Moderatore: Staff md80.it
Fonte ..... http://www.defensenews.com/article/2012 ... nt-RequestThe House Armed Services Committee denied the U.S. Air Force the ability to use any money in 2013 “to divest or retire, or prepare to divest or retire” the C-27J.
.... ed esprime un severo giudizio sulle qualità del concorrente ....The C-27J has the capacity to carry significant load and still access small, soft, narrow runways that are too short for the C-130J or runways which are unable to sustain repeated use of larger aircraft.
In Australia, the C-27J can access over 1900 airfields compared to around 500 for the C-130 Hercules aircraft.
In our region, the C-27J will be able to access over 400 airfields compared to around 200 for the C‑130 Hercules aircraft.
The C-27J was assessed by Defence as the aircraft which best met all the essential capability requirements and provides the best value for money.
It was assessed as being able to fly further, faster, higher while carrying more cargo and requiring a smaller runway than the other aircraft under consideration, the Airbus Military C-295.
..... e magari ..... non sul "libro paga" di Lockheed Martin ..... perchè, mi chiedo, vi sembra mai possibile che le "mazzette" esistano solo in Italia ?sidew ha scritto:Vediamo se in USAF ci sia qualche generale 3 stelle con il sale in zucca e meno influenzato dal "buy american" .....
La risposta fornita dal Ministro sembra, almeno per il momento, rassicurante .....Nine of these aircraft will be ones that the US is no longer taking. I understand the US price was around $30 – $31 million per unit – why are they costing us so much?
Il Ministro,infine, difende la bontà della scelta e conclude ribadendo .....The aircraft being acquired by Australia are new build aircraft.
The C-27J flies higher, further, faster and can access more airfields in our area of interest and was chosen for performance, configuration and suitability.
http://www.senatorjohnston.com.au/Media ... chase.aspxIn the eyes of just about every other air force around the world the C-295 is not only considered to be the best value for money but also the most effective battlefield airlifter.
http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/2012 ... quisition/This is not a view shared by the Chief of Air Force or the RAAF.
Valerio Ricciardi ha scritto:Oppure l'inviato della Airbus Industries incaricato di illustrargli il loro prodotto usava di norma tacchi del 12...
..... ..... 
.....Il 295 non ha avuto, finora, il successo del suo "fratello minore" 235 (probabilmente perchè si va a scontrare col C-27J/G-222 che gli è superiore) peró ne sono appena stati venduti 8 all'Oman in versione da trasporto e MPA : http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... es-372092/Valerio Ricciardi ha scritto:Ah, si? Se è così tanto valido, perché io ne ho scoperto l'esistenza solo su questo forum?
In verità non mangio nemmeno occasionalmente né l'una né l'altra...SuperMau ha scritto:Ti dico sempre che cassoela e trippa mangiate insieme sono un po' pesanti da digerire......
Pure io avrei preferito il gripen al JSF, o farlo monotipo con i tiphoon, pero aggiungendo anche il sw per swing-role...Valerio Ricciardi ha scritto: Per quel che costituzionalmente siamo autorizzati a fare, io avrei preso i Gripen...
Typhoon tutta la vita, visto che così avremmo continuato a dar da lavorare a operai italiani e non, eventualmente, svedesi..sidew ha scritto:Pure io avrei preferito il gripen al JSF, o farlo monotipo con i tiphoon, pero aggiungendo anche il sw per swing-role...Valerio Ricciardi ha scritto: Per quel che costituzionalmente siamo autorizzati a fare, io avrei preso i Gripen...
azzz..peccato, la cassoela con la verza leggermente croccante, e la costina bella morbida (ma senza cotenna) vale sicuramente lo sforzoValerio Ricciardi ha scritto:In verità non mangio nemmeno occasionalmente né l'una né l'altra...SuperMau ha scritto:Ti dico sempre che cassoela e trippa mangiate insieme sono un po' pesanti da digerire......
Qui siamo tutti d'accordo che l'F35 non serve e non funziona. EFA tutta la vita, mettici sotto un aggiornamento di avionica e software, e un pacchetto di migliorie varie, e gli da la paga ogni momento del giorno...Valerio Ricciardi ha scritto: Comunque, quanto io non sia un propugnatore del prodotto americano purchéssia lo puoi evincere dalla durezza senza se e senza ma con cui scrivo della per me scelleratissima ed incostituzionale scelta di dotarci degli F35, a costi ancora ignoti, ma di cui compreremo "solo" 90 esemplari...
Per quel che costituzionalmente siamo autorizzati a fare, io avrei preso i Gripen...
Ci si può sperare ?Would-be contractors team up for Canada’s Fixed-wing Search and Rescue effort
By: Dave Majumdar (Ottawa - 16 hours ago)
Source:
Hopes of filling Canada's fixed-wing search and rescue (FWSAR) requirement to replace its aging de Havilland Canada CC-115 Buffalo fleet are driving would-be contractors to cement partnerships with local companies.
Canada's minister of public works, Rona Ambrose, who oversees defence procurement, says that her department has setup a new FWSAR secretariat to consult with industry on the project.
©Canadian Forces
The creation of a new secretariat could be a sign that the moribund effort to replace the decrepit Buffalo is starting to gain momentum. Canada first signaled its intent to replace the antiquated twin-engined turboprop more than six years ago. The FWSAR programme will be a competitive procurement, Ambrose says. A "fairness monitor" will work to ensure the competition is open and fair, she adds. The contract, when it is awarded, will include training and support for at least 20 years.
The exact size and scope of the FWSAR tender is currently unknown, industry officials say. That is because the Canadian government has yet to finalize those requirements.
But Alenia Aermacchi, which hopes to bid its C-27J Spartan tactical transport, says that a draft request for proposal is expected in the fall of 2012. A contractor could be selected by 2014.
Alenia signed a letter of intent on 29 May to partner with General Dynamics Canada, Provincial Aerospace and DRS Canada on a potential FWSAR bid.
Meanwhile, Lockheed Martin, which plans to offer its C-130J, is partnering with local company Cascade Aerospace. The two companies signed a memorandum of understanding on 30 May at the CANSEC defence trade show in the Canadian capital Ottawa.
Jim Grant, Lockheed's air mobility vice president, says the C-130J is the ideal aircraft to conduct search and rescue (SAR) missions over Canada's rugged landscape. He points out that variants of the aircraft have been in service in Canada for decades and have already carrying out the SAR mission.
Other potential competitors include EADS CASA C-295, Viking Q400, or even the Bell/Boeing V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor.
..... è stato così riscritto in una successiva stesura .....Other potential competitors include EADS CASA C-295, Viking Q400, or even the Bell/Boeing V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor.
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... rt-372492/Other potential competitors include EADS CASA C-295, Viking DHC-5NG, Bombardier Q400, or even the Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor.
http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/2012 ... ty-update/C-27J CONTRACT SIGNED
A contract has been signed with Alenia Aermacchi that will allow for the long tern operation, maintenance, modification and upgrade of the C-27J aircraft and support systems.
On 12 May, the Government announced the decision to purchase 10 Alenia C-27J Spartan Battlefield Airlift aircraft at a cost of $1.4 billion. The announcement also foreshadowed that Defence would seek a separate agreement with the C-27J manufacturer, Alenia, in order to ensure that the RAAF could operate, maintain and modify the aircraft throughout its planned life.
The contract, which is worth around $63 million, will also provide Defence with the ability to compete and sublicense third parties, including Australian industry, to provide the maintenance services, training services and the ability to modify the C-27J capability.
The C-27J will replace the Caribou aircraft which was retired from service in 2009 after a career spanning more than four decades. The C-27J complements the capabilities of the C-130 and C-17 aircraft and uses more common infrastructure and aircraft systems such as engines, avionics and the cargo handling systems.
The acquisition of the C-27J will significantly improve the ADF’s ability to move troops, equipment and supplies. The C-27J has the capacity to carry a significant load and still access small, sort, narrow runways that are too short for the C-130J or runways which are unable to sustain the repeated use of larger aircraft.
These aircraft will provide battlefield airlift but are also capable of conducting airlift in our region. They will be able to operate from rudimentary airstrips in Australia and overseas and will be able to support humanitarian missions in remote locations.
The flexibility of the C-27J allows it to undertake a wide range of missions from delivering ammunition to front line troops to undertaking aero-medical evacuation of casualties.
Fonte ..... "AWIN First" .... http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.asp ... 465954.xmlAlenia Sees C-27J Production Through 2018-19 .....
..... in questo caso provenienti da "Flightglobal.com" ..... http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... ss-372922/Alenia Aermacchi looks to build on Australian C-27J success .....
Chinese Microchips Are Considered Impossible To Regulate
By David Fulghum, Bill Sweetman, Jen DiMascio
Source: Aviation Week & Space Technology (June 04, 2012)
The potential for specialized microchips from China to find their way into U.S. computers and networks, or even into conventional Western weapons systems, isn't just a frightening prospect—it's a chilling reality.
The defense industry supply chain is rife with counterfeit parts, and efforts to police it are failing. The potential that these parts could compromise the quality of U.S.-made defense systems is bad enough, but on top of that Chinese components could offer a back door to cybersnoops, escalating the threat of cyberspying and intellectual theft.
The U.S. knows about the potential of such capabilities because it is conducting its own research in that rarified arena of cybercombat. Draper Laboratory, for example, has a long-running project to design ways of planting hostile circuitry inside what appear to be standard microchips. This could easily become—or may already be—a two-way street, since many avionics and military systems now include generic and commercial off-the-shelf chips built into custom processor boards.
A counterfeit chip might be a copy of a U.S.-designed chip, made in China and sold for commercial applications. It could find its way into U.S. aerospace and defense components because those industries' demands are tiny compared to commercial applications. Therefore, the only economical way to provide computing power is to use commercial chips.
The unknown is whether malicious hardware could be inserted in defense applications. Given the market in counterfeit chips described in the recently released Senate report, this is not likely. The report paints a picture of an aftermarket supplier base, comprising thousands of dealers in the U.S. alone, that has grown up because system manufacturers—aerospace, defense and others—need out-of-production chips to produce or repair systems designed years ago.
Some Chinese suppliers to U.S. distributors have responded to this demand by harvesting chips from scrapped devices. Counterfeiting can take the form of selling those devices as new, or re-labeling them with a higher performance grade. However, no mechanism is described by which specific batches of chips could be steered into crucial military applications.
A potential problem with demanding tighter standards and pedigrees for defense-related chips is that distributors could be forced to exit the defense market, eliminating what has been at least a partial solution to obsolescence issues.
The threat is real enough to worry Congress. A Senate Armed Services Committee investigation of the defense supply chain completed last week found about 1,800 cases of suspected counterfeit parts over a two-year period and estimates that the total number of suspect parts involved exceeds one million. The committee tracked 100 of those parts back through the supply chain and found that 70% originated in China.
The parts found their way into military products made by the nation's biggest contractors, including Lockheed Martin's Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense Missile and the C-130J cargo aircraft. Boeing products were impacted as well, including the AH-64 Apache and CH-46 Chinook helicopters, the C-17 cargo aircraft and the P-8A Poseidon. Other parts filtered into the Sikorsky SH-60B helicopter and Alenia's C-27J airlifter.
Raytheon's vice president for supply chain operations told lawmakers that sharing information about fake parts through the Government-Industry Data Exchange program (Gidep) “can help stop suppliers of counterfeit parts in their tracks.”
But the Senate report indicates that industry is still slow to come clean about counterfeits. When Boeing discovered counterfeits on the P-8A, the company only notified the Navy after a year and a half. And Lockheed Martin told Air Force engineers that suspected counterfeit parts in an L-3 display unit were “tested and found to be authentic but re-marked.” A six-month Air Force effort to keep tabs on the display units uncovered “several failures” including blank screens and lost displays that could have been caused by counterfeit parts.
“However, Lockheed Martin produced no documents indicating efforts by the company to determine why that particular display unit, or others, had failed,” the SASC report says. “Nevertheless, Lockheed Martin reported to the Air Force that 'no failures from Jan. 2011-June 2011 were attributed to the suspect lot.'” The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) found a suspect part that is used in 176 different weapons systems including the B-52 bomber, F-15 Eagle, RQ-4 Global Hawk and A-10 Thunderbolt. Of 202 suspect parts identified by DLA in 2009 and 2010, only 15 were reported to the Gidep, four of those by DLA.
Counterfeit parts could undermine the weapons systems and further drive up costs, the report says.
So last year, the Senate Armed Services Committee passed legislation that requires contractors who supplied the counterfeit parts to be charged for reversing the damage. It seeks to ensure that companies buy their parts from trusted suppliers and mandates written notification of counterfeit parts.
In March, Frank Kendall, the Pentagon's acting acquisition chief, directed the Pentagon to establish testing and verification requirements, require that the military and industry report suspect parts to the Gidep and ensure that the Defense Department's agencies train their personnel to deal with counterfeits.
And while the findings of this report illustrate that counterfeits are “a very serious problem,” according to Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), the committee's top Republican, lawmakers are not taking corrective measures further than they did last year.
Committee Chairman Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) says no additional legislation is required at this point. “We're going to make sure it's very effectively implemented,” he says.
But to date, even industry officials greet efforts to police the flow of counterfeits into the Pentagon's vast supply chain with a shrug.
Long-running U.S. worries also concern the involvement of Chinese civilian telecommunications companies in military and information-warfare programs. A March 8 congressional report questioned the relationship between Huawei Technologies—which has twice been blocked from buying into U.S. telecommunications companies—and the People's Liberation Army (PLA) and ministry of state security.
In fact, the Huawei, Zhongxing and Datang organizations all received direct government funding for research and development of cyber, communications and intelligence-gathering systems, according to the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission. Other companies providing information security and computer network operations to the PLA have close ties to hacker groups.
The overlapping connections allow for penetration of international supply chains for electronics that support U.S. military, government and civilian industries, the report states. That connection offers the “potential to cause the catastrophic failure of systems and networks supporting critical infrastructure for national security and public safety,” it says.
The Pentagon's 2012 annual report to Congress on military and security developments in China identifies a strategy that embraces cyberspying and theft—that is not considered a military attack—while taking advantage of a “unique opportunity to focus on international development while avoiding direct confrontation with the United States,” it says. Beijing's goal remains aimed at “taking advantage of prolonging this window of opportunity . . . for peaceful development [while] sustaining economic growth.”
At the same time, the country's leaders are building a force capable of fighting and winning “regional wars,” the report says, “using information technologies that have been developed, refined and integrated to ensure continuity with China's military strategy.”
China's operational model is “active defense” which serves as the highest-level guidance to the PLA on how to fight and win wars. It emphasizes using precise and well-timed offensive operations, launched under favorable conditions to gain and maintain the initiative. Another key factor is “exploiting an opponent's most vulnerable weaknesses” which once again matches U.S. concerns about its vulnerable energy distribution pipelines, public utilities and a military that is hopelessly dependent on computers and cyber networks.
Fonte ..... http://www.airforce-magazine.com/Featur ... nless.aspxSpartanless ....
The Air Force is no longer operating C-27J Spartan airlifters in Afghanistan and currently has no plans to return them to that theater.
Fonte ..... http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2012/ ... e-062012d/What happens next to the Air Force’s 21 C-27J aircraft has not been settled.
The service’s proposal to cancel the program has been questioned by lawmakers and the Air National Guard, the operator of all of the aircraft. Army officials have also voiced opposition since the aircraft’s primary mission is to supply ground troops.
The Air Force has argued that defense budget pressures influenced its decision to end the program. That position has been questioned by the Guard and lawmakers.
Legislation under consideration in the House and Senate has recommended freezing Air Force plans to retire C-27J and other Air Force aircraft.
Com'e che si dice? Non c'è peggiore cieco di chi non vuol vedere...lo spartan gli stava facendo risparmiare un po' di soldinirichelieu ha scritto:
Di particolare interesse la tabella contenuta nell'ultima .....
richelieu ha scritto:RIAT 2011
