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.
2016-07-11 The major deal between France and Australia for a new generation of submarines is not the only reminder of the French-Australian relationship.
In this video, the Aussie forces which were sent to France to participate in the 14th of July Parade, 2016, are seen rehearsing with the French forces.
The Australian Defence Force contingent rehearses on the Avenue des Champs-Élysées in Paris on 10 July 2016 in preparation for the French National Day Parade later in the month.
Australian Defence Force personnel will join thousands of French military personnel marching down the famous Avenue des Champs-Élysées in Paris on Thursday, 14 July 2016 to mark French National Day celebrations in France.
ADF personnel will take the ‘position of honour’ at the head of the parade, which is Europe’s oldest and largest regular military parade, before travelling to the Western Front in northern France for Centenary of Anzac commemorations of the battles of Fromelles and Pozières later in July.
French National Day commemorates the storming of the Bastille on 14 July 1789 and the Fête de la Fédération, which celebrates the unity of the French people on 14 July 1790.
The 140-person ADF contingent will include 30 Royal Australian Navy sailors, 80 Australian Army soldiers and 30 Royal Australian Air Force airwomen and airmen, and a tri-service flag party carrying the Australian national flag and the ADF Ensign.
During the second day of the Airbus Defence and Space Trade Media Event, 2016, the Hforce weapons suite was highlighted as a new approach by Airbus Helicopters to the military market place.
Prior to the briefing, journalists toured the modified H145 to see the Hforce configured aircraft, and I was with a group which was fortunate to have an experienced French helicopter officer Col. (Retired) Christian Fanchini, now Senior Operational marketing manager with Airbus Helicopters.
I had a chance to talk with him after the tour and briefing as well.
In effect, the Hforce is a modular weapon system developed for the H125, H145 and H225 helicopters.
The H145 has been sold to the US Army for both utility and training roles, and is being used by pilots of all three services learning to fly helicopters.
It has been sold worldwide to many customers and represents a significant global user base.
This is important for the Hforce modified version because it shares 70% of the same parts as the H145 already in the marketplace.
Global supplies provide a solid foundation for support for operations worldwide.
Based on the commercial fleet which is undergoing upgrades on a regular basis, the modifications and upgrades to the cockpit and power packages become available to the modified military helicopters as well as part of a commercially amortized modernization effort.
This is important when seeking to see both capability growth and cost containment for military force.
The Hforce represents an alternative as well to specialized attack helicopters which are highly specialized and costly to operate.
Obviously, there are operational conditions where such a capability is preferred to a multi-mission helicopter.
But the Hforce is built on the utility helicopter which can be reconfigured within two hours by technicians to function as an armed scout or light attack helicopter and back again.
In other words, it can meet a wide variety of missions with rapid swap out of systems onboard the aircraft.
The aircraft can be armed with guns on either side and one from the rear if the doors are removed.
It can be up armed with laser guided rockets or missiles as well.
88112random1.05.0
The helicopter operates with the Tiger crewing system, whereby there is a weapons officer who manages the role of the helicopter in the battlespace.
The power of the new version of H-145 increases power by more than 20% and the emergency operating system whereby it can operate with only one engine has increased power by 39% in emergency situations.
Airbus is the software designer and manager of the helicopter, which is central to the approach.
Not only does Airbus integrate weapons capabilities into the software but works the fly by wire system to optimize performance as well.
And this means that the modular system can be modified to customer requirements with regard to communications and weapons systems required by the customer.
For Special Force Customers (and the German Special Forces is the initial launch customer) the communications equipment is integrated with customer preference.
And if desired an ITAR free version can be developed and sold as well.
A key element of 21st century air combat systems is software upgradeability and customizability; the Hforce enabled helicopter fits right in.
A customer can buy the helo with a zero based solution, meaning that upgradeability is built in but the customer can wait to determine what to add as need becomes clear or money becomes available.
The doors are easily accessible even with weapons installed for the load out of the helicopter with personnel or equipment. The rear doors can facilitate medevac missions as well.
The maintenance side is important as well.
The new version has modifications and materials which have enhanced maintainability or what I like to call enhanced maintainability by design.
According to Fanchini, the new version decreases maintenance requirements by 15% over the Lakota.
It is truly a multi-mission helicopter which leverages the evolving capabilities of the commercial fleet which Airbus builds, sells and maintains worldwide.
Airbus Helicopters says its new H145 helicopter is particularly suited to the local market as the company conducts a demonstration tour of aircraft over June and July.
Targets for the H145 – recently renamed from EC145 T2 – were expected to be EMS (emergency medical service) and police operations. The H145 is also being demonstrated to the Australian military during its month-long visit of 15 capital cities, regional centres and towns stretching from Melbourne to Far North Queensland and points in between.
Airbus Helicopters test pilot Diethelm Berndt said the H145 had the right size and the right power-to-weight ratio for Helicopter Emergency Medical Service (HEMS) and police operations.
“That makes it attractive,” Berndt told reporters at Bankstown Airport on June 22. “There is nothing comparable on the market.”
“My prediction is you will see this as the standard HEMS and police helicopter in many parts of the world.”
A New Zealand-based customer accepted delivery of a H145 in April, the first delivery of the type in this part of the world.
Meanwhile, there were currently about 10 earlier model EC145s flying in Australia. Compared to the EC145 the H145 features a Fenestron shrouded tail rotor and twin Turbomeca Arrius 2E engines.
Airbus Helicopters senior sales promotion manager Christian Fanchini said the twin-engine H145 at maximum power was about 21 per cent more powerful than the EC145.
“It is really a very powerful aircraft, particularly useful for extreme conditions – altitude and hot temperatures,” Fanchini said.
“Today, we could say that this light twin-engine is the most powerful you can find to fly in these extreme conditions.”
Fanchini said Airbus Helicopters had booked about 150 orders for the H145, which was first certified by European regulators in April 2014 and the US Federal Aviation Administration in October 2014.
Military certification followed in May 2015, with German special forces the launch customer for the H145M.
Airbus Group Australia Pacific represents Airbus Helicopters in the region.
2016-07-02 Although the arrival of F-35s for the Farnbourgh and RIAT air shows can be seen as a unique event, it is not.
It is part of a process of the coming of the F-35 to its initial operating capability, and starting a pattern of cross-Atlantic crossings.
Earlier, the Italian Air Force crossed the Atlantic with its F-35s built in Italy.
Next were the Dutch flying to the Netherlands for the first time from Edwards AFB.
And then the Marines and the RAF flew from USMC Air Station Beaufort to participate in the UK airshows at RIAT and Farnbourgh this summer.
Flying the RAF F-35B was RAF pilot Squadron Leader Hugh Nichols whom we interviewed last year at Beaufort.
At the Marine Corps Air Station, the Marines and the RAF are working the standup up of their individual capabilities but are doing so by building from the ground up in common.
The above video is credited to the UK MoD and the 2018 date refers to the UK IOC; the USMC jets are IOCd from last year.
According to a story on the UK MoD website published on June 30, 2016:
The first of Britain’s new supersonic ‘stealth’ strike fighters has touched down in the UK for the first time.
The F-35B Lightning II jet was flown by RAF pilot Squadron Leader Hugh Nichols on its first transatlantic crossing, accompanied by two United States Marine Corps F-35B aircraft from their training base at Beaufort, South Carolina.
The combined US/UK team of aircrew and engineers are here in the UK to demonstrate just what the 5th generation state of the art aircraft can do, flying at the Royal International Air Tattoo and Farnborough International Air Show over the next few weeks. The aircraft are due to enter service with the Royal Navy and RAF from 2018.
Defence Secretary Michael Fallon said:
The F-35Bs are the most advanced fast jets in the world. Whether operating from land or from one of our two new aircraft carriers, they will ensure we have a formidable fighting force.
They are part of our plan for a stronger and better defence: more ships, more aircraft, more troops available at readiness, better equipment for special forces, more being spent on cyber – to deal with the increased threats to our country.
Air Commodore Harv Smyth, Lightning Force Commander said:
The arrival of Lightning in the UK is an important step towards our delivery of operational capability with the UK’s first ever stealth fighter aircraft.
Operating from land bases or our new aircraft carriers, the F35B Lightning will provide ‘next generation’ advanced sensor capabilities which, when combined with its low observable, ‘stealthy’ design, allow the pilot to see more, know more and act faster than the enemy.
Our Lightning Force is developing very quickly and we are well prepared for the arrival of our first operational squadron (617 Sqn ‘The Dambusters’) at RAF Marham in 2018.
88238random1.05.0
For our interviews with key players in standing up the UK F-35 capability, see the following:
The photos in the first slideshow show the transit and arrival of the the Marine Corps and UK F-35Bs to the United Kingdom and are credited to the UK MoD.
The video above shows the USMC and RAF F-35Bs refueling during their 10 hour flight across the Atlantic.
Credit for Video: UK Defence Journal
PREPARING TO OPERATE OFF OF THE HMS QUEEN ELIZABETH: WORKING WITH THE MARINES AT VFMAT-501
Question: What is your function here at the squadron?
Sqn Ldr Hugh Nichols: I have two roles. I am an instructor pilot within the Warlords and in that role, I am an integrated member of the team.
My other role is as the Senior National Representative for the UK on the base here.
Question: At Luke the Aussies and USAF pilots are flying each other’s planes.
Is that happening here?
Sqn Ldr Hugh Nichols: It is. In effect, we have a pooling agreement here.
Our aircraft are pooled with those of the Marines, and we fly aircraft in the pool not just the UK jet.
Question: When you return to the UK with the planes, obviously a wider F-35 community is being established with which you will operate.
How do you see that?
Sqn Ldr Hugh Nichols: The majority of the operating areas big enough to fully utilize this aircraft will be out over the North Sea, so I can see us using this to our advantage by operating with our Northern European allies.
I would anticipate that there will be a lot of cooperation with Norwegians, Danes or the Dutch as we bring this exciting aircraft into service on European soil.
Question: And because the B and the A have common combat systems, your collaboration will not depend on which airframe you fly?
Sqn Ldr Hugh Nichols: That is correct.
At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter if you in an A, a B or C, once airborne, the mission systems are the same.
Question: What is the advantage of being here working with the Marines?
Sqn Ldr Hugh Nichols: There are many, but let us start with their sense of urgency in getting the aircraft to Initial Operating Capability.
The Marines have done a fantastic job working through previous program difficulties and have blazed a trail towards bringing this next generation capability into service..
They are Marines, and if anything gets in the way, they deal with it.
Working with them will clearly ensure that we are ready for the Queen Elizabeth.
And the pooling agreement is important in terms of cross learning.
Our young maintainers are working with Marine Corps maintainers and they are learning to work through different procedures and protocols to learn how to maintain a common airplane.
Question: Obviously, this will yield operational advantages later as Marines fly onto your ships and vice versa.
How do you see this?
Sqn Ldr Hugh Nichols: Obviously, deciding to do that is above my pay grade, but clearly you are right, we have cross-decked in the past and shaping commonalities from the outset will help us to so in the future.
The Marines could fly jets off of the Queen Elizabeth and we off the Wasp or other ships the USMC enable for F-35B use in the future.
Question: The RAF is in the throes of a modernization effort and necking down to a smaller type model series of aircraft across the board.
How are you working the Typhoon-F-35 integration?
Sqn Ldr Hugh Nichols: We have already started Typhoon-F-35 integration at Edwards, with the Test and Evaluation Sqns, and it shouldn’t’ be too long before we are involved in training exercises on the East Coast.
Question: Secretary Wynne made the point that modernization of legacy aircraft should be taken going forward from the perspective of working with the F-35.
How do you view that approach?
Sqn Ldr Hugh Nichols: It makes sense.
Each aircraft brings different strengths to the fight and we will fly them both, with the tactics will evolving over time.
Software modifications will undoubtedly be required in order to get the most out of each aircraft and ensure full interoperability; take Link 16 for example, where the F-35 could put out a huge amount of information.
We need to ensure that Typhoon is able to receive and display the information without overloading the pilot.
Question: Typhoons have flown for some time with F-22s and now with F-35s.
What is the impact on the Typhoon?
Sqn Ldr Hugh Nichols: It makes the Typhoon more lethal and survivable.
Today, every legacy aircraft that can fly with a Raptor clearly wishes to do so.
But there is going to come a point where they will prefer to fly with the F-35 due to the data linking capability of the F-35 and how that capability enhances the situational awareness of all aircraft in that fight.
For example, we can push information out to the legacy fleet so they know where the threats from integrated air defense platforms are and therefore they have a better understanding of where they are safe from those systems.
Question: What is the way ahead for the British presence at Beaufort?
Sqn. LDF Hugh Nichols: By 2018, we will have around 250 people here.
It is tasked to be involved in the ongoing operational tests as new software and new capabilities come online for the F-35 throughout its service life.
On May 19, 2015, a week before visiting the USS WASP and meeting with the crew and pilots doing the operational trials aboard the ship, the Second Line of Defense team went to MCAS Beaufort to discuss the progress made with the Warlords after moving from Eglin.
Credit Photos in the Second Slideshow Above: Second Line of Defense
The first few shots show some of the F-35s at the squadron that day, including one with Wasp markings that was prepared to join OT-1.
The sixth photo shows Squadron Leader Nichols in front of a UK F-35. Even though he is standing in front of the plane, within the squadron any squadron member might fly this plane, as will the Brits fly USMC jets. This is the same as at Luke where the Aussies and the USAF pilots fly each other’s planes. This is part of the F-35 global enterprise already being stood up.
The seventh and eighth photos show Murielle Delaporte with Squadron Leader Nichols and Major Brian Bann.
The final photos show Lt. Col. Bachmann and Major Bann with Murielle Delaporte and Robbin Laird in front of the Warlords squadron building.
And from the experience of flying the other way across the Atlantic in the middle of winter, we have the perspective of “Ninja.”
NINJA DISCUSSES HIS F-35 FLIGHT ACROSS THE ATLANTIC: THE RIGHT STUFF ITALIAN STYLE
Question: You flew in formation and through heavy clouds, we understand?
Answer: We had four aircraft total; and kept tight formation; and refueled in the clouds as well.
We had two C-130s just in the case; the tanker, a Typhoon headed to Red Flag and the F-35.
Question: So you were in a new aircraft, single engine, flying in the middle of winter across the North Atlantic in heavy headwinds?
Answer: That characterizes it.
Question: Did you hand fly the plane to stay in formation?
Answer: The plane is very reliable, and I hand flew some times, but auto pilot handled a great deal of the flight.
Question: What about the air refueling events?
Answer: We had 100% success even in the clouds; the big thing here is that the plane is very stable and reliable with no problems.
We had no disconnections; the F-35 is a very stable airplane.
Question: This is the first F-35 built on a new assembly line.
Did that come into play in your calculations in flying the aircraft?
Answer: We did 15 flight hours with AL-1 prior to crossing the Atlantic and we had no issues, and I mean NO issues.
It is the first F-35 built outside the United States.
Our workers at the FACO worked as a team as a team to get this result.
We are building for our own air force and wings for other air forces.
We flew the jet 5 times back to back to back to back prior to coming. I don’t think that has ever been done before as well.
Question: How many flight hours do you have on the F-35?
Answer: About 50 real flight hours.
I was formerly a Tornado pilot in the reconnaissance role.
And then became a test pilot.
84406random1.05.0
Question: After the testing here, what is next for the jet?
Answer: We will take the first two aircraft to Luke AFB.
Then in a few months will bring additional aircraft to Luke.
This summer we will ferry number 4 and 5 to give us a full complement of five at Luke.
All the student pilots at Luke fly the aircraft in the fleet whether US, Australian, Norwegian or Italian.
And the training allows us to learn common TTPs from the ground up.
We are building a fifth generation approach from the ground up.
Question: When you sit in the F-35 cockpit and flew across the Atlantic how did the various systems assist you in the flight?
Answer: The great thing about the F-35 is that the human-machine interface (HMI) is so good and so built around the pilot that you don’t have to learn how it works.
You just use it.
You can configure the screens to configure for the mission.
The aircraft is built to understand; you are building a strategy, not focusing on managing the sensors or really focused on the flying function.
I was able to see the aircraft surrounding me through the clouds, such as keeping distance with my tankers, by using my helmet and the Distributed Aperture System and see the C-130s below me below the clouds.
Question: Did you have any problems with your helmet?
Answer: No. I used the Gen II helmet and the Gen III has improved the helmet, but my helmet worked flawlessly during the flight. I was able to fulfill the mission and I am here.
Question: How different is flying the Tornado compared to the F-35?
Answer: How can answer and be polite? There is no comparison. Recently, I flew the Tornado after learning to fly the F-35. It was a real shock to go back in time.
I had to move my head and focus on the switches and sensors – you have to manage the aircraft to fly.
The F-35 is totally different.
Question: What is it like to cross the Atlantic with DAS?
Answer: It is IR so much of its functionality is used during the night not the day, although you do look through your legs and could see buildings, intersections, and various landmarks while flying.
Question: Many more people saw Lindbourgh land at Le Bourget in 1927 than are here today.
There are four reporters here to witness your arrival, and let make no mistake about it, this is an historic day in which an Italian flew the first F-35A with an Italian assembled aircraft, rather than the USAF having done so.
How does that feel from an Italian point of view?
Answer: It feels great. It is a different mindset. We are working at a different level than we have done in the past.
It must be weird from your point of view to have an Italian fly the first F-35 across the Atlantic. We are making history. We are building it; we are flying it; we are maintaining it.
We talk about facts. I am a pilot.
We have flown all these flight hours with no problems; we are living a new reality.
The aircraft is extremely reliable.
We are close to 50,000 flight hours with aircraft.
That is a fact.
We had a no gripe, no maintenance discrepancies during flight as well.
Question: When the Marines we barred from flying from Pax River to the Farnbourgh air show in 2014, how did this affect your preparation and thinking?
Answer: I certainly realized that I was going to be first and felt that pressure.
But with regard to the flight I talked with the Marines about their flight – they went from Yuma to Pax – and their flight plan to come over.
They were very helpful.
Semper Fidelis is what I have to say about that.
Question: How was the airplane ergonomically?
Answer: I did not think about it until you asked the question.
The seat is very comfortable.
You can stretch your legs in front of you.
The helmet was confortable, and the seat was very supportable and comfortable.
With this helmet I do not have to turn my head, which makes it easier as well for the pilot.
Question: When did you learn that you would do this flight?
Answer: We started working this about six months ago and worked various scenarios for the flight including divert requirements if needed.
But the aircraft holds so much fuel that there is an additional safety factor built in. After 30 minutes after take off from the Azores I could reach the coast of Canada flying high. If I needed to fly lower, I would need a refueling.
We also brought our tankers to Edwards last year to do refueling of the F-35 and worked through various procedures and operating conditions.
Question: This plane is designed to drop bombs and fire missiles.
What you can see going forward with regard to training with regard to weapons?
Answer: It is a lot easier than you think.
This is one of the first aircraft that you can take off and after about two flights dropping bombs, and firing weapons.
Your mission systems are so good that you can start operating weapons very early in your training and operations.
We have to air-to-air pilots working with air-to-ground pilots and merging the cultures.
You are not focusing on your sensors; you are focusing on the end objective of your mission.
The big difference with this aircraft is situational awareness.
You see everything, and I mean on the surface and on the ground and you command attack, defense and electronic warfare functions within the aircraft.
The HMI is processing this and allowing you to be more strategic in your role.
You have different screens and different set ups that we are using as we fly the aircraft, and over time we can help the pilots standardize ways to usual the two screens optimally.
During my flight, I mostly used the two screens in the following way:
Half a screen provided a long-range view to look further; the second half showed the formation.
And the second screen contained my targeting Pod in one half and DAS in the other.
I hand flew because I wanted to play with the screens and figure out how to make best use of the systems during flight.
Question: How is the F-35 a game changer for the Italian Air Force?
Answer: The F-35 gives us much greater global reach.
We have so much gas in the aircraft and it is so fuel efficient, it gives us options in the various scenarios we are likely to face in our area of operations.
The photos in the third slideshow are credited to the Italian Air Force and Lockheed Martin and show the arrival of the Italian F-35s to Pax River on February 5, 2016.
2016-07-05 According to an article by the Commander, US Third Fleet Public Affairs published on 6/23/16:
SAN DIEGO – Twenty-six nations, 45 ships, five submarines, more than 200 aircraft, and 25,000 personnel will participate in the biennial Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) exercise scheduled June 30 to Aug. 4, in and around the Hawaiian Islands and Southern California.
The world’s largest international maritime exercise, RIMPAC provides a unique training opportunity that helps participants foster and sustain the cooperative relationships are critical to ensuring the safety of sea lanes and security on the world’s oceans.
RIMPAC 2016 is the 25th exercise in the series that began in 1971.
Hosted by U.S. Pacific Fleet, RIMPAC 2016 will be led by U.S. Vice Adm. Nora Tyson, commander of the U.S. 3rd Fleet (C3F), who will serve as the Combined Task Force (CTF) commander.
Royal Australian Navy Rear Adm. Scott Bishop will serve as deputy commander of the CTF, and Japan Maritime Self Defense Force Rear Adm. Koji Manabe as the vice commander.
Other key leaders of the multinational force will include Commodore Malcolm Wise of the Royal Australian Navy, who will command the maritime component; Brig. Gen. Blaise Frawley of the Royal Canadian Air Force, who will command the air component; and the amphibious task force will be led by Royal New Zealand Navy Commodore James Gilmour.
Three nations, Denmark, Germany, and Italy will participate in RIMPAC for the first time, in 2016.
This year the Trident Warrior experimentation series, will highlight fleet innovation during the see amphibious operations in the Southern California operating area, and feature a harpoon missile shoot from an LCS, the U.S. Navy’s newest surface platform.
The theme of RIMPAC 2016 is “Capable, Adaptive, Partners.”
The participating nations and forces will exercise a wide range of capabilities and demonstrate the inherent flexibility of maritime forces. These capabilities range from disaster relief and maritime security operations to sea control and complex warfighting.
The relevant, realistic training program includes amphibious operations, gunnery, missile, anti-submarine, and air defense exercises as well as counter-piracy, mine clearance operations, explosive ordnance disposal, and diving and salvage operations.
This year’s exercise includes forces from Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Denmark, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, People’s Republic of China, Peru, the Republic of Korea, the Republic of the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Tonga, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
Unfortunately, due to unforeseen scheduling commitments, Brazil is unable to participate in RIMPAC ’16.
We value our partnership with the Brazilian Navy and look forward to them taking part in RIMPAC 2018.
Video: PEARL HARBOR (June 29, 2016)
The People’s Republic of China People’s Liberation Army (Navy) replenishment ship Gaoyaohu (966) arrives at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam for Rim of the Pacific 2016.
(U.S. Navy Video By Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Meranda Keller/RELEASED)
First flight within only two months of HATS contract signing
Donauwörth, Germany, 26 January 2015
The first EC135 T2+ helicopter in a planned fleet of modern, twin-engine, rotary-wing aircraft being acquired by the Australian Defence Force (ADF) for its new Helicopter Aircrew Training System (HATS), has successfully completed its first flight in Europe.
Under the HATS project, a joint training scheme for both Army and Navy aircrew will utilise some 15 Airbus Helicopters EC135 T2+ trainers, along with EC135 flight simulators and a new flight-deck equipped, sea-going training vessel.
Boeing Defence Australia (BDA) is the prime contractor for the new training system, partnered by Thales Australia which will provide the flight simulators.
The first EC135 T2+ (Serial Nbr.1179) took off from the Airbus Helicopters’ production site in Donauwörth, Germany, where the helicopter is assembled at 14.37 local time on 16th January and landed back on site 57 mins later.
The Airbus Helicopters Flight Test Department reported the successful first flight had validated the full performance of the aircraft’s systems and engines, and that future flights would test specific customer equipment.
Said Peter Harris, Airbus Helicopters Head of Sales – Australia Pacific: “At Airbus Helicopters we are thrilled to have reached such a fantastic milestone in only two months from contract signing last November. This clearly demonstrates the commitment that we have towards supporting Boeing Defence Australia in meeting the ADF’s needs for training all future combat helicopter aircrew for the Royal Australian Navy and the Australian Army. We will take all of our milestones just as seriously.”
While the EC135 T2+ is a civil design helicopter, it has also proved to be a consummate military trainer. With a high-visibility glass cockpit, multi-axis auto-pilot and the performance and safety of a twin-engine helicopter replacing current single-engine types, it is similar to the multi-role and combat helicopters now in service with the ADF – including new-generation Tiger ARH and MRH90 helicopters – and meets all training, technical and safety requirements for future Army and Navy aircrews.
Initial Operating Capability (IOC) is scheduled for late 2018 although students will begin arriving earlier. When fully IOC the HATS system will accommodate up to 130 students a year covering pilots, aviation warfare officers, aircrewmen, sensor operators and qualified aircrew returning for instructor training.
Boeing Defence Australia as the prime contractor for the new training system for the ADF, joined with representatives of the Royal Australian Navy and the Australian Army for a Factory Acceptance ceremony for the “ideal training platform for the next generation of Navy and Army pilots”.
Under the JP 9000 Phase 7 HATS project, a new joint helicopter training system for both Army and Navy aircrew will utilise the EC135 T2+ helicopters, along with flight simulators and a new flight-deck equipped sea-going training vessel.
“Airbus Helicopters is thrilled that Boeing and the Commonwealth of Australia have demonstrated their confidence in our product by accepting this first EC135 T2+, on time and on budget, as part of a world leading high tech helicopter aircrew training system for the ADF”, says Peter Harris, Head of Governmental Sales for Australia Pacific.
“Following contract signature in November of 2014, the first aircraft took to the skies on the 16th of January 2015, and is now accepted by the customer. The next steps involve training of initial Boeing and Commonwealth aircrews and technicians here in Donauwörth, before shipment to Australia in January 2016” said Harris.
Boeing’s HATS Program Manager James Heading said that during 2015 the Boeing team have been conducting engineering evaluations and ground and flight test activities and have been fully satisfied with the results.
“By partnering with Airbus Helicopters on this important program, Boeing Defence Australia is confident of meeting our requirements towards the Commonwealth for providing a mature and cost effective platform that meets training, technical and safety requirements and the future needs of the Australian Defence Force,” said Heading.
The EC135 T2+ is a consummate military training helicopter, offering a glass cockpit with high visibility, a multi-axis auto-pilot, the performance and safety of a twin-engine helicopter replacing current single types, plus other advanced technologies to help instructors perform training missions safely and provide the ADF with the flexibility to undertake additional missions.
The more than 1,200 H135 helicopters now delivered have clocked up over three million flight hours world-wide. The helicopter is part of successful training systems in Germany, Switzerland, Spain and Japan, and is in service in Australia with the Victorian and New South Wales police forces.
On the 6th of April this year, Airbus Helicopters employees working on the Australian program known as Helicopter Aircrew Training System, or “HATS”, had the pleasure to share some ceremonial cake with the customer.
The occasion was the arrival of the first of 15 EC135T2+ helicopters, specifically configured for training missions for the future generations of Australian combat aviators.
The delivery was made on time, and fully compliant, leading the way for 14 more deliveries over just the next 8 months! These deliveries, plus the efforts to put the support contract in place, reflect an ongoing huge effort by the HATS team from Donauworth.
This is not just internal praise, since during speeches at the ceremony, this was recognized by the contractual customer, Boeing Defence Australia, and the end user within the Australian Government.
There is little question that the result of the recent British referendum shocked most members of Parliament as well as politicians across the entire European Union. The unexpected referendum majority vote to leave the EU also shocked global financial markets.
Within hours after the vote count had been completed it became evident that the Prime Minister’s office, the Parliamentary promotors of “remain” or “leave”, and most businesses and bankers had made no plans for exit from the EU.
Throughout the month leading up to the historic June 23 vote Boris Johnson and other leaders of the “leave” movement had recited a litany of reasons why remaining was bad for the British people and promises of gains that would accompany exit. On the morning of the 24th neither Johnson or is fellow Brexiters were able to explain what would be the next steps, and when.
Financial markets naturally recoiled in disbelief that no plans had been made. Endless questions of when and how exit would take place spread through the media and the internet. A fear generated tsunami of selling the pound sterling and stocks of British banks was set in motion.
This spread to selloffs of entire stock and bond markets, not only in London, but throughout the world. Seemingly unrelated, a collapse of world oil prices started, spreading damage to Russia and Middle East oil producers, even threatening to reach the fledgling oil producers in North America.
It also became evident that the EU Commission, its supervisory superstructure, and the European Parliament were all unprepared.
When the dust settled over the following weekend, only the German Government was found to have a contingency plan in hand as well as a diplomatically deft encouragement to the British government to move cautiously and avoid irreversible actions.
A sharp split between the Brussels bureaucracy and leaders of the major national economies on the Continent appeared all at once.
Chancellor Merkel said let’s not be hasty. Let’s talk this through. Foreign Ministers of five governments issued a declaration on the 25th calling for recognition that different nations may have “different ambitions,” and that the EU as a whole must take account of that.
Brussels and the European Parliament demanded instant UK initiation of negotiations so that plans could be made for maximum punishment, ostensibly to discourage other growing EU exit movements appearing in Netherlands, France, Italy, Hungary and elsewhere.
The leader of the European Parliament, Martin Schultz, derided the British referendum as an undesirable legitimization of the uninformed masses in defiance of the work of decades wrought by Europe’s elites.
Much of the immediate outpouring of analyses of Brexit assumed an outcome to be put rapidly in place, without understanding that a lengthy political process would have to be set in motion to interpret what the legal standing of the referendum was for all of the United Kingdom, including restive Scotland and Northern Ireland.
Did the referendum legally require the British government to initiate formal action under Article 50 of the European Treaties, or could that formality be addressed at some future date?
When this question arose on the morning of the 24th, Prime Minister Cameron announced that he would step down in October, and it was best left to the next Prime Minister to make that decision.
This interim period would also allow other EU member governments to consider whether, in what manner, and when formal discussions should be initiated. The referendum by itself did not have legal standing under the EU Treaties. Rather, it was just an expression of public opinion until the British Parliament declared it to be a formal step.
While the Brussels Eurocrats want immediate clarification, it is likely that cooler heads among Europe’s other leaders will want to explore what this means for the political future of the EU. The trade and financial implications would be a secondary consideration for all EU members, not the primary driver.
And much of this has little to do with trade or macro-economics; much of has to do with the relaunch in effect of an earlier period in which the Council of Europe and the political leaders mattered more than the European Commission in negotiating and establishing policy.
The process launched by the Brexit vote will see the British and its neighboring European member states sorting out a wide range of issues of politics, law and sovereignty long before picking at the details of what is sold and bought among neighbors.
As long as Article 50 in the European Union treaty is not invoked rapidly, the focus will be upon what actually the vote means in concrete terms.
Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty reads in part as follows:
Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.
A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union.
That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.
The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.
Put in simple terms, the Treaty allows for a European style multi-layer negotiation to sort out a withdrawal process. This opens the aperture on European negotiations, precisely when a number of other member states are also under political pressure to seek changes in the relationship of national and local governments to the European hierarchy and its undemocratic European Court of Justice.
Indeed, one outcome of the Brexit vote could clearly be to relaunch a political process which has been frozen for some time, and in which the Commission has operated as a technocratic, aggressive regulatory force filling the political void left by national leaders preoccupied with other pressing issues including refugee challenges and financial market fragility.
In other words, rather than Brexit being seen as political closure, it can be seen as an opportunity for a political opening to a much needed, long overdue reform process. Much of the discussion of Brexit has ignored the reality of political sclerosis in Europe; the status quo is not stable; the Brexit vote can allow the British government working with other key states to re-launch Europe.
Recently, Secretary Kerry offered his services to negotiate between the UK and Europe. Not only is this a premature idea, but the US role in all of this is ambiguous at best. The last clear cut moment of positive US contribution to European construction was President Bush and his team working to shape a German reunification outcome. This was a crucial moment in post-war history, and the US assistance greatly helped a smooth political transformation.
US Administrations since that time have had at best a mixed impact on the evolving reality of Europe. The Clinton Administration pushed for NATO and EU expansion, introducing states whose entrance have undercut the processes of democratic support which had been a key element underlying European Union. George W. Bush led a war into Iraq, which unleashed an implosion in the Middle East and an outpouring of migrants into Europe. It was this threat of uncontrolled migration which was for many ordinary UK citizens a critical factor in their negative stance toward the EU’s rapidly evolving immigration policies..
The current US Administration has seen the President’s ill-received direct intervention into the British electoral process, turning out to be counterproductive, reducing US historical influence with its long-standing UK special relationship. The Vice President added to the muddle by declaring the Brexit vote to be a racist vote, an interesting interpretation that reflects Inside the Beltway, not European realities.
The Brexit vote has direct consequences for the internal politics of several key European states.
For Germany, it puts further pressure on Chancellor Merkel but also provides her with an opening to lead a European political reform effort.
For France, facing a Presidential election in 2017, it provides an opening for a conservative candidate to embrace Britain and to isolate the French right wing by leading an effort for democratic reform in all of Europe.
The often publicized, so-called democratic deficit is really about an unelected EU Commission bureaucracy not only managing day to day Europe, but formulating rules which are routinely ratified by a supportive European Court of Justice, thereby becoming law without participation of elected political representatives of the people of each member state.
Politicians are gradually being phased out of leadership of the complex processes of governance of nations with centuries of cultural, legal, and language differences. What has happened is that the concept of sovereignty of elected governments has been overridden by elites not answerable to the people. Brexit has put in place a reality check on this dynamic.
A thoughtful political reconsideration of Europe’s future could also have positive responses for North Atlantic defense. Clearly, a simple extension of European defense from the core of the European Union is off the table. And given the centrality of the UK to any European pole in the Alliance, its fate is central to determine what France and its European defense aspirations can amount to. And has Germany has promised to increase defense spending, clearly the partnership with the UK is part of determining where those investments would go and what new European platforms would emerge for the defense of Europe.
One consequence of the Brexit pressure point might be a emphasis on a North Sea coalition within NATO as well.
The Nordics and the UK have become more focused on the direct threat to them from recent Russian actions in the Baltic region. As the Russians build up force and become more activist, a clear response is required by the key NATO states.
Perhaps the common interests of the Nordics, Poland, Netherland and the UK will become highlighted, leveraging broader reforms to encourage a more effective North Sea defense coalition to deal realistically with the perceived Russian threat.
In short, rather than looking at Brexit as the beginning of the end, it can be looked at the beginning of a clearly needed European reform process.
Ironically, it is the democratic deficit which has spoken in the British referendum. Similar uprisings of disaffected citizenries are already emerging in at least eight other EU nations.
In each case the growing imposition of an unelected Commission-governed European overlord which rides roughshod over all issues of local and national sovereignty is at the core rising unrest.
An earlier version of this article appeared on Breaking Defense.
Last April, I had the chance to talk with Air Commodore Smyth about the coming of the F-35 to RAF Marham.
And just down the road from Marham is RAF Lakenheath where the USAF will operate its UK-based F-35s.
Flying the same aircraft in the same airspace and with the colocation of maintenance facilities provides an overall opportunity to shape a common approach, a common culture, and extensive synergies between two operating forces.
And the two forces can provide an interactive base to work with the close proximity neighbors, the Dutch, the Danes and the Norwegians who will also fly the same aircraft.
In other words, there is a unique opportunity to share training, maintenance, parts, and operational experience for the two forces on bases within close proximity.
According to Air Commodore Smyth:
“It is early days, but we are discussing ways to shape synergy.
“We already have an excellent working relationship with our USAFE colleagues, and both sides are being very open to exploring ideas.
“But the real opportunity will lie in joint training and some semblance of joint sustainment.
“How do we do training in a more joined up way, both synthetically which is of immediate interest to me, and live with our F-35s because there’s got to be synergy in our approaches in British and European air space.
Col. Peter D. Buck and Col. Robert D. Cooper greet United Kingdom Royal Air Force officers Air Commodore Harvey Smyth, Group Capt. Paul Godfrey, and Group Capt. Ian Townsend as they arrive at Headquarters and Headquarters Squadron, June 16, 2015.
“This could then no doubt grow beyond a UK-USAFE relationship, as our close European neighbors establish their F-35s in their countries.
“The next question then is sustainment.
“What is the appetite from the USAF to want to leverage off what will already be found at RAF Marham as we shape our infrastructure?
We fully understand that the JPO is still working hard to bottom out what the eventual Global Sustainment Solution will look like.
“But at Marham we have left an ability to do modular builds and to grow it bigger if there is an appetite from USAF, or from someone in Europe, to want to bring their airplanes in as well.
“This applies to training as well as sustainment.
“The USAF has operated F-15s at RAF Lakenheath and have used a classic USAF model of flying in parts to sustain their F-15s with C-5s, C-17s and tankers.
“It would make sense to shift to a new model whereby our F-35s shared sustainment and parts, transparently between our two bases, which after all are not very far apart.”
To get a sense of how the USAF is looking at the challenge and the opportunity, I visited RAF Lakenheath in June and discussed the evolving approach with the Wing Commander and the staff standing up the F-35 at Lakenheath.
In this piece, the discussion with the Wing Commander is the focus of attention; in the next the discussion with the staff will be highlighted.
Colonel Robert G. Novotny commands the 48th Fighter Wing at Royal Air Force Lakenheath, England, the only wing in the Air Force with an official name, the “Statue of Liberty Wing.”
The Liberty Wing consists of nearly 5,000 active duty personnel, 2,000 British and U.S. civilians, and includes a geographically-separated unit at nearby RAF Feltwell.
The wing employs three combat-ready squadrons of F-15E Strike Eagle and F-15C Eagle fighter aircraft, as well as a squadron of HH-60G Pave Hawk Combat Search and Rescue helicopters and a squadron of Guardian Angel pararescuemen.
Question: You are an experienced F-15 pilot as well as having worked the F-35?
Col. Novotny: “I am and I have.
“This is my sixth F-15 assignment and worked the F-35 as the Commander of the 53rd Test & Evaluation Group, Nellis AFB,. So I was the Commander of the OT squadron for F-35.”
Question: Could you describe the process of the F-35 stand up at Lakenheath?
Col. Novotny: “The F-35 bed down decision was a secret NOFORN initially as the base selection was being made. Now with Lakenheath having been identified as the long-term base for F-35s in Europe, we can put the correct pieces in place.
“All the area planners are Brits who work at Lakenheath.
“They are Ministry of Defence employees who are working with the whole plan to standup the wing.
BF-04 Flt 371 piloted by LtCol Tom Fields performs aerial refueling tests with a KC-30 Voyager tanker on 16 May 2016 from NAS Patuxent River, MD
“And after the announcement, we have been working directly with RAF Marham and Air Commodore Smyth in shaping our approach. We deal frequently with the RAF F-35 program integration office and RAF Marham personnel have been here frequently to engage with our own Site Activation Task Force.
“So from the beginning, there is great synergy and opportunity to learn from each other.
“Obviously, they are primarily responsible for working the airspace issues, which will in turn shape how a basic element of how we will train and operate together as well.
“We’re talking about exchange opportunities across the logistics enterprise, and among the pilots as well. If you can fly the A you can fly the B; and vice versa; it is an adjustment, not a whole new training process.
“We are looking to have RAF pilots flying USAF jets and vice versa”
Question: When we were at Edwards, the USAF was maintaining a C and the young mechanic said that it was no big deal for it was just an F-35.
Col. Novotny: “That is where we want to get to here as well. A model pilots could fly B model airplanes with very little training and just be dual qualified”
Question: The synergy between Marham and Lakenheath can provide a strategic opportunity for the USAF.
What is your sense of this opportunity?
Col. Novotny: “That is really the bulls eye point.
We are bedding down a number of facilities in the United States, but what we are doing is different: it is standing up a common capability between two core allies at a critical point in the defense of US and allied interests.
Computer Generated Image of the Maintenance and Finish Facility which is being built at RAF Marham, Norfolk, as part of a programme of works to prepare the station for the arrival of the F-35 Lightning II fleet in 2018.
“We are not flying alone; but joined at the hip. We will be flying exactly in the area of interest for which the plane was designed and can fly together, maintain together, and operate together leveraging the air and sea base for which the F-35 B will fly from as well.
“It is a unique and strategic opportunity for the USAF and for the nations.
“I’m glad that we are the first base overseas, but I see there is great potential for two countries to develop in concert, side-by-side, and to set, set the model for joint operations.
“As we get this right, we can bring in the Danes, the Norwegians and Dutch who are close in geography and the Israelis and Italians as well to shape the evolving joint operational culture and approach.
“Before you know it, you’ve got eight countries flying this airplane seamlessly integrated because of the work that Lakenheath and Marham are doing in the 20 nautical miles radius of the two bases.”
Question: As an F-15 pilot, you saw the challenge of breaking down the cultural barriers for the F-22 community to learn not to fly the F-22 like an F-15. I am sure you are seeing the same with the F-35?
Col. Novotny: “That is a good point.
“I remember when we first flew the F-22, we pilots were thinking, if all we’re going to do is fly like an F-15, that’s a gigantic waste of money. But over time, the F-22 community evolved to leveraging its unique capabilities.
“We have the same thing with the F-35. We’ll have to break down some cultural barriers. We’ll have to take the yoke off the intellectual capacity of the squadron. We’ll have to integrate them into Red Flag exercises and Iron Hand exercises in the group.
“And we’ll have to pay attention to what other countries are doing, and learn from mistakes, and adopt best practices.
“I think we can do all that right here at Lakenheath/Marham.
“That is why it is a strategic opportunity.
“To shape the day-to-day operational perspective, to shape the combat learning, which squadron pilots bring to the fight, we can do that here at Lakenheath.
“Two countries are working side-by-side to figure this plane out.
Col. Novotny
“And unlike the F-22, the F-35 is not being stood up as a small fleet. It is a global fleet, and by working the synergy here you can accelerate the learning curve.
“And it is inherently a coalition aircraft. Because everybody’s going to benefit, we’re all going to work together.
“And the ability to fly together means that the squadron pilots as well as the maintainers share their experiences.
“If you want to do a Red Flag, you send the force across the pond, prepare and it costs a dedicated amount of money to do that.
“Here we just fly and we can have our regular Red Flags over the North Sea.
“And it doesn’t have to be three weeks out of every fiscal year, or three weeks out of every two fiscal years.
“We’ve seen the Typhoons do QRAs since I’ve been in command, When you do that with F-35s, the US and coalition F-35s will now know exactly what’s going on at the same time.
“That’s happening here almost right now by shared awareness.
“With the F-35 will just take it up to, you know, two or three levels higher than that.
“I think this is going to be one of the test beds for integration, which will evolve, based on operational practice.
“Compare this with standing the F-35s up in the United States.
EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE, Calif. — Photos of Royal Netherland’s Air Force KDC-10 tanker and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter conducting aerial refueling tests above Mount Whitney, Owens Valley, and the Western Mojave Desert in Southern California, March 31, 2016.
“For example, Hill AFB is doing great work in standing up the F-35 but they are only going to integrate with other US fighters or operate in the less frequent Red Flag.
“There are almost no other fighter units near them that are not already fully engaged in real world operations.
“We are standing up a coalition integrability force from the outset.
“Take my example at the OT squadron.
“I did two OT assignments and we worked to get into Red Flag when we could to do joint training. Here we can do that virtually every day. We reach the Dutch training airspace, and can work with the Dutch, with the Brits, with the Germans, with Typhoons, with F3s, with the NATO AWACS
“We take off and we fly 30 minutes to the east and we make it happen.
“It is Red Flag as regular menu; rather than scheduling a gourmet meal from time to time.
“Most of that learning is done after the sortie. Face-to-face interaction, the conversations that are happening in the squadron vaults that happens at Red Flag three weeks out of every two years.
“We will have the opportunity to do that regularly here.
“There is such a unique opportunity here compared to any other place.
“Because every other place which is s going to get into the F-35 program in whatever capacity is going to eventually attempt to develop a little bit of a stovepipe. It happens.
“This is the only place where it’s not the case.
“There’s no other place where we have a maintenance officer who’s run into an issue on Monday at Lakenheath and decides to get in the car and drive 35 minutes to Marham and talk to them and see what they’ve figured out face-to-face.
“Learn to listen.
“Have a bite to eat.
“Be back here by 2:00 in the afternoon with the solution that came from another country.”
Note: By the way, the conversation was conducted in the Eldorado Canyon Room at the base, and the coming of a fleet, which can operate passiviely to do a future Eldorado Cannon will fly from Lakenheath and Marham with a combined force, built in.
The Biography of Col. Novotny
Colonel Novotny was commissioned in 1992 upon graduating from the U.S. Air Force Academy and earned his wings at Laughlin Air Force Base, Texas.
He completed five operational F-15 assignments with extensive test and combat experience, in addition to serving as an action officer at a Major Command, a fighter squadron commander, and a test and evaluation group commander.
He is also a graduate of the U.S. Air Force Weapons School, the Naval Command & Staff College, the School of Advanced Air & Space Studies, and the National War College.
Colonel Novotny is a command pilot with 2,500 flight hours in 11 different aircraft, primarily in the F-15C/D/E, and more than 540 combat hours. Prior to his current assignment, he served as the Chief of Staff for the 9th Air and Space Expeditionary Task Force and the International Security Assistance Force Joint Command, Deputy Commander for Air, in Kabul, Afghanistan.
ASSIGNMENTS
August 1992 – May 1995, Manpower / Plans & Programs Action Officer, Headquarters, Pacific Air Forces Plans & Programs Division, Hickam AFB, Hawaii
2. June 1995 – July 1996, Student, Specialized Undergraduate Pilot Training, Laughlin AFB, Texas
3. October 1996 – April 1997, Student, F-15 Basic Course, Tyndall AFB, Fla.
4. May 1997 – January 2000, Training Officer, Assistant Chief of Weapons, Chief of Fighter Standardization & Evaluation, 71st Fighter Squadron, 1st Operations Group, Langley AFB, Va.
5. January 2000 – January 2001, Chief of Standardization & Evaluation, Acting Chief of Weapons, 67th Fighter Squadron, Kadena AB, Japan
6. January 2001 – June 2001, Student, U.S. Air Force Weapons School, Nellis AFB, Nev.
7. June 2001 – June 2003, Chief of Weapons & Tactics, 67th Fighter Squadron, Kadena AB, Japan
8. July 2003 – July 2005, Division Commander, Assistant Director of Operations, 422d Test & Evaluation Squadron, 59th Test & Evaluation Squadron, Nellis AFB, Nev.
9. August 2005 – June 2006, Student, Naval Command & Staff College, Newport, R.I.
10. July 2006 – June 2007, Student, School of Advanced Air & Space Studies, Maxwell AFB, Ala.
11. August 2007 – May 2008, Director of Operations, 67th Fighter Squadron, Kadena AB, Japan
12. May 2008 – May 2010, Commander, 67th Fighter Squadron, Kadena AB, Japan
13. July 2010 – June 2011, Student, National War College, Fort Leslie J. McNair, Washington, D.C.
14. July 2011 – June 2013, Commander, 53rd Test & Evaluation Group, Nellis AFB, Nev.
15. June 2013 – April 2014, Chief of Staff, 9th Air & Space Expeditionary Task Force, International Security Assistance Force Joint Command, Kabul, Afghanistan
16. July 2014 – Present, Commander, 48th Fighter Wing, RAF Lakenheath, EnglandFLIGHT INFORMATION
June 2013 – April 2014, Chief of Staff, 9th Air & Space Expeditionary Task Force, International Security Assistance Force Joint Command, Kabul, Afghanistan
MAJOR AWARDS AND DECORATIONS
Legion of Merit
Bronze Star
Meritorious Service Medal with two oak leaf clusters
Air Medal with six oak leaf clusters
Aerial Achievement Medal with four oak leaf clusters
NATO Meritorious Service Medal
Distinguished Graduate, AETC Commander’s Trophy, Undergraduate Pilot Training
Distinguished Graduate, Squadron Officer School
Distinguished Graduate, U.S. Air Force Weapons School
Distinguished Graduate, Naval Command and Staff College
Air Force Association Writing Award, National War College
At the recently held Trade Media Brief 2016 in Munich, Stephan Miegel, head of Military Aircraft Services for Airbus Defence and Space provided an overview on the company’s approach to services and support to military combat systems.
At the same time, an article appeared in National Defense, which highlighted the evolving Boeing approach.
This provided a natural opportunity to compare the approaches.
After Boeing lost their latest fighter contract bid, this time in Denmark, the new head of Boeing Defense informed us that Boeing was no longer focused on fighters.
“If I told you that I am and want to be a market leader in the fighter business, you all would tell me that I’m an idiot,” said Leanne Caret, executive vice president of Boeing and president and CEO of the BDS unit. “Let’s be real clear: we lost JSF.”
She added: “We need to stop defining Boeing’s future based on a single program or two programs, and we have been doing that with the fighter story. It doesn’t mean it was wrong or right, I just don’t think it represents the great diversity of the Boeing Defense portfolio.”
They also lost the bomber contract, the C-17 is no longer built and this raises the question of what exactly is the core focus going forward.
One answer seems to be logistics and support.
According to the article in National Defense by Sandra Erwin, Boeing is seeking to dominate military aviation logistics.
The company has made no secret that it intends to make a full-court press in military aviation support services and training, and that goal was made clear when it appointed Edward “Ed” P. Dolanski president of global services and support, one of five major units of Boeing Defense, Space & Security…..
We aren’t having discussions inside the company about why we didn’t win the last fighter contract,” Dolanski said. “That’s not in the debate. What is in the discussions now is that the opportunities to grow services are immense,” he added. “We doubled the size of Aviall over a nine-year period.”
Initiatives to capture more services contracts are getting especially strong advocacy from the top leadership, he said. Boeing President and CEO Dennis Muilenburg and Boeing Defense, Space and Security President Leanne Caret both have in recent years been in charge of the services unit.
Boeing is forecasting growth in the defense sector in other segments besides aviation logistics, including space launch, satellites, helicopters, unmanned aircraft and what it calls “commercial derivatives.” These are passenger jets that are customized for military use, as is the case with 737s that are transformed into Navy P-8 maritime surveillance aircraft. The company also is building refueling tankers for the Air Force from 767 airframes.
While support services are far less glamorous than manufacturing fighters, they almost certainly ensure profits over the long run. “If you look at the sale of the platform, 30 percent of the cost is the acquisition of the platform. The logistics tail is 70 percent,” said Dolanski. “It is a very long tail.” Military derivatives of commercial aircraft like the P-8 are “designed to fly a very long time,” he said. “So as a business leader you would naturally put your attention into services. That’s an annuity, fundamentally. Other companies have used it as an annuity. And it’s worked quite well.”
Boeing plans to aggressively compete for support work not just for the aircraft it built but also for platforms made by competitors. The company currently does maintenance and upgrades of several aircraft that were not designed or made by Boeing such as the F-16 Viper, the T-38 trainer, the QF-16 aerial target and the A-10 Thunderbolt. It produces the technical manuals of all C-130 cargo aircraft variants, supports the Air Force Special Operations Command’s C-130 gunships and the B-2 stealth bomber under a contract from Northrop Grumman. Boeing also operates the F-16 mission-training center and oversees F-22 crew training.
Conceivably, Boeing could one day provide maintenance services for the F-35 joint strike fighter, made by Lockheed Martin. That is entirely plausible, Dolanski said. “I don’t see any platforms in my mind that are off limits. We look and see if the customer has a need where we can help. And we want to be a part of that help.”
Does Airbus have a similar approach in mind?
Clearly, they seek to support the programs they build and sell.
But the approach there is evolving from a classic approach, which is more global, and performance based.
In other words, the focus is upon industry becoming a partner to the customer in delivering performance-based logistics.
The challenge for both Airbus and Boeing will be to ensure that they support the platforms they sell – for they will face competition at this level – and at the same time craft an approach which is platform agnostic and be viewed by users as potentially sound in dealing with platforms they do NOT build or sell.
That is a core challenge.
And this will depend upon the customers as well.
If the core customer is focused upon performance based opportunities and the companies can demonstrate their capabilities associated with their core platforms, but build engineering and support skills which can be applied throughout the combat force, growth is clearly possible.
One challenge which Boeing will face is that the US uses a depot system which limits the maneuver room for US companies to provide for logistic services.
The UK is the most innovative MoD in the world in unleashing performance-based logistics, which has clearly benefited both BAE Systems and Airbus.
The A330 MRTT could be a flagship program for Airbus in this sense as a global user community can be leveraged to shape common approaches and of course the plane flies to areas of conflict. And these areas can provide servicing for multiple fleets.
But there is the limitation upon cross-leveraging commercial to military systems.
Question: You are part of the global sustainment approach of the C-17, do you see something akin to this for the KC-30A fleet?
Air Vice Marshal McDonald: Yes we are a part of the very successful C-17 sustainment system and I would like to see a similar model bought in for the KC-30A.
But what first needs to be worked out is how to tap into the commercial parts pool for the global commercial A330 fleet.
Right now the military certification of the KC-30A does not readily translate into the commercial certification of a A330 so that even though the parts are often the same we cannot tap into the commercial parts pool.
Obviously, this makes little sense.
It’s blindingly obvious, but sometimes you have to be quite innovative to make that blinding obvious come into an executable outcome.
We can have a KC-30A parked on the tarmac next to a group of A330s and know they have the parts we need in their repair and support bays but we cannot access them.
We need to solve this one.
When we visited Jacksonville, we learned of a similar challenge facing the military version of the 737 as well.
We asked about any advantages on deployment to the aircraft being a 737.
“If you can access a trusted buyer it is possible to get commercial pars, but our own supply system only utilizes their process to get secure parts. If we could access the commercial sector when deployed it would save us time waiting for parts and enhance aircraft availability.”
Currently, this is difficult and “when we deploy around the world we currently take our own support equipment, our own tires and our own parts.”
Clearly, working with trusted vendors can shorten the supply chain problem when deployed.
“We had an issue on deployment where a lightening strike damage one of our aircraft.
A team from Boeing came out to survey the damage. We needed to replace a part and did not have that part in our inventory in Navy Supply.
The Navy went out into the commercial sector and bought part and it came in quickly when ordered and it had Made in Australia stamped on it.”
A work in progress as well is to leverage the data generated by operational aircraft to provide for enhanced sustainment support.
Un-correlated data which does not feed back into the supply chain or leveraged for maintenance is not very helpful.
But customers have to allow you to access the flow of operational data and real world performance to build an accurate picture of performance and only by this foundation can you then shape effective performance based logistics.
For example, the A400M is a software rich airplane which is upgraded and maintained based on the flow of operational data. But will the European and global customers allow Airbus to work the data to provide for the kind of performance based logistics which the plane operating as fleets could allow?
This is a work in progress, but the French and British are doing parts sharing currently on the A400M.
An example of what can be achieved was highlighted by Miegel with regard to the A400M operated by the RAF. He underscored that Brize-Norton where the support fleet operates is employing a whole force approach for the RAF and this allows for an innovative A400M support approach as well.
In short, there are significant opportunities in the services and support market.
But this will depend on customer demand and working relationships with industry. 21st century air systems are increasingly software upgradeable and operate as fleets.
Will the customers allow industry the capability to leverage a new approach?
