Archive: June 1, 2024

A lighter, high-tech Abrams tank is taking shape

The U.S. Army awarded the manufacturer of Abrams tanks a contract this month to begin the preliminary design of its new tank variant expected to be lighter and feature high-tech capabilities so it’s more survivable in battle, the service’s head of combat vehicle modernization told Defense News.

The contract allows the Army to work closely with General Dynamics Land Systems on shaping requirements for the new M1E3 Abrams tank. The hope, according to Brig. Gen. Geoffrey Norman, is to be able to bring the new variant into the force at a similar timeline to the M30 Mechanized Infantry Combat Vehicle, which is under development.

“I think that there would be real goodness for the Army if M30 combat vehicles and M1E3 tanks could be fielded simultaneously to an [armored brigade combat team],” Norman said. “I think the Army senior leaders are going to push us to try to align those schedules, and whether that can be done is an open question right now.”

Norman said factors like technology maturation budgets will likely dictate whether that is achievable.

The Army is running a competition between two American Rheinmetall Vehicles and General Dynamics Land Systems to build the XM30 vehicle that will replace the Bradley infantry fighting vehicle. The service plans to select a winner in late fiscal 2027 or early fiscal 2028, Norman said.

The schedule for the M1E3′s preliminary design and what follows is under review within the Army’s acquisition branch, Norman said. In the meantime, the Army and GDLS will begin working through what the service wants in and can achieve with a new Abrams variant. A firmer timeline will likely take shape by the fall, he added.

The Army last fall decided to scrap its upgrade plans for the Abrams tank and instead pursue a more significant modernization effort to increase the tank’s mobility and survivability on the battlefield. As part of the decision, the Army ended its M1A2 System Enhancement Package version 4 program.

The M1E3 “from a requirement standpoint is an engineering change proposal,” Norman said, but with “a different design approach to meeting existing requirements. It’s going to be a very differently configured Abrams than what we currently have.”

Over the next 18 months, Norman said the Army will work through a series of technology maturation efforts to include autoloader capabilities, aides “to enable a crew to operate fully buttoned up [inside the tank],” alternate power trains, and active protection systems.

“Those are the types of things where different systems are being competed to pick the best of the breed that then will be integrated into an [engineering change proposal] prototype,” he added.

The Army plans to bring the weight of Abrams under 60 tons. The current variant is roughly 73 tons, according to Norman.

“That might be a little aggressive, but we’re pretty ambitious,” he said of the goal. “In order to do that, we anticipate having to change the crew configuration, potentially looking at opportunities to go to a remote turret or an optionally manned turret in order to save the space under armor.”

Power trains that include hybrid capability will also undergo examiniation in order to achieve both reduced fuel consumption as well as the desirable silent watch and silent drive capabilities to better avoid detection. The power train must still be able to reach high dash speeds, Norman noted.

The M1E3 will also have an integrated active protection system “that’s part and parcel to the vehicle survivability, profile and design. That’s one of the things that we know absolutely will be integral to the program,” Norman said.

Breaking down barriers to tackle cyber threats

As the U.S. faces China’s unprecedented military buildup, conflicts involving our partners in two theaters, and resurgent terror threats, it is clear that the world today is more dangerous than most Americans have experienced in their lifetimes.

Yet, as the U.S. Department of Defense pursues modernization programs to retain our competitive edge, we cannot afford to forget about vulnerabilities to the systems that the American people use every day. The cyber domain could make the difference between victory and defeat.

As the top Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and a member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittees on Defense and Homeland Security, I have a multifaceted view of the threats we face.

There is undoubtedly a DoD interest in the cyber security of our critical infrastructure — the expertise and readiness of our service members and their equipment can be undermined in the blink of an eye if their installations lose access to power or water while attempting to deploy.

Earlier this year, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), National Security Agency (NSA), and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) issued a joint advisorythat Chinese state sponsored cyber actors are pre-positioning themselves on U.S. networks to conduct destructive cyber attacks against our critical infrastructure in the event of a global crisis or conflict. According to their report, the Chinese state-sponsored group Volt Typhoon had persistent access to some U.S. critical infrastructure for up to five years.

Volt Typhoon hacks likely to inspire copycats, CNMF’s Mahlock says

Further, an adversary attack against U.S. critical infrastructure during a conflict could affect the lives of everyday Americans severely enough to sway public opinion in opposition to U.S. military operations. These national security challenges under DoD’s purview are challenged by the fact that the majority of our nation’s critical infrastructure is owned and operated by the private sector.

It is evident to me from my leadership roles on the committees responsible for authorizing public works programs and funding homeland security initiatives that today’s national security issues demand increased synchronization with the state, local, and industry partners that administer our day-to-day functions.

I recently attended the groundbreaking ceremony for a new National Center of Excellence for Cyber Security in Critical Infrastructure, which will be housed in my home state of West Virginia at Marshall University.

This NCOE will break down the walls between the DoD, the Department of Homeland Security, academia, and industry to facilitate cooperation in identifying and tackling the cyber threats we face. As a partnership with United States Cyber Command’s Joint Force Headquarters-Department of Defense Information Network, as well as the National Guard, it also emphasizes a joint, operational perspective to the cyber problem set. Most importantly, it will serve as a hub for the curriculum and training of the U.S. cyber workforce necessary to defend our infrastructure—both in and out of uniform.

Cyber protection is not only a U.S. interagency, public-private challenge, but an allied problem set. I’m proud that West Virginia is also leading the way in bolstering the cyber security of our allies and partners as the host for the U.S. team in NATO’s Locked Shields Exercise.

Locked Shields is the world’s largest and most complex live-fire cyber exercise, featuring 40 countries and 3,000 participants throughout NATO member states. In Morgantown, West Virginia, nearly 200 United States, Norwegian, and Montenegrin players worked as a team in the simulated cyber defense of a NATO ally under attack—an all-too-realistic scenario that we must prepare for.

The United States remains a global superpower—one that can devote resources to military modernization programs while also improving interagency and public-private coordination right here at home to protect our most critical systems.

Our next fight won’t just take place in the air, on land, and at sea. Instead, it will take place in the space and cyber domains where boundaries are blurred and partnerships are key.

If done right, the NCOE will be a model for future national security challenges that extend beyond DoD jurisdiction in areas like the private sector, academia, and state and local. On the battlefields of today and tomorrow, even the most advanced militaries will be challenged by cyber threats. Breaking down the barriers now will help us win.

U.S. Senator Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) is a member of the Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee and serves as the Ranking Member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. Capito also serves as the vice chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, the fifth ranking Republican in the U.S. Senate.

European Union weighs creation of air defense shield

COLOGNE, Germany — The European Union is considering setting up its own air defense shield after bloc leaders threw their support behind a Greek-Polish initiative to that effect this week.

The two countries’ prime minsters, Kyriakos Mitsotakis and Donald Tusk, respectively, pitched the idea to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in a letter earlier this month.

After von der Leyen, who is eyeing a second term following elections in early June, swiftly endorsed the idea, the EU’s top diplomat, Josep Borrell, also signaled support.

“I welcome that member states say that to defend our airspace, why should we look at that in a fragmented manner?” Borrell said ahead of a May 28 meeting of the Foreign Affairs Council in Brussels.

Borrell told reporters the idea raises plenty of questions. “But the devil is in the details,” he said. “Where will these air defenses be put? At the border? Which border? With which capacities? With which funding?”

In their letter, Mitsotakis and Tusk said they envision “a comprehensive air defense system to protect our common EU airspace against all the incoming threats,” citing Russia’s war against Ukraine as key motivation.

Besides the tangible, military benefits such an endeavor could bring, the two leaders argued that a joint “flagship” program would signal to would-be attackers that the EU is united on defense.

That wording could be seen as a veiled dig at Berlin, where officials are well underway in assembling an air defense coalition under their European Sky Shield Initiative, which now counts 21 member countries. German officials created the initiative in 2022 amid the shock over Russian troops targeting Ukrainian infrastructure and population centers with missiles and drones.

Poland’s Tusk previously said he wants his country to join, but he has faced opposition from the president, Andrzej Duda, who was reelected in 2020 with backing of the then-ruling Law and Justice party.

The project is essentially a European outgrowth of NATO’s air defense architecture, aimed at coordinating national procurements and ensuring interoperability between sensors and interceptors.

But not all EU member states have bought into the idea, partly because the aperture for sourcing the requisite hardware leans heavily on non-European products, including the Israeli-American Arrow 3 missile and the U.S. Patriot system.

The German reaction to the Greek-Polish proposal has been muted, with officials saying they have nothing against it as long it doesn’t interfere with their initiative.

“NATO remains the biggest and most important defense alliance for Europe,” State Secretary Siemtje Möller told reporters ahead of the Foreign Affairs Council meeting this week. She floated the idea of using the bloc’s procurement and funding channels as a feeder mechanism for Germany’s initative.

In the end, the council meeting came and went without any action on the issue, according to officials in Berlin and Brussels. A spokesperson with the German government said the Greek-Polish proposal came up only on the periphery, while an EU spokesperson said formalizing national proposals wasn’t the panel’s job to begin with.

France bans Israeli firms from Europe’s biggest defense show

PARIS — France has banned Israeli firms from participating in Eurosatory, Europe’s largest defense show, a little over two weeks before the event kicks off in Paris, with the government citing Israel’s military actions in Gaza.

“At the request of the French authorities, Israeli companies will not be present at Eurosatory,” the French Armed Forces Ministry said in an emailed statement on Friday. “Conditions are no longer suited to welcome Israeli companies to the French show, in a context where the President is calling for Israeli operations in Rafah to stop.”

French President Emmanuel Macron this week repeatedly called for Israel to halt operations in the Palestinian city of Rafah, saying on Monday he was outraged by Israeli strikes that killed many displaced people. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been a topic of hot debate in France, and Armed Forces Minister Sebastien Lecornu has faced multiple questions from lawmakers in recent months about the country’s defense exports to Israel.

More than 70 Israeli companies had been scheduled to participate in the Eurosatory defense show, which officially kicks off in Paris on June 17. That included Israel’s three largest defense firms, Israel Aerospace Industries, Elbit Systems and Rafael Advance Defense Systems. Elbit has been planning to present its PULS multiple-rocket launcher and the Sigma next-generation howitzer, the firm told Defense News before news of the ban.

In line with the French government decision, there will be no stand from the Israeli defense and security industry at Eurosatory 2024, according to show organizer Coges Events, which declined further comment.

Israel was the world’s ninth-largest arms exporter in the 2019-2023 period, accounting for an average 2.4% of global arms exports, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.

The country’s defense exports rose 9.7% to a record U.S. $12.5 billion in 2022, according to the most recent figures reported by the Ministry of Defense, with $3.67 billion for Europe. Unmanned aerial vehicles and related drone systems made up a quarter of Israel’s 2022 defense exports, with missiles, rockets and air-defense systems accounting for about a fifth.