas around Australia and Exercise KAKADU provided an opportunity to enhance interoperability with partner nations, demonstrating a high-end warfighting capability in the region.
The Officer conducting Exercise KAKADU, Commodore Mal Wise, OAM, RAN, said the graduated training program was successfully achieved, with all nations receiving great benefit from the Exercise.
“Being able to project our forces from the north of Australia is a vital component of Australia’s maritime strategy.
“Exercise KAKADU proves that Navy is present, persistent and potent at sea.
90470random1.05.0
“These types of exercises allow us to continually develop our tactics and improve our performance at sea alongside our partners to build understanding, capability and interoperability,” Commodore Wise said.
Anti-submarine warfare was a key feature of KAKADU 2016, with Australia deploying its new generation MH-60R Seahawk Romeo helicopters with dipping sonar, and the United States bringing a P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft.
Singapore also demonstrated its Scan Eagle Unmanned Aerial Vehicle capability.
Exercise KAKADU is Australia’s premier international maritime exercise, bringing together navies and air forces from the Asian, Pacific and Indian Ocean regions to test integration and war fighting abilities.
The Australians are focused on the extended defense of Australia or what one might call their version of an anti-access or area denial strategy.
The Aussies are shaping a transformed military force.
It is one which is built around new platforms but working together across services to achieve a joint effect and able to operate in a joint manner in an extended battlespace.
It is about extending the defense perimeter of Australia and shaping, in effect, their own version of an anti-access area denial strategy.
They also recognize a key reality of 21st century military evolution in terms of shaping an integrated information-based operating force.
Interactive modernization of the force is built around decision-making superiority and that will come with an effective information dominant force.
Recently, the Williams Foundation of Canberra, Australia held its latest seminar on force integration, this one focused on air-sea integration. As Chief of Navy, Vice-Admiral Tim Barrett put it: “As we add new platforms, and modernize those we have the goal is not to build a joint force but an integrated one.”
Notably, the Australians invited the US Navy to bring its P-8 to the exercise as part of the coalition effort, but also to anticipate the arrival of their own P-8s and Tritons, and to shape a way ahead for their joint force IN advance of receiving their own platforms.
Exercise KAKADU is a joint-enabled, biennial exercise hosted by the Royal Australian Navy (RAN) and supported by the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF).
KAKADU is the Navy’s premier maritime exercise, developing interoperability between nations in the maritime and air domains, and providing training opportunities for maritime security and surveillance.
Exercise KAKADU, was held from 12 to 23 September 2016, will involve 19 ships and submarines, 18 aircraft and more than 3000 personnel from 19 Asia Pacific and Indian Ocean navies and air forces.
Participating nations include Australia, Canada, Fiji, France, India, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Singapore, Thailand, Timor Leste, Tonga, United States of America, and Vietnam.
The slideshow above highlights photos provided by the Australian Ministry of Defence with regard to the exercise.
2016-09-23 In a recent press release from Airbus Defence and Space, dated September 22, 2016, it was announced that Airbus Defence and Space had reached an agreement with the European Aviation Safety Agency for the design and development of unmanned aerial systems intended for certification in civilian operations.
“After more than two years’ work Airbus Defence and Space has become the world’s first company to be approved by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) for the design and development of unmanned aerial systems (UAS) intended for civil type certification.
The company’s existing Design Organisation Approval (DOA) for conventional manned aircraft has been extended to cover UAS – the critical step in allowing it to achieve type certification for that class of aircraft.
The milestone was reached two years after its Atlante UAS became the first UAS to be submitted to EASA for civil certification.
EASA and Airbus Defence and Space have been working closely together to develop certification processes based on the existing system for manned aircraft and to agree new practice where no procedures were previously in place.
Zephyr UAV in flight. Credit: Airbus Defense and Space
Jana Rosenmann, Head of UAS, Airbus Defence and Space said: “Establishing the UAS category in DOAs will be a key element in the regulatory regime needed to foster UAS development in Europe. As a company we are determined to maintain a leading industrial position in the civil UAS sector, but all players stand to benefit from the establishment of the optimum regulatory framework.”
Earlier this year, at the Airbus Defence and Space Trade Media Event held in Germany on June 20, 2016, Rosenman had discussed the approach of the company to UASs, including a perspective on their role in civilian applications.
Rosenmann predicts that the global UAV market will rise from around $10.5 billion in 2016 to nearly $18 billion in 2025, with two thirds of that coming from the United States. Medium altitude, long endurance (MALE) UAVs are predicted to make up the vast majority of market value.
She told media in Germany this week that Airbus is ‘crossing the Rubicon’ and moving into the commercial market and has spent a lot of time engaging with this market.
“Everybody is talking about the civil market, with a focus on small consumer drones, of which thousands are flying around.” She said Airbus is looking to see what strategy to take with regard to the commercial market.
One example of out of the box thinking with regard to UAVs is the Zephyr pseudo satellite, a solar powered aircraft operating in the stratosphere above weather and regular air traffic. Its main applications are surveillance, communications and Internet. So far it has flown 900 hours, including a single flight that lasted 14 days.
The Zephyr S (single tail) has a wingspan of 25 metres, payload of 5 kg and weight of 55 kg but Airbus is working on the larger Zephyr T (twin tail), with a 33 metre wingspan, weight of 140 kg and 20 kg payload. The United Kingdom Ministry of Defence has ordered two for a capability demonstration next year, and is in negotiations for a third.
Rosenmann said she saw enormous UAV potential from the commercial world, with Airbus in negotiations with information technology companies in this regard, with a focus on providing hubs for Internet connectivity, with military contracts following on from those.
But what is missing from this discussion is the key issue of the transformation of air traffic control associated with what in the United States is called next gen and in Europe SESAR.
And this crossing of UAS with space based air traffic control systems certainly is a key development for a company like Airbus Defence and Space.
In a study of the roll out of NextGen in the United States, we looked at a number of challenges which unmanned systems posed for the evolving space-based system for air traffic management which suggest the challenges in shaping an effective way ahead for the use of UAVs for civilian taskings as well.
The national air space is in effect the ocean within which the USAF operates and as such has a major stake in the transformation of ATM. NextGen will enable the shaping of an effective common operating picture (COP), and ADS-B which is a key element being embedded in aircraft can help deal with the challenge
The shift from ground-based radar to space is captured by the role of ADS-B. As originally conceived, ground stations for GPS signals would be used to provide for the inputs into the cockpits which would allow for the aircraft to gain significant situational awareness of their operating space, and with the out function the planes can provide others as well as the air traffic controllers with tools to re-shape the operational management space.
The challenge is that as the COP is shaped there is going to be more noise distortion, more traffic, a growth of unmanned systems operating in the airspace – all of this will enhance the challenge for shaping a secure and agile airspace management system.
One of the key capabilities, which the FAA is mandated to deliver by Congress, is the ability to manage unmanned aerial vehicles within the national airspace.
(For the FAA roadmap with regard to the integration of UAVs into the national air space see the following:
And one of the tasks, is the USAF working the FAA to deliver such a capability.
At a recent conference about robotic technology in Washington, D.C., a number of military members spoke about the importance of integrating drones along with manned aircraft.
“The stuff from Afghanistan is going to come back,” Steve Pennington, the Air Force’s director of ranges, bases and airspace, said at the conference. The Department of Defense “doesn’t want a segregated environment. We want a fully integrated environment.”
That means the Pentagon wants the same rules for drones as any other military aircraft in the U.S. today.
Currently, UAVs can fly only with special access in the U.S. national airspace, which requires a special certificate of authorization. These certificates very and have numerous and varied restrictions.
In the interim solution, policy, procedures and technology will be in place to permit UAVS to operate with non-segregated access in selective areas. Ground Based Sense and Avoid systems (GBSAA) will be available to mange UAVs within those selective areas.
And over the long term, the goal is to allow Remotely Piloted Aircraft or UAVS with integration into National Airspace. There will be a mixture of systems in play to allow for ATC of a mixed manned-remotely piloted air space.
In effect, the technology in NextGen and the UAV integration challenge leads in the same direction: fundamentally changing a highly centralized culture of control by the legacy ATC system into one where the ATC focuses on overall risk management and mitigation and the pilots of both RPA and manned aircraft re-shape how they handle their roles within the airspace to do sense and avoid as the air traffic pattern is altered to yield the new flight paths envisaged by the founders of NextGen.
There are clearly a number of technological issues to be overcome in enabling the effective management of remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) in the national airspace.
These technological hurdles are underscored in a 2012 Air Force Times article.
The Air Force and FAA agree there should be no restrictions on unmanned aircraft flying at altitudes between 18,000 feet and 60,000 feet, known as Class A airspace. At those altitudes, all aircraft — manned and unmanned — operate under instrument flight rules, which means the pilot relies primarily on instruments to control the plane within a flight plan filed with the FAA. Those instruments can be in the cockpit or, in the case of unmanned aircraft, in a ground control station. Either way, air traffic controllers are responsible for maintaining safe distances between aircraft operating under IFR.
Below 18,000 feet, pilots are permitted to use visual flight rules, which allow them to look out of the cockpit to navigate and avoid other aircraft. Under VFR, safe separation is the responsibility of the pilot, who does not have to communicate with air traffic controllers, except near controlled airports and some busy areas. There is also controlled IFR traffic below 18,000 feet, but pilots of those aircraft still must look out for uncontrolled VFR traffic.
However, the military’s unmanned aircraft do not have the ability to “sense and avoid” nearby aircraft. So below 18,000 feet, the FAA allows drones to fly only in narrow, segregated flight corridors or in areas for which special permission has been granted.
The Air Force can’t install sense-and-avoid equipment on the Predators because the necessary gear — radars, infrared cameras, transponders — is either too big or consumes too much power. A Predator equipped with sense-and-avoid equipment “can’t carry anything else,” said Dave Bither, Mav6’s vice president for strategic development. “Right now, the technology is a generation away.”
With that in mind, the Air Force is trying to convince the FAA that, in the short term, readings from ground radars can be sent to pilots in ground control stations. These radar readings would serve as the core for a ground-based sense-and-avoid system.
The FAA has agreed to work with the Pentagon on the ground-based proposal, but it expects the radars to have limited impact on the problem.
“From a practical standpoint, the ground-based sense-avoid is likely to be much more of a localized solution,” said an FAA official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. “Radar can only reach out so far.”
Les Smith, the FAA’s flight technologies and procedures division manager, said the agency’s biggest technological challenge is sense and avoid, although “we welcome anything [the Air Force] comes up with.”
The Air Force is pushing the radar concept because it wants to avoid creating columns of restricted airspace around UAV bases. Restricting more airspace would disrupt civilian air traffic and defeat the service’s effort to normalize unmanned operations.
For the next five to 10 years, the Air Force wants to use existing ground-based air traffic control radars and other long-range search radars already in the Air Force inventory, Pennington said.
“We’d repurpose current existing ATC and long-range radars and provide a picture to the crew in the GCS that shows both the cooperative and non-cooperative” aircraft, Pennington said, referring to radar icons that display the identity information broadcast by aircraft, and those that are unidentified. “What the ground-based sense and avoid is designed to do is to provide you coverage until you get into Class A airspace, or if we’re going to continue transiting below 18,000 feet.”
Around the service’s RQ-4 Global Hawk base in Grand Forks, N.D., for example, the Air Force has created a transition airspace zone, but it would return that airspace to civil users once the ground-based sense-and-avoid system is in place, Pennington said.
The reliance on radars would not require a large leap of faith, Pennington said. It would be relatively easy, he said, to monitor air traffic in narrowly focused corridors in which unmanned aircraft flew predetermined courses.
But that would be a short-term solution. If unmanned planes are to operate with few restrictions, the Air Force will either have to come up with a way to more closely monitor all of the airspace inside the U.S. or find an airborne solution, Pennington said.
“Airborne sense and avoid is the follow-on,” he said.
That follow-on, Smith said, is “much more attractive and preferred.” However, it will be much more difficult to develop and build.
There are two hurdles, Pennington said. With the possible exception of the Global Hawks, the Air Force’s unmanned planes don’t have enough electrical power and volume to accommodate sense-and-avoid equipment. The Navy is taking the lead on sense-and-avoid technology under its Broad Area Maritime Surveillance program, in which Northrop Grumman is developing a variant of the Global Hawk for ocean surveillance.
The FAA is particularly concerned about the size, weight and power issues, Smith said.
The vast majority of unmanned planes are fairly small and fly under 18,000 feet, he said.
The Defense Department has looked at airborne radars and airborne camera systems. But the FAA’s Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast apparatus — for which every aircraft is equipped with a next-generation transponder that would transmit aircraft data such as altitude, velocity and separation — is gaining favor as the basis of a Defense Department airborne sense-and-avoid architecture. This technology is in development under the FAA’s Next-Generation Air Transportation System.
“Probably the greater capability over time is going to be the ADS-B,” Pennington said.
However, the FAA is not sold on the ADS-B for airborne sense and avoid for unmanned aircraft, Smith said.
“I would say from the FAA perspective, we’re open to industry to come up with a technical solution to sense and avoid,” he said. “We’re not limiting the technology, but we haven’t endorsed any particular technology.”
The second hurdle as Pennington sees it is that the Air Force and the FAA also need to come to an agreement on lost command link procedures.
“Our concern with the command-and-control link is the reliability and integrity of that link itself,” Smith said. “The second part would be predictability of the aircraft when that occurs…..”
2016-09-22 Earlier, Second Line of Defense has raised the question several times about whether the execution of the Mistral deal made any sense in light of Russian actions in Europe.
Whatever the logic of negotiating a deal with Russia in 2011, the strategic situation has changed dramatically.
The seizure of Crimea has returned European direct defense to the table, and the Nordic states in NATO have clearly expressed not only their concern but increased resources for their direct defense and are concerned with Baltic sovereignty.
In a piece published in EUObserver on August 7, 2015, the cancellation of the program by the French government was the focus of attention.
French president Francois Hollande’s office announced on Wednesday (5 August) that a deal has been reached with President Vladimir Putin to pay Russia compensation for cancelling the delivery of two French Mistral warships over the Ukraine crisis.
Russia will be “fully reimbursed” for the two warships, the Elysee Palace said in a statement.
According to Le Figaro, France will pay back a little less than €1bn to Russia, a sum that falls short of what Moscow initially demanded (€1.2bn) and is more than what Paris had said it would pay (€800m).
The payment covers what the Kremlin had already paid to Paris for the ships as well as some costs to do with the training of Russian sailors at Saint-Nazaire, a port town in the west of France, in spring this year.
Both the Kremlin and the French government said they considered the matter closed.
What then transpired was a search for a customer for the ship or to be more accurate prior to the decision the French government sought a buyer to compensate in part for their losses. Reportedly, the final bill for France came in at a little more than $2.6 billion, well above the $1.2 billion Russia originally paid for both.
And according to a story on France 24 published on 8/7/15:
Egypt and Saudi Arabia’s reported interest in the French warships comes as the two Sunni powers have been pushing for a joint Arab force to counter the threat of Islamist militancy on the heels of an Iran nuclear deal that has rattled several Sunni Arab regimes.
The Anwar El Sadat, a mistral-class Landing Helicopter Dock, delivered ti the Egyptian Navy by DCNS. Photo courtesy DCNS
On July 30, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi and Saudi Defence Minister and Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman signed a “Cairo Declaration” aimed at boosting military ties and economic cooperation between the two countries.
In a statement announcing the signing of the Cairo Declaration, the Egyptian presidential office noted that, “The two sides stressed the need to exert all efforts to boost security and stability in the region, and to work together to protect Arab national security,” in what was widely viewed as a reference to Shiite Iran’s growing influence in the region.
Saudi Arabia has been instrumental in keeping the Egyptian economy afloat following Sisi’s ouster of the democratically elected former Egyptian leader Mohammed Morsi. Despite international condemnation over Morsi’s ouster, oil-rich Saudi Arabia gave Egypt a financial assistance package of more than €3.7 billion (4 billion USD).
The Egyptians have been able to buy not only the two Mistrals but 24 new Rafale jets as well with Saudi help.
And now the Egyptians have taken delivery of the second Mistral-class ship.
According to our partner defenceWEB in a story published on 9/22/16:
The Egyptian Navy has taken delivery of its second and final Mistral class landing helicopter dock, Anwar el-Sadat, while DCNS has floated the first of four Gowind corvettes for Egypt.
The Anwar el-Sadat (L 1020) was handed over to the Egyptian Navy in Saint Nazaire, France, on 16 September in a ceremony attended by Egyptian Navy Chief of Staff Osama Rabie, the chairman and CEO of DCNS, Hervé Guillou, and the president of STX France, Laurent Castaing, together with senior French and Egyptian officials.
It departed St Nazaire on 21 September for Egypt and en route is scheduled to take part in a joint exercise with the French Navy in Toulon. Arrival in Alexandria is scheduled for 6 October.
Shipbuilder DCNS said 180 sailors have been training on the vessel since June in conjunction with DCNS, STX France and Defense Conseil International. In all, close to 400 Egyptian sailors will have received training in this way.
On 10 October 2015, DCNS signed a contract with the Ministry of Defence of the Arab Republic of Egypt for the supply of two Mistral-class Landing Helicopter Dock vessels (LHDs). The delivery of the first of these two helicopter carriers, the LHD Gamal Abdel Nasser (L 1010) took place on 2 June 2016.
Peter Roberts, a senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute and a former Royal Navy officer, said Egypt’s military is shifting its focus, previously on the Sinai, to a more regional outlook.
“It does provide an interesting window into the decision-making of Egypt’s leaders at this moment,” he said.
Analysts said the purchase showed Egypt’s attempt to take a more muscular role in the region, notably with the disintegration of Yemen and Libya.
“The reality is that Egypt isn’t going to try to conquer Libya or Yemen,” said Ben Moores, an analyst with IHS Janes.
And “General Hisham Al-Halabi, military advisor at the Nasser Military Sciences Academy, describes the Mistral as “a military command ship capable of performing major tasks in amphibious operations, equipped with combat management, tactical naval information and satellite communications systems.”
The Russians came out well in the deal for after their Syrian foothold expanded, they were then able to arm the Mistral ships along the lines they intended to do for themselves, but now as part of arms sales relationship with Egypt.
In this report, the major presentations and discussions at the Williams Foundation seminar on new approaches to air-sea integration held on August 10, 2016 in Canberra, Australia are highlighted along with interviews conducted before, during and after the seminar as well.
Interviews with the Army, Navy, and Air Force have been woven into the evolving narrative of joint integration, as well as inputs from the two major foreign guests to the seminar, Rear Admiral Manazir, the Deputy Chief of US Naval Operations for Warfare Systems, and Captain Nick Walker of the Royal Navy.
Beginning in March 2014, the Williams Foundation began a series of seminars and workshops to examine both conceptually and practically ways to build a 21st century combat force, which can prevail in the extended battlespace.
This can be looked at as a force operating in what the U.S. Chief of Naval Operations as kill webs or what an Australian Army General called building an Australian anti-access anti-denial strategy.
What is unique about what Williams has done is to shape a public discussion of the opportunities and challenges to shaping such a force.
And through the seminars, the conversation has evolved and generated more joint force involvement as well.
The seminar and interviews provide insight into the way ahead to shape an integrated Australian Defence Force. As Chief of Navy, Vice Admiral Barrett put it: “We are not building an interoperable navy; we are building an integrated force for the Australian Defence Force.”
He drove home the point that ADF integration was crucial in order for the ADF to support government objectives in the region and beyond and to provide for a force capable of decisive lethality.
By so doing, Australia would have a force equally useful in coalition operations in which distributed lethality was the operational objective.
The Australian military is shaping a transformed military force, one built around new platforms but ones that operate in a joint manner in an extended battlespace. The goal is to extend the defense perimeter of Australia and create, in effect, their own version of an Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) strategy.
They also recognize a key reality of 21st century military evolution in terms of shaping an integrated information-based operating force. Interactive modernization of the force is built around decision-making superiority and that will come with an effective information dominant force.
That makes the Aussies a key partner to the US and other allies in discussing openly a path for force transformation along lines where cutting edge thinking is occurring in the US and allied forces. Put bluntly, they are driving a public discussion of transformation in a way we have not seen in the United States for a long time.
The goal was put clearly in an interview by Craig Heap, commander of the Surveillance and Response Group in the Royal Australian Air Force in an interview.
“We are small but we want to be capable of being a little Tasmanian Devil that you don’t want to play with because if you come at us, were going to give you a seriously hard time that will probably not be worth the effort; deterrence in its purest form.”
During the Williams Foundation seminar on Air-Land integration, a key speaker was Brigadier General Chris Mills, Director General, Army Modernization for the Australian Army.
After his presentation, I had a chance to discuss with him his perspective on the way ahead of the Australian Army for the decade ahead.
A key point which he underscored in that interview was the following:
“I think the reality is that as we move beyond this decade, those type of joint effects need to empower the small team to achieve tactical success as the array of tactical successes transcend into an operational impact.”
After the Williams Seminar on air-sea integration, I had a chance to re-engage with BG Mills and to get an update on developments since we last spoke.
I was especially keen to discuss the perspective introduced into the latest seminar by Major General McLachlan, head of Australian Army Modernization.
Major General McLachlan discussed and analyzed the evolving role of the Aussie Army in the defense of Australia through what the U.S. Army would call Air Defense Artillery (ADA) or shaping the lower tier to a missile defense system engaged with the power projection forces.
From his perspective, the more effective the territory of Australia could be used to shape effective defenses, the more the Air Force and Navy could focus on extended operations. He characterized this as shaping an Australian anti-access and area denial force.
One development since we last talked was the recent exercise Hamel 2016 which certified First Brigade as ready to meet the Australian Government’s requirements as the Australian Defence Force’s next ‘ready’ brigade.
According to Brigadier General Mills: “In essence, First Brigade, was challenged by both our conventional force and a non-conventional arranged force combatant to look at confirming the brigade’s ability to conduct tasks from non-combatant evacuation operations, to operations against a non-conventional foe, to a conventional against a conventional plus fore, to a combination of all of those occurring at once.
And really that, that’s army’s high watermark to ensure that we can conduct the spectrums of task required of, of a small army from our peacekeeping and peace support operations to a conventional war foe.
88493random1.05.0
Exercise Hamel was born out of a concern by army’s generals a number of years ago that we had spent too long just focused on preparing and conducting the foes like in Afghanistan. And for us it had been Timor and Solomon Islands and having troops supporting coalitions of the willing both in Iraq and Afghanistan. And there were some growing concerns that for a small army for that level of commitment.
We were eroding the foundational war fighting skills doctrine and capabilities that our army had previously built as our operational norm. We needed to update those skills for 21st century full spectrum operations.
We need to be able to fight continuously in three timeframes – the timeframe of focusing on recovering from the last fight while you’ve got force elements fighting the current fight, while you’ve got force elements preparing for the future fight.
And the ability to be able to fight in those three timeframes at once builds tempo.
And for a small army like the Australian Army and the Australian Defense Force, we need to be able to look at technology, tactics, techniques, and procedures that enables us to fight across those three dimensions; to minimize the time between transition from the current to the future.
We look to generate combat mass through a rapid tempo or an ability reset or re-tasking capability across the force in a spectrum of operations.
Question: Major General McLachlan specifically raised the question of the Army’s role in integrated Air and Missile defense, could you comment on that?
Brigadier General Mills: It’s in Australia’s interest to be prepared to defend our sea and air lines of communication to the north. I think the architects of the white paper very much had a view that they expected more from the army than the past and this includes in air and missile defense
We are looking a system of system’s approach where the Army provides the lower level defense and the Air Force the medium level defense but under Air Force overall leadership.
We’d very much like to be able to use in-service air force missiles.
The same missiles that potentially will be used on the medium system could be used on the short system.
Integrated air and missile defense capability talked about in the white paper is very much a first for the Australian Defense Force. The army is acquiring as well a long range land-based rocket system. You’re then talking of a land-based long range and the shipping missile capability to be acquired by the army in the foreseeable future.
The collective grouping of the integrated air and missile defense with a new long range land based rocket system for air and naval defense, will provide a mobile anti-access and area denial capability that’s significant in terms of the geography to the north of Australia supportive of our national needs and those of our coalition partners.
And by so doing, we are freeing up Navy and Air Force for other tasks.
Question: How has the air-land discussion proceeded since the Williams seminar earlier this year?
Brigadier General Mills: The concepts we introduced there are being worked in specific ways.
We have visited Williamtown and continued our work with Wedgetail.
There are Army officers on board and see Wedgetail as provided important capabilities for battle management and EW from an Army perspective. Army officers from Seven Signals EW regiment are regular riders on the Wedgetail.
They are there that we can get the best out of the systems that are available on that jet to support land forces.
Although it’s predominantly designed to support aerial combat, it has functionality that supports the ground forces as well.
A No. 2 Squadron E-7A Wedgetail aircraft soars through the clouds on a training sortie.
Our vision is for the small group commander to be able to leverage Air Force and Navy fire support as well.
We are working to provide the combat team commander with an evolving capability to tap into Navy and Air Force fire power to support his operations.
That is an ongoing task which is central to ADF modernization as well.
We are visiting Air Force and Navy commands to shape an effective way ahead on joint fires, surveillance and battle management solution sets.
Question: Since we last spoke, the two LHDs are operating and becoming a driving force for change in Air Force, Navy and Army.
Do you see the LHD as a forcing function for some of the changes which you are shaping for the Army?
Brigadier General Mills: We see the engagement with Navy as part of our modernization effort.
Next year we are deploying a joint digital system on the ship able to support the force ashore so that the evolution of the LHD is part of the digital future of the Army as well.
In other words, we are putting digital land C4I system onboard the LHDs.
We’re a small force.
We don’t have the luxury of some very large organizations that, that have joint effects within a single service.
We don’t have that.
We, we got a small army, a small navy, and a small air force.
We want to achieve large effects.
So I think even at the junior officer level, the way we plan and conduct our exercises, the way operations have been conducted in the last two decades, there is an expectation that joint isn’t just a word.
It’s just how, the idea of does things now.
89199random1.05.0
We see the LHD being stood up from the beginning as a joint asset.
For example, the Canberra has been used to move First Brigade to the Hamel exercise area. We see it providing close air support and air mobility as well for our ground forces.
And more generally, EW for the ground forces particularly in the environment in north of Australia really does rely in the integration of air, land, and sea EW to achieve the effect. And we are looking forward to the coming of the Growler as a contributor to this effort as well.
And I think the LHD over the last five or six years has really driven the idea to start the journey to ensure joint with more than just a throw away word.
We are starting the journey of working the sequences of air lift, sea lift, overhead support, C2 and the insertion of the ground forces.
In what circumstances do we use which assets to put a force ashore and support its operations?
LHDs are now part of that and the RAAF changes with the C-130Js and C-17s are as well.
We’re a small defense force operating in a very large environment.
We very much feel that we’ve got a requirement to support like-minded countries and play our part in a global rules-based order.
We need to be able to achieve large effects with a leveraged force.
Our army wants the air force to be the best small air force in the world, and we want our navy to be the best small navy in the world.
Because if they’re not, the army’s not going be able to get to where it needs to get to and be sustained in the fight to achieve the desired effect.
Our army looks to achieve effects on the ground. That’s what it’s been designed to do.
To do that, it must be supported by air force and navy but it must be capable of rapidly changing and re-tasking.
It must be well-protected.
And it must be able to sustain itself in austere environments.
One of the benefits of living in a large country with a dispersed population is that the Australian army has grown up on being able to sustain itself in austere environments for long periods of time.
If we want to go on exercise, unlike American-only bases that have their exercise area just out the door, we’ll more travel 10 hours by road convoy to get to the exercise area.
Where the amphibs play a part is they assist us because the reality is we need an amphib capability just to defend Australia or just the force to be projected around Australia.
Look at where our three brigades are.
Our three brigades are at the three ends of the country.
Preparing for power projection is rooted in our ability to even operate in the continent the size of Australia.
We need to be joint simply to operate; what we are doing now is looking at the new technologies which allow us to enhance our capabilities to shape an integrated force to get the combat effects which we need in a region as large and diverse as ours is.
The first slideshow highlights operations during Exercise Hamel 2016 and the photos are credited to the Australian Ministry of Defence.
The second slideshow highlights Chinook landings onboard the HMAS Adelaide at Fleet Base East in Sydney and the photos are credited to the Australian Ministry of Defence.
2016-09-14 The F-35 has been operational with the USMC for more than a year, and this summer with the USAF. The US Navy is getting ready for the introduction of the F-35 and already sees it as a key element of and trigger fro what Navy leadership calls the kill web.
This means that the F-35 is see both as a new capability but part of a much broader transformation of the power projection force.
In this report, we look at perspectives of the US services and the allies on the impact of fifth generation enabled combat capabilities and ways to think about the patterns of transformation of the power projection forces.
Interviews have been conducted at the major bases and warfighting centers in the United States as well as interviews in the UK and Australia as well. There is a convergence of thinking about the broad strategic direction of the reshaping of power projection forces but a diversity of innovative approaches with regard to how best to achieve change.
21st century warfare concepts of operations, technology, tactics and training are in evolution and revolution. The F-35 is at the heart of this change for a very simple reason – it is a revolutionary platform, and when considered in terms of its fleet impact even more so. The F-35, Lightning II, will make combat aviation history with the first of kind sensor fusion cockpit.
The F-35 is essentially an F/A/E-35 that makes it effective in AA, AG and EW combined missions.
Allied and U.S. combat pilots will evolve and share new tactics and training, and over time this will drive changes that leaders must make for effective command and control to fight future battles.
An issue has been that the F-35 has been labeled a “fifth generation” aircraft, a sensible demarcation when the F-22 was being introduced. But the evolution of the combat systems on the aircraft, the role of the fusion engine, and the impact of a fleet of integrated F-35s operating as a foundational element will make the current term “5th Gen” obsolete.
The F-35 is the first of a new generation of design features and airborne capabilities that will change everything.
It is a first generation information and decision making superiority “flying combat system.”
The global fleet of F-35s will be the first generation for building a foundation for a fundamental change in the way air power operates in overall combat concepts of operations. It is not in and of itself a single aircraft platform; it is about what an integrated fleet of F-35s can deliver to TRANSFORM everything.
The decade ahead will be very innovative.
Combat warriors, at all ranks, can leverage what they learn and then apply those lessons to reshaping the force over and over.
The impact of an integrated fleet of F-35s with fused internal pilot combat data and also distributed information out, will allow the US and its allies to rethink how to do 21st century air-enabled operations.
Each F-35 will be able to network and direct engagements in 360-degrees of 3-dimensional space by offloading tracks to other air/land/sea platforms including UAVs and robots.
The current head of the ACC when he was PACAF looked forward to the time when allies and the US forces had substantial numbers of F-35s flying in the Pacific area of operations and highlighted how dramatic he saw the coming changes to be.
“General Carlisle was asked what would be the impact of a fleet of F-35s (allied and US) upon a Commander of PACAF a decade out.
It will be significant.
Instead of thinking of an AOC, I can begin to think of an American and allied CAOC (Combined Air Operations Center).
By sharing a common operating picture, we can become more effective tactically and strategically throughout the area of operations.”
The most neglected aspect of the roll out of the F-35 is its global nature.
It is not just about the three US services, it is about partners and allies concurrently rolling out their F-35s and sorting out how their new air systems transform their forces.
The F-35 is not an airplane; it is a global air combat system.
Although the F-35 is a U.S. aircraft, it has significant foreign content provided by an integrated global network of suppliers. With the introduction of F-35s globally, comes the nascent global sustainment enterprise.
The forces are working out ways to leverage the commonality in the plane and the support structure to sustain those planes in combat.
It is a nascent effort, but is already laying down building blocks such as sustainment enterprise in Europe and Asia to support the partners, and the operation of U.S. forces from regional support centers, such as being built by the Italians, the Dutch or the Australians.
F-22 Raptors from the 94th Fighter Squadron, Joint Base Langley-Eustis, Va. and F-35 Lightening IIs from the 58th Fighter Squadron, Eglin Air Force Base, Fla. fly in formation over the Eglin Training Range after completing an integration training mission Nov. 5, 2014. F-35s and F-22 Raptors integrated throughout four missions to fight against T-38 Talons to improve employment of fifth generation aircraft. (U.S. Air Force photo/Master Sgt. Shane A. Cuomo)
The roll out of the aircraft is built upon a common logistics enterprise shaping a global sustainment effort similar to that of the successful the C-17 global enterprise.
Global defense industry, not just the U.S. defense industry, is significant to building AND sustaining the F-35. About 30% of the F-35 fleet will be built with foreign content, and the maintainability will rest on best practices from global suppliers.
The F-35 logistics enterprise will not simply be forced to rely on sole source suppliers for any number of key parts produced globally.
And with the system to identify parts, the performance of those parts will be put to the test and the better performing parts suppliers determined by performance in combat and in operations, not simply determined in a procurement bureaucracy.
Besides the US, the F-35’s nine partner countries are Australia, Canada, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, and Turkey. And they’re a number of other countries buying the aircraft via a more traditional FMS acquisition route, including; Japan, South Korea, Israel and possibly Singapore. Each of these countries is buying the F-35 as part of their overall efforts to shape 21st century defense forces.
The global nature of the fleet – is a trigger for change and key allies are looking at F-35 enabled defense transformation.
The coming of the F-35 triggers key aspects of shaping 21st century concepts of operations, we will focus on an examples of how concepts of operations can be reshaped, namely the evolution of “tron warfare” under the impact of the F-35 global fleet.
Leveraging the F-35 triggered transformation, rather than pursuing a stove-piped platform modernization and upgrade strategy, will be the essential catalysis to shape new platform acquisitions.
The decade ahead will be one of significant innovation which will in turn build a technology, training and tactics foundation for what new systems will be important to develop in the decade after next.
Please enter your name and email below and you will then be able to download the report directly.
Leverage Allied Investments and Combat Learning Experience in Modernizing the U.S. Military
On the Friday after the Williams seminar on air-sea integration, I had the chance to tour the headquarters of the Australian Navy’s Fleet Base East on Garden Island, Sydney.
Garden Island is the largest historic naval area on Sydney Harbour, with use going back to the founding of the colony in 1788.
Greatly expanded during World War II, it now comprises major dockyard facilities run by a civilian operator, the naval wharves used by major fleet units of the RAN, various training facilities under the control of HMAS Kuttabul and a heritage precinct, open to the public, that includes the official museum of the Royal Australian Navy.
Modern Australia was created as an outreach of the Royal Navy and Garden Island has the first graffiti from the British, namely, the name markings of sailors on the first fleet which arrived in Australia in 1788.
The First Fleet is the name given to the 11 ships that left Great Britain on 13 May 1787 to found the penal colony that became the first European settlement in Australia.
The Fleet consisted of two Royal Navy vessels, three store ships and six convict transports, carrying more than 1,000 convicts, marines and seamen, and a vast quantity of stores.
From England, the Fleet sailed southwest to Rio de Janeiro, then east to Cape Town and via the Great Southern Ocean to Botany Bay, arriving in mid-January 1788, taking 250 to 252 days from departure to final arrival.
When touring the base, several buildings which served the Royal Navy in the 19TH century can be found which are now used by the Australian Navy.
My interlocutor and guide during my visit was Captain Paul O’Grady, Deputy Commander of the Surface Force.
We toured the base and afterword’s sat down in Rear Admiral Mayer’s office to conduct an interview.
We discussed many issues, but one key issue is the challenge of shaping an infrastructure for a 21st century fleet.
Chief of Navy, Vice Admiral Tim Barrett, and Commander of the Fleet, Rear Admiral Mayer, discussed at the seminar and in interviews with me, the evolution of the fleet and the challenges of shaping 21st century capabilities.
But what is often overlooked is the salience of infrastructure in building, operating and shaping that fleet.
Vice Admiral Barret discussed the one ship concept and the need to integrate the build, with the maintenance, with the modernization and with the operations of the fleet.
He was seeking a naval equivalent to what the RAAF is doing with Wedgetail in Williamtown where the squadron is co-located with the systems program office which is tasked with the software upgrades of the aircraft.
90189random1.05.0
Earlier this year, at the Air Power Conference, the Australian Minister of Defence highlighted the crucial importance of building the infrastructure which could support a modernized Australian defense force.
It is of course not just improved ICT networks and systems and capability that will underpin our future Air Force over the next two decades.
One of the defining features of the 2016 Defence White Paper and Integrated Investment Program is the renewed focus on enabling capabilities.
In fact, 25 per cent of the Integrated Investment Program is allocated to the enabling projects, which help to bind our capabilities – whether it’s our airfields, our bases, our wharves, our ordnance facilities or our logistics systems, just to name several.
As Captain O’Grady underscored: “We have ships with increasingly greater demands for power such as the Aegis ships.
And of course the requirements from an environmental perspective are quite different now to what they were when some of these facilities were originally built.
There’s been a dramatic shift from the facilities which worked in the 1970s and 1980s to what we need now, particularly, operating in an urban environment like Sydney as well.”
During the visit, Captain O’Grady pointed out the new infrastructure being built to support the new LHD ships and the coming Air Warfare destroyers to support Fleet Base East.
To decongest the area, most of the support facilities such are collocated on Garden Island but some are located nearby in the area, such as training facilities.
He emphasized the significance of the shift back from more individual operation of platforms to a 21st century task force concept in which ships deployed from Australia would marry up with other air and naval assets in areas of interest.
This meant as well ensuring commonality of logistical support across the fleet to ensure proper force generation to ensure the performance of the given task force up against the tasks given to that task force.
He highlighted the importance of shaping what he called “a logistical node system” to support the distributed fleet.
Captain O’Grady
It was important to be able to support the fleet from a diversity of support points to support a distributed task force.
“How we support a task group requires a different set of support networks than supporting individual ships.
“We have to think about the broader task force and its wider support requirements on operations.”
During a visit of the modified Perry class Frigate at the base, the Captain highlighted the advantages of being able to leverage a global fleet of ships. Operating the Perry class has meant that the Australian Navy has been able to support it ships on operations by leveraging the global logistiocs supporting a fleet of such ships.
They have also modified the ship with new technology which allows it to have new weapons and C2 capabilities appropriate to evolving missions.
This example highlighted the importance of building ships which are capable of regular upgrades of software or weapons.
Also on base is a significant dry dock for ship repair, originally built to support Allied large deck naval carriers and battleships when built in 1945.
It is still in use and the cost of the facility is amortized in part by making it available for commercial purposes as well.
In short, the leadership of the Royal Australian Navy is working the infrastructure side of the evolving fleet hard.
But the challenge is a significant one and will require resources, and vision in shaping an appropriate infrastructure for the new classes of ships and the evolving concepts of operations.
Editor’s Note: The following note from Wikepedia provides an overview on the RAN ship inventory and locations:
The Royal Australian Navy (RAN) fleet is made up of 47 commissioned warships as of January 2016.
The main strength is the eleven frigates of the surface combatant force: eight Anzac class and three Adelaide class. Six Collins-class boats make up the submarine service, although due to the maintenance cycle not all submarines are active at any time.
Thirteen Armidale-class patrol boats perform coastal and economic exclusion zone patrols, and four Huon-class vessels are used for minehunting and clearance (another two are commissioned but in reserve since October 2011).
Replenishment at sea is provided by two ships, Sirius and Success, while the two Leeuwin-class and four Paluma-class vessels perform survey and charting duties.
In addition to the commissioned warships, the RAN operates the sail training ship Young Endeavour and two Cape-class patrol boats acquired from the Australian Border Force. Other auxiliaries and small craft are not operated by the RAN, but by DMS Maritime, who are contracted to provide support services.
The lion’s share of the RAN fleet is divided between Fleet Base East (HMAS Kuttabul, in Sydney) and Fleet Base West (HMAS Stirling, near Perth).
Mine warfare assets are located at HMAS Waterhen (also in Sydney), while HMAS Cairns in Cairns and HMAS Coonawarra in Darwin host the navy’s patrol and survey vessels.
The slideshow above highlights scenes from the day of the visit, including views of two ships out of commission, including HMAS Tobruk, L-50.
A New Zealand ship is seen as well.
The location of the fleet within the harbors is highlighted throughout.
The final photos show the 19th century buildings and the shot of the area which is a key area for upgrade is seen prior to the views of the 19th century buildings.
The next week, I visited the Maritime Museum in Sydney which is really an excellent experience to get a perspective on the role of maritime activities in the shaping of modern Australia.
Seen below is a shot of HMAS Onslow, a submarine of the Oberon-class submarines, the predecessor to the current Collins Class.
When I visited the HMAS Onslow that day, onboard was a retired Naval officer who had spent nearly 30 years onboard Australian submarines and he clearly was the guardian of the flame for the silent service, but was not so silent in articulating why he thought the Onslow was a wonderful vessel!
There he sat — in retirement — clearly ready to go to sea again with his submarine!
