Suivre ce blog Administration + Créer mon blog
30 juin 2015 2 30 /06 /juin /2015 19:50
State of Play of the Implementation of EDA's Pooling and Sharing Initiatives and its Impact on the European Defence Industry

19.06.2015 source SEDE

This study examines the state of 'Pooling and Sharing' (P&S) at EU and Member State (MS) level. Instead of the demanded change in mindset, we witness another episode in the traditional struggle to make classic defence cooperation work. The marginal results of P&S are not yet adequate to the size of problems. The cooperation initiative misses definitions of success, useful models of cooperation and a permanent monitoring of opportunities and capabilities. MS make progress at a snail’s pace: many projects kicked off in the first phase of P&S are still in their early stages and thus do not deliver capabilities. At the same time, Member States paralyse efforts of the EDA. NATO has not performed much better. This underlines that the core of the problem remains the sovereignty question within Member States. The developments have to be seen against the simultaneous evolution of the European defence landscape: budgets and capabilities have been cut further. Member States have lost time and money but most importantly, they have also lost many options to safeguard capabilities through pooling or sharing. The European Parliament should encourage first, a new politico-military flagship project around which defence can be organised, second, an efficiency perspective towards spending and procuring capabilities; third, the discussion on the future of sovereignty in defence; and fourth, a European Defence Review that offers a sober assessment of the current and future European defence landscape, including the opportunities for cooperation. This would enable a public debate on Europe with or without defence.


Executive Summary


The disastrous impact of the fiscal crisis on the EU Member States’ (MS) defence capabilities and the unwillingness of the US to continue paying for European defence has forced EU capitals to rethink the way they generate and maintain these capabilities. The recently expanding and intensifying arch of crisis around Europe adds many more tasks to the EUs Security and Defence policy. The impression that more defence money will be available in the future should be balanced against the continued strain on public and thus defence budgets. Time is running out. By now, Europe has already lost about 20% of its capabilities since 2008. At the same time, it still pays enormous sums for redundancies, national wish lists and wrongly organised multinational procurement. Therefore, the risk of further shrinking military, industrial and technological capabilities in defence remains.

Pooling and Sharing shall provide the solution: as there is no more money available, neither now nor in the future, boosting efficiency remains the only option to keep and possibly rebuild capabilities. The increased efficiency shall result from MS sharing systematically: they should provide a capability that is missing in other MS, like airlift, or conduct tasks other MS are not able to undertake, like air policing. To pool a capability would mean that contributions by several MS are coordinated to make them available on a more constant basis or in greater numbers compared to individual, uncoordinated contributions, as it is done through the European Air Transport Command (EATC).

Since 2010, the EU has made P&S its official approach to defence cooperation. However, turning P&S into the default mode of defence cooperation implies significant changes: MS would have to move from an ad-hoc and bottom-up approach to a more systematic and top-down one. In essence, what is demanded from national politicians and decision makers is nothing less than a shift in mind-set: the acceptance that sovereignty is no longer based on the autonomy to decide but on the capability to act.

Since the 2010 decision, many activities evolved, not only on the national but also on the European level, as the Council has tasked EDA and the HR/VP to support the work on P&S in its military and political dimensions. This raises the question to what extent change has taken place, meaning whether P&S is on track and has started delivering the results that MS have declared they want to achieve.

The emerging defence cooperation framework shows some distinct characteristics: in EU level strategic documents EU MS show a mix of realism, illusions and activism: while the assessment of the situation is realistic and improving, the MS systematically overstate their current or earlier contributions, thereby creating illusions on the magnitude of their engagement. However, they do not tackle the vicious cycle of rhetorical sovereignty and de facto dependency.

The activities within the multilateral political cooperation frameworks among MS neither point to a change of mind-set taking place, nor have they delivered significant improvement of capabilities so far. The old logic of cooperation is blocking most multilateral frameworks from going beyond renewing the rhetoric on cooperation. The multilateral cooperation often consists of several bilateral cooperation arrangements. While bilaterals perform better, they cannot suffice when huge efforts need to be made in terms of investment (UAVs) or capabilities (strategic airlift). With the exception of the Ghent- Initiative, none of the frameworks is explicitly linked to the EU.

At the beginning of 2015, 393 military projects exist, most of them in the area of training and education, least in transport. However, a winning formula for P&S can hardly be deduced from them because they all work along the classic logic of cooperation. Variables like regional proximity and pre-existing political cooperation seem to enable cooperation. Also, most likely cooperation areas are difficult to retrieve from the data, because what is potentially subject to P&S is still defined nationally.

Multilateral operations pose a rich but mostly neglected source for lessons learned and successful cooperation. Ad-hoc Pooling and Sharing comprise examples in critical areas like CSAR and quick reaction forces – key is a strong framework nation.

EDA’s role has been cut back from an innovator to a facilitator: While EDA has kicked off the P&S debate, MS have marginalised the agency, instead of using its full mandate. The 59 projects EDA is or has been involved in are too small to influence the general mind-set or the structural determinants of the defence sector. With a few exceptions such as Air-to-Air Refuelling (AAR) or Medical Support, these projects rather tackle technical and regulatory issues, instead of concrete Pooling and Sharing of capabilities and large-scale projects. While the four flagship projects EU MS have agreed upon during the 2013 Defence Council make some headway, EDA handles only elements of these. The Capability Development Plan (CDP), even after its reset in 2014, does not interest MS very much because the CDP is found not to focus on their capability needs or not to reflect the relevant level of ambition.

NATO’s defence cooperation framework 'Smart Defence' (SD) shows similarities to the EU-one, especially regarding the problems to motivate MS to engage in cooperation. Important differences are that SD explicitly aims at specialisation and thus addresses the sovereignty issue directly, though with similar success to the EU’s. NATO has the mandate to facilitate and manage, but not to fundamentally shape or lead capability development and procurement. The NDPP (NATO Defence Planning Process) is perceived by many as a mature and influential defence-planning tool. However, in reality the NDPP has adapted to the conditions defined at national levels, i.e. nationally defined requirements, defence plans and procedures. It does not really guide capability development. NATO has nonetheless learned to use the NATO Summits to push NDPP priorities forward.

P&S can have a significant impact on the industrial dimension of efficiency in three ways: Pooling of demand, pooling of research and development activities (R&D), and specialisation by sharing industrial infrastructure. However, neither has the Defence Council 2013 aimed to push industrial P&S beyond the two flagship projects AAR and UAV, nor have EDA activities led to serious success. The impact of missing P&S is very obvious: Companies further cut their European business branches by selling key technologies to non-European companies and shift their production focus towards new markets.


Conclusion: Instead of a mind-set change, we see another episode in the traditional struggle to make classic defence cooperation work. There is a significant gap between the cooperation rhetoric of governments’ joint declarations within the EU and what they deliver. The marginal results of P&S are not yet an adequate response to the size of problems. The cooperation framework misses definitions for success and a permanent monitoring of opportunities and capabilities. MS make progress at a snail’space. At the same time, they paralyse joint defence planning in EDA. While the mis-achievement of the EU is most probably triggered by the dire political-institutional context of the CSDP and CFSP, NATO has not performed much better. This underlines that the core of the problem remains the sovereignty question within MS. Other blocking factors are bureaucratic politics, policy makers who are only interested in short term output, and resources that are widely tied into existing projects for the next years. The developments have to be seen against the parallel evolution of the European defence landscape: budgets and capabilities have been cut further, MS have lost time and money but most importantly they have lost the option to safeguard capabilities through pooling or sharing; an option that will not return very soon.


Recommendations: As there is a growing need for a more effective and efficient defence in Europe, the EU should engage in the underlying problems, instead of only scratching their surface: The European Parliament can play a crucial role in this. It can encourage a new politico-military flagship project around which defence can be organised: fusing the EU-Battlegroups into the Framework Nation Concept. An efficiency perspective towards spending and procuring capabilities can arrive from using output measures. The discussion on the future of sovereignty in defence can be kicked off by asking whether European governments want to be autonomous or capable. A European Defence Review offers a sober assessment of the current and future European defence landscape, including the opportunities for cooperation. This would enable a public debate on the European defence that we can have, i.e. grounded in realities rather than pipedreams.


Download State of Play of the Implementation of EDA's Pooling and Sharing Initiatives and its Impact on the European Defence Industry

Partager cet article
30 juin 2015 2 30 /06 /juin /2015 18:50
source EDA

source EDA

19.06.2015 source SEDE

Are exports made to countries outside of the European Union (EU) impeding European cooperation in armaments? Although the numbers vary significantly from one country to another, the European Defence Technological and Industrial Base (EDTIB) now collectively derives an important share of its collective turnover from extra-EU export sales. Accordingly, EU Member states devote important political, financial and administrative resources to support and promote their national producers in major competition overseas. The current scarcity of common European programmes, and the limited impacts of recently introduced legislation designed to harmonize national defence procurement rules and to facilitate intra-EU transfers, could indicate that extra-EU exports are detrimental to European cooperation on weapons projects. This negative effect would primarily come from introducing greater levels of competition between European companies creating greater tensions, which are not conducive to cooperation on the EU level. The study finds that there is indeed a correlation between competition for major foreign markets and difficulties of intra-EU cooperation but makes the analysis that extra-EU exports are more a symptom of structural constraints faced by major suppliers, such as the weakness of defence spending in European countries, and the persistence of fragmentation and duplication of production capabilities.


Executive summary


The impact of extra-EU exports on European armaments cooperation

The interrogation at the heart of this study is whether the importance of the European defence industrial and technological base (EDTIB) extra-EU exports in its turnover has consequences on European cooperation in armaments. The EDTIB derives a significant share of its collective turnover from export sales and EU Member states devote important political, financial and administrative resources to support and promote their national producers in major competition overseas.

This situation has led to the proposition that competition between Member States to gain market shares overseas and have become a handicap in establishing an integrated European defence market. Implied here is that this dynamic leads Member States to prioritize the international markets at the expense of European joint initiatives.


Approach to evaluating the consequences of extra-EU exports on European armaments cooperation

In order to assess the importance of extra-EU exports in the European DTIB turnover, the study first investigates the origin of the turnovers of the 6 countries of the Letter of Intent (LoI), namely France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom, to which Poland, as an emerging European supplier, was added. It is largely recognized that the LoI countries concentrate the core of European defence production capabilities expressed both in quantitative (turnover) and qualitative (range and diversity of defence specific capacities) terms. It demonstrates the importance of extra-EU exports varies between 18% (Germany,Poland) and 43% (Italy) for the year 2012, and that sales to markets outside of the EU represent a significant share of their turnover.

Second, the study presents the support and guidance mechanisms implemented by the LoI countries plus Poland to support their companies’ extra-EU export efforts. This part shows that Member States devote significant financial, administrative and political resources to help their ‘national defence champions’ win major sales abroad. Considering the fact that some of these countries are involved in cooperation programmes, States are sometimes faced with the choice of either supporting a domestic made system, or one produced in cooperation. In other cases, promotion resources help a multinational company compete with itself on a foreign market by supporting a national subsidiary of a company based in another country.

A third part of the report explores the ineffectiveness of the European Common Position (CP) on arms exports in harmonising export rules and guidance at the European level. Using the recent debate surrounding the sale of Mistral command and power projection ship to Russia, it demonstrates that one of the main goals of the CP – to create a more level-playing field by eliminating differences of restrictiveness in national export legislation – was not achieved.


The relationship between extra-EU exports and cooperation

There are indications of a strong correlation between, on the one hand, the importance of extra-EU exports for EU Member States and especially for LoI countries and on the other hand, difficulties of European cooperation between companies and between Member States. Competitions for extra-EU markets often involve several European suppliers, which are supported in different ways by their states in these contests.

Multiple examples presented in the report indeed show that this rivalry fosters tensions and hostility between European actors, which, in turn, has a negative impact on European cooperation in the field of armament.

However, this report did not uncover evidence to support the idea that extra-EU defence exports are actually causing the challenges currently displayed by European defence production cooperation.

Examination of past armament collaborations or competitions suggest that there is no automatic link between frictions and mistrust among suppliers with either exports or cooperation. Therefore, the importance of foreign sales may be a symptom of deeper-seated features of the European defence market.


The structural drivers of extra-EU exports

The domination of national logic in European defence and the weakness of European defence spending would explain both the ‘race to export’ by individual countries and the reluctance to engage in cooperation programmes. The general weakness of European defence expenditures over the past 15 years contrasts starkly with the general growth observed in the rest of the world. This has led both companies and Member States to turn to these extr-EU markets to counteract weaker domestic sales. Since the issue of the fragmentation and duplication of defence production capabilities across European countries remain, competition between European producers in foreign market seems inevitable. In turn, the high stakes and intensity of these competitions warrant significant Member Sates support.


Download The Extra-EU Defence Exports' Effects on European Armaments Cooperation


Note RP Defense: read Armaments Co-operation Strategy

Partager cet article
30 juin 2015 2 30 /06 /juin /2015 17:50
The Impact of the 'Defence Package' Directives on European Defence

19.06.2015 source SEDE

In its conclusions on the Common Security and Defence Policy, the December 2013 European Council stressed the importance of ensuring the full and correct implementation and application of the two defence Directives of 2009. The present study intends to provide the Parliament with an initial perspective regarding the state of implementation of the Directive 2009/81/EC on defence and security procurement (Part.1) and the Directive 2009/43/EC on intra-European Union transfers of defencerelated products (Part.2). It undertakes a first assessment of national practices, through qualitative and statistical analysis. It identifies the complex points and obstacles, which, if not overcome, may well call into question the Directives’ expected beneficial effects.


Executive summary


The directive 2009/81/EC on defence and security Procurement under scrutiny

In order to understand the evolution of Member States’ acquisition practices since the entry into force of the Directive, the first part of the study is structured around three main sections : (1) the situation before the Directive’s entry into force, an overview of the major principles introduced by the Directive and their implications for actors in the European defence sector, along with the process of transposition into national law; (2) An initial evaluation of national practices through qualitative analysis and statistical analysis (based on reprocessed data from the TED database, during the period from the 21st August 2011 to the 31st December 2014, covering all EU Member States) ; (3) An identification of the complex points and obstacles, which, if not overcome, may well call into question the Directives’ expected beneficial effects.

The Directive 2009/81/EC intends to provide procurement rules tailor-made for defence and security markets and is supposed to lead to more transparency and competition. Most importantly, it should limit the use of the exception clause of Article 346.

While the number of documents published on TED over these past two years has been increasing, this increase is not as significant as expected, and above all it is due to a small group of Member States (France, Germany, and the United Kingdom). This initial survey demonstrates an important disparity in the Member States’ publication practices (contract notices and contract awards). This poses the question of reciprocity. In value, contract awards notified between the 21st August 2011 and the 31st December 2014 represent around €10.53 billion. The year 2014 accounts for around 65% of the total, due to significant contracts notified by the United Kingdom in the field of services and facilities management, and by France on the segments covering Repair and maintenance services of military aircrafts.

The Directive 2009/81/EC is today favoured for contracts dealing with services, the acquisition of equipment deemed to be of a low strategic value, and sub-systems. Over the past three years, all of the major military equipment contracts, thus those that have had a structural effect on the DTIB, were notified without going via the Directive. Previous practices have continued, notably the use of Article 346.

When the contracting authorities/entities provide the name and address of the successful economic operators, in 84% of cases, the selected supplier is based on national territory. An analysis focused on the Member States that have published the most contract award notices (and if we consider non-specified addresses as national, as the European Commission does) demonstrates that the proportion of selected suppliers located on national territory reaches 98% for Germany, 97% for France, 96% for Italy, 96% for Poland, 92% for the United Kingdom, 90% for Romania, and 64% for Finland.

Concretely today acquisition practices seem to show an incomplete and incorrect application of the Directive, with de facto a limited or even non-existent impact on the DTIB. It is indeed too hasty and premature to draw conclusions from such a short period, all the more so given that it generally takes 5 to 10 years for a directive to be fully applied, and this is referring to the civilian sector. Although this new regime is not yet functioning satisfactorily at the present time, the Directive represents an important step in a sector such as defence, which is marked by a significant degree of opacity in acquisition practices.


The State of implementation of the Directive 2009/43/EC on Intra-EU transfers of defence- related products

In order to assess in details the current state of implementation o the Directive 2009/43/EC, the second part of the report proceeds in 3 steps and considers, first, the principles of the ICT Directive regarding the general licences, second, the state of the certification process and third the eventual impact of the Directive on the actors focusing specifically to topic of the end-use/end-user control.

The use of general licences appears to be quite limited considering its potential. This can be partially explained by the fact that the implementation of the new regulations is still in a transitional phase. However study reveals that the entire licensing process established by the EC suffers from major problems threatening the objective of simplification and harmonization. First, the report identifies a lack of availability of the relevant documents. Second, the general licences are too diversified in terms of scope and structure of the documents and conditions attached. Third Member states adopt different definitions of what sensitive products are, which is a corollary of the multiplicity of the defence-related product lists attached to the general licences.

To date, only 36 defence companies are registered on CERTIDER. The pace of certification is impacted by the relative complexity and diversity of the general licences, but there is obviously is some skepticism about the practical benefits of the enlisting process. It may not be considered worth the effort for the defence companies. The observation is even more valid for Small and Medium Enterprise.

Because of the slow pace on implementation of the Directive 2009/43/EC it is hazardous to analyze its effect on the European defence market. However, the actual trends allows the formulation of hypotheses notably on the eventual adaptation of the en use/end user control processes within the EU. States remain attached to their monitoring systems. It is an international or regional obligation for them but they also want to stay aware of any eventual re-export within the UE and of course, outside.

The benefits of the ICT Directive will not be felt similarly by all Member States, national authorities and defence companies. Their effects will certainly be different among Member States depending on the structure of their national defence sector and its reliance on exports. National factors and realities of the defence industry, as well as diverse perceptions of arms trade controls in Europe, can explain the current unequal level of implementation of the Directive and limit the overall benefits of the new regulatory system put in place by the Directive.


Download The Impact of the 'Defence Package' Directives on European Defence

Partager cet article
30 juin 2015 2 30 /06 /juin /2015 16:50
Kockums A26


30 juin 2015 by Saab


Kockums A26 is the world’s most modern submarine program for the Swedish Navy. The Kockums A26 is a unique submarine with proven modular design, silent long-endurance submerged performance and excellent manoeuvrability in all waters.

Partager cet article
30 juin 2015 2 30 /06 /juin /2015 16:35
A330 Multi-Role Tanker Transport (MRTT) - photo Airbus DS

A330 Multi-Role Tanker Transport (MRTT) - photo Airbus DS


30/06/2015 By: James Drew - FG


Airbus Defence & Space this week added South Korea to its growing list of A330 Multi-Role Tanker Transport (MRTT) operators after the nation downselected the tanker type over Boeing’s KC-46A Pegasus and Israel Aerospace Industries’ 767-based design.


South Korea’s Defense Acquisition Program Administration announced the selection decision on 30 June, citing the performance and price of the European tanker over the US and Israeli alternatives.


The $1.26 billion KC-X programme aims to deliver four tankers by 2019, and the selection of Airbus is an important victory for the company as it looks to an upcoming Japanese tanker competition.


Boeing had expressed confidence before the decision, touting estimates that the KC-46A it is developing for the US Air Force will cost 25% less to own and operate over its life-cycle compared with the A330 MRTT, despite being a more expensive aircraft up front. However, Airbus offers a much larger aircraft compared with the 767-based KC-46A, and it can carry 111t (245,000lb) of fuel and up to 300 troops.


“This contract will also allow Airbus Defence & Space to establish a long-term and sustainable cooperation with the Korean industry,” says company spokeswoman Maggie Bergsma. “We will carry out our contractual obligations faithfully and are looking forward to executing this programme in a timely and efficient way as we have done with other A330 MRTT contracts.


“The decision means that the A330 MRTT has won every tanker competition outside of the United States since it entered the market, and has now been selected by nine nations plus the European Defence Agency.”


The decision to go with a European supplier shows that South Korea is prepared to break from the tradition of buying American military hardware, following multi-billion-dollar commitments last year to procure the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and three Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk unmanned air vehicles.


"While we are disappointed with this decision, we remain committed to our partnerships in Korea,” says Boeing spokesman Chick Ramey.


Boeing’s KC-46 programme is running behind schedule, and is yet to conduct the first full-up KC-46A tanker flight. The first 767-2C engineering and manufacturing development aircraft recently flew an airworthiness test fitted with a boom and wing aerial refuelling pods. Still, Boeing can claim the largest base customer, the US Air Force, with 176 orders expected initially and potentially up to 400 as the aging KC-135 is retired.


Meanwhile, Airbus already has 35 solid orders on its books from six countries, and has delivered more than 24 aircraft to date. The tanker has also been selected by India (six aircraft) and Qatar (two). France is boosting its tanker order to 12, and the European Defence Agency is exploring options to acquire several aircraft that would be operated jointly.


One of Boeing’s biggest selling points was interoperability with the US fleet. The KC-46 will be certified to refuel more than 64 receiver types at little or no cost to the foreign customer, Boeing says.


However, Korea is not alone in the Pacific. The Royal Australia Air Force – which operates Super Hornets and, soon, F-35As – was the tanker type’s launch customer and it has already completed several refuelling certifications.


Singapore has also ordered six aircraft, and in Europe and the Middle East – Korea would dovetail on the established MRTT programmes of the UK, France, Saudi Arabia and UAE.

Partager cet article
30 juin 2015 2 30 /06 /juin /2015 11:55
photo CESA Drones

photo CESA Drones


25 juin 2015 par Aerobuzz.fr


Apave Aeroservices et CESA Drones (Centre d’Essais et de Services sur les systèmes autonomes) ont décidé de créer Qualidrones. Cette qualification est présentée comme un moyen de permettre :


- aux exploitants de démontrer
 leur niveau d’intégration (sécurité, réglementaire, protection des droits privés, 
assurances ou encore qualité de service) et d’accéder par cette reconnaissance à 
de nouveaux marchés

- aux clients de favoriser la sélection des exploitants en se
reposant sur une qualification établie par des experts du domaine en toute

- aux assureurs de mieux évaluer les risques liés à l’exploitation
de drones pour proposer des primes d’assurance RC adaptées

- aux 
pouvoirs publics de faciliter l’exploitation des dossiers de demande
d’autorisation, de réduire les délais d’instruction et de référencer et de qualifier les exploitants.


Le référentiel modulaire de Qualidrones définit 4 niveaux de qualification en fonction du cadre et type d’exploitation visé par les opérateurs et des risques associés.

Partager cet article
30 juin 2015 2 30 /06 /juin /2015 11:35
Arrival of C-27J Spartan  at RAAF Base Richmond - photo Commonwealth of Australia, Department of Defence

Arrival of C-27J Spartan at RAAF Base Richmond - photo Commonwealth of Australia, Department of Defence


30 June 2015 Australia DoD

Chief of Air Force, Air Marshal Geoff Brown, AO, welcomed the first RAAF C-27J Spartan battlefield airlift aircraft in Australia at a ceremony at RAAF Base Richmond today, coinciding with the 90th anniversary of the base’s establishment.
The acquisition of the C-27J Spartan will fill a gap in Australia’s military capability for tactical fixed wing airlift, which has been left open since the retirement of the Caribou fleet in 2009.
AIRMSHL Brown said the acquisition of 10 C-27J aircraft, which has been planned since 2012, signifies a $1.4 billion investment in Australia’s airlift capability.
“This acquisition represents a commitment to Australia’s air power capability which is a critical element of Australia’s national security and defence strategy,” he said.
“The C-27J will strengthen the Australia Defence Force’s air lift capability by increasing our ability to move troops, equipment and supplies.
“The aircraft will complement the capabilities of the C-130J Hercules and C-17A Globemaster and will be able to carry medium-sized loads and access smaller runways that are not suited to other aircraft.
“This will allow Air Force to support humanitarian missions as well as battlefield airlift in remote locations and unprepared airstrips common in Australia’s region.
“Under Plan Jericho, the plan to transform Air Force into a fifth generation fighting force for the information age, the C-27J will operate within an integrated system that is more agile, has an extended reach and gathers and distributes information quicker and more efficiently than ever before.”
The C-27J aircraft provides protection from a range of threats through features such as missile warning systems, electronic self protection, secure communications and battlefield armour.
Initial Operational Capability for the C-27J fleet is planned for late 2016, with Final Operational Capability expected within the following two years.
The fleet of C-27J Spartan aircraft will initially be based at RAAF Base Richmond in New South Wales, until their permanent home at RAAF Base Amberley in Queensland is completed.

Partager cet article
29 juin 2015 1 29 /06 /juin /2015 16:55
Lettre de veille #3 du Comité Armée du Futur - ANAJ-IHEDN


15.06.2015 Pierre LALOUX, Responsable du Comité Armée du Futur (78ème session jeunes – Brest 2013) - ANAJ-IHEDN


Le Comité Armée du Futur de l’ANAJ-IHEDN a le plaisir de vous présenter la troisième édition de sa Lettre de veille sur le monde de la Défense.

Avant la période estivale, la lettre de veille du comité Armée du Futur vous permettra de retrouver l’actualité du monde de la défense, agrégée en trois rubriques thématiques : innovations et nouvelles technologies ; organisation et restructuration ; ainsi que finance, économie et budget.


Cette troisième édition reste fidèle à l’orientation initiale choisie par le comité : fournir aux acteurs du monde de la Défense des informations soulevant des réflexions d’ordre prospective sur l’armée de demain, que ce soit du point de vue organisationnel, financière, que technologique. Cette édition met l’accent sur cette dernière thématique, en proposant 8 pages dédiées, ainsi qu’en intégrant des sources variées d’origine internationale sur ce sujet.

Le comité Armée du Futur de l’ANAJ-IHEDN a pour vocation de développer, favoriser et diffuser la réflexion sur la Défense de demain. Fort de membres actifs, dynamiques et motivés, le comité ne cesse de renforcer son intérêt commun : l’étude prospective de l’outil militaire via une diversité d’approches et de points de vue.

Avant de vous remercier pour votre intérêt et de vous souhaiter une excellente lecture, il convient de rappeler la volonté du comité Armée du Futur d’affirmer son positionnement de laboratoire d’idées, résolument tourné vers l’avenir. Groupe d’échanges, de débats et de réflexions sur l’armée de demain, le comité Armée du Futur est ouvert à toutes propositions, remarques ou suggestions.

Que vous soyez simplement curieux de découvrir les enjeux de la Défense, férus des nouvelles technologies et de leurs implications au sein des forces, ou encore désireux de partager votre connaissance de l’outil militaire, lancez-vous, imaginez la Défense de demain !



Télécharger le fichier

Partager cet article
27 juin 2015 6 27 /06 /juin /2015 11:35
X15 Combat Boat

X15 Combat Boat


June 27, 2015: Strategy Page


An Indonesian shipbuilder (PT Ludin) with links to Swedish builders has adapted the Swedish CB90 fast patrol boat to a design better adapted for use in tropical waters. The first design was the X15 which was very similar to the 20 ton CB90. A smaller version of the X15, the 10 ton X12 has proved very popular in Indonesia and now Bangladesh, where a local firm is building 18 under license from PT Ludin. The X12 has a top speed of 63 kilometers an hour and is 11.7 meters (38 feet) long and 11.4 feet wide. They can operate in shallow (one meter/three feet deep) water and are usually armed with two machine-guns and small arms. The coast guard versions have a radar and a crew of six or more sailors. These boats cost less than $100,000 each.

Partager cet article
26 juin 2015 5 26 /06 /juin /2015 16:20
photo US Navy

photo US Navy


June 26, 2015: Strategy Page


In May 2015 the U.S. Navy ordered its new SM-6 (Standard Missile 6) anti-aircraft missile into full production. Over 200 have already been built or ordered for development or as initial (low quantity) production. In late 2014 there were successful several live fire tests in which SM-6 shot down aircraft, anti-ship missiles and cruise missiles under a variety of different conditions. This included the longest surface-to-air engagement (missiles shooting down target) in naval history. The distance achieved was not released, but the max range of the SM-6 is given as 240 kilometers. The new version of the Aegis fire control software was also successfully tested under realistic combat conditions.


It was only in 2013, two years after receiving the first production models, that the SM-6 successfully hit an aircraft (a BQM-74 target UAV) over the horizon. The SM-6 is basically the existing SM-2 anti-aircraft missile with the more capable guidance system of the AMRAAM air-to-air missile, as well as general improvements in the electronics and other components. The SM-6 is a 1.5 ton, 6.55 meter (21.5 foot) long, 533mm (21 inch) diameter missile. It has a max altitude of 33 kilometers (110,000 feet).


The older SM-2 is 1.35 ton, 8 meter (26.2 foot) long missile with a max range of 190 kilometers and max altitude of 24.4 kilometers (80,200 feet). The main change for the SM-6 is the guidance system which is self-contained and will seek out any target it comes within range of. The SM-2 uses a "semi-active" guidance system, which requires that a special targeting radar "light up" the target with a radar beam, which the SM-2 guidance system detects and homes in on. The "active" guidance system of the SM-6 is thus harder to jam and can home in on targets beyond the range of targeting radars. The SM-6 can attack anti-ship missiles as well.


The SM-6 took 9 years to develop and has been in limited production since 2011, with plans to obtain 1,200 missiles at a cost of $4.3 million each. SM-6 will replace many of the SM-2 missiles currently carried by American and Australian warships.


Meanwhile, the navy has been continuing years of improvements in the Aegis radar and fire control system that controls SM-2, SM-6, and the smaller SM-3 anti-missile version. The SM-3 can destroy ballistic missiles and low orbit satellites. Aegis equipped ships began getting version 4.0 of the Aegis anti-missile software in 2013 and the next major upgrade (5.0) makes the anti-missile capabilities a standard feature of Aegis software. New destroyers are having anti-missile Aegis software installed as standard equipment. Much of the anti-missile capability of the original Aegis anti-aircraft system came from upgrades to the Aegis software.


The Aegis anti-missile system has had a success rate of over 80 percent in knocking down incoming ballistic missile warheads during test firings. To achieve this, two similar models of the U.S. Navy Standard anti-aircraft missile are in service, in addition to a modified (to track incoming ballistic missiles version) version of the Aegis radar system.


The RIM-161A, also known as the Standard Missile 3 (or SM-3), has a range of over 500 kilometers and max altitude of over 160 kilometers. The Standard 3 is based on the anti-missile version of the Standard 2 (SM-2 Block IV). This SM-3 missile has a shorter range than the SM-2, which can destroy a warhead that is more than 200 kilometers up. The SM-3 is optimized for anti-missile work, while the SM-2 Block IV was designed to be used against both ballistic missiles and aircraft. The SM-2 Block IV also costs less than half of what an SM-3 costs. So going after aircraft with SM-3s is discouraged unless absolutely necessary.

Partager cet article
25 juin 2015 4 25 /06 /juin /2015 11:50
Member States implement Code of Conduct on REACH


Brussels - 23 June, 2015 European Defence Agency


With the exception of Poland, all EDA participating Member States as well as Norway have decided to subscribe to and therefore participate in the implementation of the Code of Conduct on REACH Defence Exemptions which was adopted in March 2015.


This new milestone highlights the importance of harmonising national defence exemption procedures. Poland is still conducting an internal analysis towards a final decision regarding its subscription to the Code of Conduct.

A harmonised approach towards national REACH defence exemptions will contribute to a level playing field for European defence industries, reducing their administrative burden and related costs. It will also support the creation of an open and transparent European Defence Equipment Market and a capable and capability-driven European Defence Technological and Industrial Base, providing armed forces with the right defence equipment to meet their operational requirements.

In coming years the EDA will act as a facilitator to support national implementation and application of the CoC in practice, by the Member States.


More information

Partager cet article
25 juin 2015 4 25 /06 /juin /2015 11:50
High-level Group of Personalities on defence research issues statement

Brussels - 18 June, 2015 European Defence Agency

The European Commission has recently set up a high level group of politicians, academics, think tankers and CEOs from research technology organisations and defence industry to advise on how the EU can support defence research programmes relevant to the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP).


Working on a tasking from the December 2013 European Council, the European Defence Agency is bringing its expertise to this work strand through the organisation of workshops with the Commission and the discussion of modalities related to the future Pilot Project on CSDP Research.

The High-level Group is chaired by Commissioner Elżbieta Bieńkowska and supported by the High Representative, Commission Vice-President and Head of the European Defence Agency Federica Mogherini – who has been represented by EDA Chief Executive Jorge Domecq in the Group of Personalities. It is expected to make recommendations for a long-term vision for EU-funded CSDP-related defence research in support of European defence cooperation.

While the Group will report in full in early 2016, it offers now the following considerations as a preliminary contribution in the run up to the June 2015 European Council.


Official Statement by the Group of Personalities on defence research


The EU's security role and the need for a strong EDTIB

To ensure its long-term security, the EU and its Member States need political will and determination underpinned by a broad set of relevant instruments, including strong and modern military capabilities. These will enable the EU to live up to its responsibilities as a security provider and to be a relevant and reliable partner at global level. Investing today in future-oriented defence research programmes is crucial to developing the capabilities that will be required tomorrow.

It is widely recognised that Europe needs to retain robust military capabilities in its Member States, which, however, can no longer afford to sustain a full range of defence industrial assets on a purely national basis. Years of defence spending cuts by EU countries risk producing a net loss of combined military and industrial capabilities. And while defence-related research is pivotal in maintaining the technological edge that ensures military advantage, European investment in defence R&D has declined by more than 29 % since 2006 – and by more than 27 % in R&T.

The European defence industry needs therefore to become more integrated and more sustainable in order to maintain critical mass and global competitiveness, to remain an equal and attractive partner internationally, and to generate the key defence technologies needed to ensure Europe’s long-term operational autonomy. A common understanding of the capability-driven research areas that should be developed cooperatively - and of the ways to identify and select them - will be required, taking into account all existing processes at EU level.

The role of future collaborative programmes in addressing capability gaps

Cooperative defence research programmes will clearly be essential for sustaining and fostering key military capabilities in Europe and addressing well-known shortfalls. Currently, however, only 8% of national defence budgets are spent on collaborative projects.

The Preparatory Action and its follow-on programme can contribute significantly to the development of crucial military capabilities for Europe and help ensure the sustainability and competitiveness of the European defence industrial sector - from prime contractor level through to SMEs - thus also underpinning the Union’s long-term security.

The Preparatory Action should therefore pave the way to a substantial and ambitious CSDP-related defence research programme in the next EU multi-annual funding framework, thus making a quantitative and qualitative difference to the current situation and demonstrating the added value of a permanent EU scheme.


Key principles for EU-funded CSDP-related defence research

The future research programme must be clearly defence-oriented, coherent with and complementary to existing national defence research efforts, and must take fully into account the unique aspects of the defence sector in its governance principles and modalities.

It must help address specific capability needs stemming from the evolving security environment, avoid duplications, and catalyse collaborative research efforts.

The Preparatory Action needs to properly test the effectiveness and relevance of EU-funded defence research and the appropriateness of the proposed governance model. As such, it should be endowed with appropriate and credible means – preferably up to the maximum budget allowed by the legal framework.



  • Fernando Abril-Martorell, CEO Indra;
  • Carl Bildt, former Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs;
  • Antoine Bouvier, CEO MBDA;
  • Håkan Buskhe, CEO of Saab;
  • Paul de Krom, former secretary of State for Social Affairs and Employment, President and CEO of TNO, a Dutch organization of applied scientific research
  • Tom Enders, CEO Airbus Group;
  • Michael Gahler, MEP, EP rapporteur for Commission's communication on defence;
  • Elisabeth Guigou, President of the Foreign Affairs Commission in l'Assamblée Nationale, former Minister of European Affairs, of Justice and of Employment;
  • Ian King, Chief Executive BAE Systems;
  • Bogdan Klich, former Minister of Defence, member of Polish Senate;
  • Mauro Moretti, CEO Finmeccanica;
  • Reimund Neugebauer, President of the "Frauenhofer-Gesellschaft", application-oriented research organisation;
  • Arndt Schoenemann, Managing Director of Liebherr-Aerospace Lindenberg GmbH, Chairman of ASD Supply Chain and SME Group;
  • Teija Tiilikainen, Director of Finnish Institute of International Affairs;
  • Nick Witney, former EDA Chief Executive, senior policy fellow with the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR).

More information

Partager cet article
25 juin 2015 4 25 /06 /juin /2015 06:51
Comment l'Agence européenne de défense veut relancer la coopération

Défense L'Agence européenne de défense étudie actuellement un projet de fonds d'investissement au sein de l'Agence où les Etats pourraient verser de l'argent destiné à des programmes réalisés en coopération (ici l'A400M, le dernier grand programme européen en coopération - photo Armée de l'Air)


25/06/2015 Michel Cabirol – LaTribune.fr


Les chefs d'Etat et de gouvernement se réunissent les 25 et 26 juin à Bruxelles pour évoquer les questions de défense. Afin de relancer la coopération entre les pays membres, l'Agence européenne de défense travaillent sur des incitations fiscales et sur la création d'un fonds destiné à financer les programmes européens.


Et si l'Agence européenne de défense (AED) avait trouvé la martingale pour inciter les Etats membres et les industriels de l'armement européens à lancer à nouveau des programmes en coopération. Et au-delà à consolider une industrie encore beaucoup trop dispersée face aux géants américains et à la montée en puissance progressive des industriels des pays émergents. En tout cas, le nouveau directeur de l'AED, Jorge Domecq, pourrait avoir trouvé l'argument qui fait mouche auprès des industriels européens, y compris du PDG d'Airbus Group, Tom Enders, toujours très critique - à raison parfois - vis-à-vis des programmes en coopération.

Sur quoi travaille précisément l'AED ? Sur quatre projets très incitatifs pour les industriels, qui sont à des stades de maturation très différents. Des projets qui font partie de la feuille de route de l'AED validée par les ministres de la Défense des Etats membres. L'un d'entre eux pourrait voir le jour très rapidement : l'exemption de la TVA - soit 21 % - pour des programmes lancés dans le cadre de l'AED. Le conseil européen du 25 et 26 juin pourrait acter cette incitation très importante", selon Jorge Domecq, qui espère que ce dispositif sera "en place en septembre-octobre 2015".


Un fonds d'investissements pour des programmes en coopération

L'AED étudie actuellement un projet de fonds d'investissement au sein de l'Agence où les Etats pourraient verser de l'argent destiné à des programmes réalisés en coopération. "Ce qui permettraient de disposer d'une plus grande continuité budgétaire dans l'exécution des programmes, estime le directeur de l'Agence européenne de défense. Car il arrive parfois que des pays, qui souhaitent lancer un programme en coopération, n'ont pas les budgets en même temps". Ce fonds donnerait également une visibilité à l'industrie. Ce projet est en discussion avec les Etats membres. L'AED est également en train d'étudier comment des programmes civils et militaires en coopération pourraient faire l'objet de prêts de la Banque européenne d'investissements (BEI).

Enfin, Jorge Domecq examine la possibilité de faire bénéficier les industriels européens de la défense du Fonds européen pour les investissements stratégiques (FEIS) lancé par le président de la Commission européenne, Jean-Claude Juncker, et destiné à mobiliser 315 milliards d'euros au cours des trois prochaines années. Ce fonds "pourrait aider quelques programmes qui ont un impact dans le domaine civil", explique le patron de l'AED, qui compte trouver "d'autres incitations". Ces dispositifs, espère-t-il "devraient intéresser les industriels. Ce type d'incitations fiscales favorisera les coopérations entre les pays membres".


Lire également "L'Europe n'a plus de temps à perdre sur la défense" (Jorge Domecq, directeur de l'Agence européenne de défense)

Partager cet article
25 juin 2015 4 25 /06 /juin /2015 06:50
"L'Europe n'a plus de temps à perdre sur la défense" (Jorge Domecq, Agence européenne de défense)

"Le mot d'ordre doit être la coopération dans le secteur de la défense", a assuré le directeur de l'Agence européenne de la défense (AED) - photo EDA


25/06/2015 Michel Cabirol – laTribune.fr


Les questions de défense seront abordées lors du Conseil européen qui se tiendra les 25 et 26 juin à Bruxelles. En dépit d'une actualité dense, le directeur de l'Agence européenne de défense, Jorge Domecq, recommande dans une interview accordée à La Tribune à l'Europe d'aller vers plus de coopération.


Le sommet européen qui doit être consacré aux questions de défense sera-t-il parasité par les questions d'actualités sur la Grèce, Daech et les problèmes migratoires en mer Méditerranée ?
Il est important que l'Europe doive se rendre compte qu'elle n'a plus de temps à perdre sur les questions de défense. Chaque année qui passe, se pose effectivement la question du poids de l'industrie de la défense européenne, comme partenaire sur la scène internationale. Pourquoi ? Pour être un contributeur à un monde plus stable et un monde en paix, l'Europe doit avoir des capacités opérationnelles. Et pour détenir de telles capacités, l'Europe doit avoir une industrie qui produise toutes les capacités opérationnelles et surtout qui les produise de façon autonome, et non comme une franchise. Si l'Europe perd des capacités industrielles et technologiques dans les cinq à dix ans à venir, le poids de l'Europe comme partenaire intéressant pour d'autres pays, y compris nos alliés, va faiblir. L'Europe deviendra alors un contributeur secondaire. Nous avons donc besoin d'avancer dans les domaines capacitaires et d'avancer dans une plus grande intégration de l'industrie pour qu'elle soit plus compétitive et qu'elle dispose d'un poids technologique à la hauteur des futurs besoins de la défense européenne.


Êtes-vous confiant sur les conclusions du sommet ?
On verra. Mais j'espère que le sommet servira à maintenir l'attention sur les questions de défense. Il serait également bien d'obtenir une réaffirmation des chefs d'Etat et de gouvernement de vouloir aller de l'avant sur ces questions. Déjà 16 pays de l'OTAN, dont douze pays de l'Union européenne, ont décidé d'augmenter leurs dépenses de défense C'est très important que des pays arrêtent de couper leurs dépenses de défense.


L'Europe ne devrait-elle pas avoir une défense commune, les menaces étant en grande partie communes à tous les pays européens ?
Absolument. Les menaces actuelles au sud et à l'est de l'Europe impliquent une mise en commun des moyens européens. Mais pas seulement. Avec la crise économique actuelle, le mot d'ordre doit être la coopération dans le secteur de la défense. C'est un must. Nous ne pouvons plus considérer en tant qu'Européens que nous avons le choix même si nous retardons les décisions. Il faut absolument avancer dans la coopération entre Européens. Mais peut-être pas à 28 sur tous les dossiers. Les pays européens doivent dépenser plus efficacement qu'aujourd'hui leurs ressources dédiées à la défense. Par exemple, l'Europe ne peut pas dépenser la moitié de l'argent que les États-Unis mettent chaque année dans la défense et n'obtenir que 15% de leur résultats.

Partager cet article
24 juin 2015 3 24 /06 /juin /2015 16:20
photo Lockheed Martin

photo Lockheed Martin


24 Jun 2015 By: Beth Stevenson – FG


The UK and USA have carried out the first short take-off test of the Lockheed Martin F-35B Lightning II during a ground-based test at Patuxent River Naval Air Station in Maryland, USA on 19 June.


This marks the start of the first phase of testing to certify the UK’s short take-off and vertical landing F-35B as capable of take off and landing from an aircraft carrier. The work is being controlled by the F-35 Pax River Integrated Test Force (ITF), assigned to the Air Test and Evaluation Sqn 23.


Test aircraft BF-04 took off on a ski-jump, demonstrating the F-35B’s ability to integrate into the UK’s future operations. The UK has selected the ski-jump approach as opposed to the catapult and arresting gear approach favoured by the USA in its carrier operations.


The UK’s new carriers – HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales – are shorter and contain an upward slope ramp at the bow, curved to allow for the F-35B to launch upward and forward at the same time. This allows the aircraft to take off with more weight and at a lower speed than a horizontal launch permits, the UK Ministry of Defence says.


"Friday’s F-35B ski-jump was a great success for the joint ski-jump team,” says Peter Wilson, BAE Systems test pilot and ski-jump project lead.


“As expected, aircraft BF-04 performed well and I can’t wait until we’re conducting F35 ski-jumps from the deck of the Queen Elizabeth carrier. Until then, the de-risking that we’re able to achieve now during phase I of our ski jump testing will equip us with valuable data we’ll use to fuel our phase II efforts.”


This follows a test on 12 June during which Royal Air Force test pilot Sqn Ldr Andy Edgell released two inert Raytheon Paveway IV precision-guided bombs from F-35B test aircraft BF-03.


The 500lb dual mode weapons were dropped over the Atlantic Test Ranges at Pax River, marking the first weapons separation test of the Paveway by the ITF. The passive bombs safely separated from an internal weapons bay within the F-35B, Lockheed Martin says, and maintained the stealth characteristics of the aircraft throughout

Partager cet article
23 juin 2015 2 23 /06 /juin /2015 07:20
Blast Gauge: pour mesurer les effets d'une explosion sur l'organisme et guider le traitement

18.06.2015 par Philippe Chapleau - Lignes de Défense

L'US Army vient de passer commande de dispositifs Blast Gauge à la société Blackbox Biometrics (lire  ci-dessous). Ce contrat porte à 16,4 millions de dollars le montant des achats effectués par l'US Army.


Le Blast Gauge (modèle 6) est une petite (moins de 30g) jauge d'explosion qui mesure l'exposition aux ondes de surpression d'un combattant (mais aussi d'un démineur ou même d'un chien de sauvetage) aux explosions; ses données permettent de guider le triage et le traitement, assurant ainsi une grande rapidité de réaction. Ce dispositif peut s'adapter sur le casque, l'épaule ou la poitrine.


L'annonce US:
"Blackbox Biometrics Inc.,* Rochester, New York, has been awarded a maximum $9,371,520 firm-fixed-price contract for concussive force monitoring devices. This was a sole-source acquisition using justification commercial Federal Acquisition Regulation part 12. Location of performance is New York, with a June 9, 2016, performance completion date. Using service is Army. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2015 through fiscal 2016 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Land and Maritime, Columbus, Ohio (SPE7M9-15-C-0034)."


Ce matériel est distribué en France par la société CLDS Conseil, de Monaco (info@cldsconseil.com ). Le Blast Gauge aurait été évalué par le ministère de la Défense, mais pas encore par celui de l'Intérieur.

Partager cet article
22 juin 2015 1 22 /06 /juin /2015 16:55
Le nouveau Hall 39-45 au Musée de l’Air et de l’Espace

19/06/2015 Thibault Duclos  - DICOD


Le Hall 39-45 consacré aux avions de la Seconde Guerre mondiale vient de rouvrir ses portes au Musée de l’Air et de l’Espace au Bourget, après neuf mois de travaux. L’occasion de revoir tous ces appareils légendaires, du Supermarine Spitfire britannique au Heinkel 162 allemand, premier chasseur de l’histoire à abandonner l’hélice pour le moteur à réaction. Visite guidé

Partager cet article
22 juin 2015 1 22 /06 /juin /2015 16:50
Earth Observation

22 juin 2015 by Airbus DS


The most comprehensive range of Earth observations systems available today.
Discover the complete Airbus Defence and Space Earth observation portfolio.

For more information

Partager cet article
22 juin 2015 1 22 /06 /juin /2015 12:50
Airbus Defence and Space set to resume A400M deliveries


19/6/2015 by Airbus DS


Lifting of restrictions permits all aircraft to fly subject to completion of checks.


Airbus Defence and Space is about to recommence deliveries of Airbus A400M aircraft following the lifting of all remaining flight restrictions on new production aircraft by Spanish regulator DGAM yesterday.


As a result, all A400Ms are now cleared for flight provided they have undergone the checks specified by the manufacturer in the Alert Operator Transmission (AOT) of 19 May 2015. Airbus Defence and Space´s own three development aircraft, and the 12 aircraft delivered to customers prior to the accident were not affected by the restrictions.


The production plan for the year is under review following the accident but currently is still targeting at least 13 aircraft in 2015, plus up to four more subject to flight-test results due this summer.


Two aircraft which were due for delivery at the time of the accident are expected to be delivered in a matter of days with a number of others to follow in the coming weeks.


Head of Military Aircraft Fernando Alonso said: “We appreciate the Spanish authorities’ timely action in restoring our permission to fly without restriction as well as our customers’ patience and support in recent weeks. We are working hard to bring the schedule back on track while continuing to support the investigation.”

Partager cet article
19 juin 2015 5 19 /06 /juin /2015 16:20
Canada accepts first six Sikorsky CH-148 Cyclones


19 Jun 2015 By: James Drew - FG


Washington DC - The Royal Canadian Air Force has accepted delivery of its first six Sikorsky CH-148 Cyclone maritime patrol helicopters, marking a major step forward for the Sea King replacement programme that has a “torturous history”.


Two more helicopters are due to arrive at the Shearwater operating base in Nova Scotia this December, and the full tranche of 28 Cyclones will be in place by 2021, Canadian defence minister Jason Kenney said at a ceremony 19 June.


The first six choppers arrive amid a hurricane of displeasure in Canada over the handling of the various Sea King replacement efforts, the latest of which – the Cyclone programme – started in 2004 but was beset by technical issues, delays, cost growth and contract revisions.


In fact, an earlier Sea King replacement was aborted in 1993, at a cost to Canada of about $500 million. The total value of the Cyclone acquisition is $7.6 billion, including $1.9 billion for development and production of 28 helicopters and $5.7 over 20 years for in-service contractor support.


The twin-engine, medium-lift Cyclone is derived from Sikorsky’s civil S-92 and is designed for shipboard maritime surveillance and rescue operations on Canada's east and west coasts.


It will replace 27 long-serving Sikorsky CH-124 Sea Kings that have been in constant operation since 1963 and are the oldest aircraft in the RCAF inventory.


Public works and government services minister Diane Finley says it gives her great pleasure to finally put the Sea King “workhorse” out to pasture.


“I’m not one to mince words. The Cyclone has been a complex procurement – one that has seen its share of challenges,” she explains. “In fact, this procurement has had a torturous history.”


The Block I Cyclones were delivered in time to meet a revised schedule that was put in pace in January 2014. The fleet will be fully operational by 2018.


The ministers have confidence that the six aircraft are ready to deploy from a Halifax-class frigate at the next opportunity. Enough pilots, aircrews and maintainers have been trained to meet early operational objectives.


Over the past few months, the fleet has conducted 60 test missions consisting of about 300 takeoffs and landings from HMCS Halifax.


Despite reports to the contrary, the defence minister says the helicopters do meet the operational requirements of an amended contract with Sikorsky and are ready for operational use. “They’re ready for full utilization now,” he says.


The Sikorsky-led cyclone team includes General Dynamics Canada and L-3. The helicopters are checked out at Sikorsky’s facility in West Palm Beach, Florida.

Partager cet article
19 juin 2015 5 19 /06 /juin /2015 11:50
Paris Airshow 2015: Innovation

19 juin 2015 by Airbus HC


Since joining Airbus Helicopters as Head of Research and Innovation in 2014, Tomasz Krysinski has been at the head of many innovations poised to transform the future of helicopter flight by increasing efficiency and bringing greater value to customers.

Here he talks from the 51st Paris Air Show about some of the projects currently underway – Blue Edge blades, the high compression engine, the next phase of the high speed demonstrator program – and what he’s got his eyes on for the future.

Partager cet article
19 juin 2015 5 19 /06 /juin /2015 06:55
Le secteur aéronautique ne peut plus ignorer la menace des cyberpirates

Le secteur aéronautique ne peut plus ignorer la menace des cyberpirates


17 juin 2015 Liberation.fr (AFP)


Avions détournés à distance par un cyberpirate ou depuis un siège passager en perturbant les commandes de vol... constructeurs et experts testent tous les scénarios catastrophe face à un risque cyber envahissant.

Certains de ces scénarios relèvent de la pure science-fiction, d’autres sont «peu» probables. Dans tous les cas, le secteur ne peut plus ignorer une menace de plus en plus intrusive susceptible de perturber les avions, le trafic aérien mais aussi la chaîne de production en amont.

Le secteur «est soumis à de très nombreuses attaques, quotidiennes. Les attaquants se comportent de plus en plus comme des guerriers. On est dans des stratégies militaires de renseignement et d’attaque», a estimé Alain Robic, expert en cyberdéfense chez Deloitte Conseil, lors d’une présentation au salon aéronautique du Bourget (15-21 juin).


Suite de l’article

Partager cet article
19 juin 2015 5 19 /06 /juin /2015 06:20
photo Airbus HC

photo Airbus HC


Par - Le Monde.fr |


Pour une fois, au Salon du Bourget, c’est le bruit des hélices des hélicoptères qui couvre celui des moteurs d’avions. L’américain Sikorsky a lancé un mouvement de restructuration du secteur. Le numéro un des hélicoptères militaires est à vendre. Son propriétaire, le groupe United Technologies Corporation (UTC), qui contrôle également le motoriste Pratt & Whitney, en demande environ 8 milliards de dollars (7 milliards d'euros). Plusieurs candidats seraient sur les rangs pour le racheter, dont les deux américains, Bell et Lockheed Martin, et le français Airbus Helicopters. Guillaume Faury, PDG de la filiale hélicoptères d’Airbus, a admis « regarder attentivement le dossier ».

Toutefois, chez Airbus on admet ne se fait guère d’illusion : « Il paraît très peu vraisemblable que les autorités américaines laissent passer sous contrôle européen l’un des premiers fournisseurs du Pentagone. » En outre, les 8 milliards de dollars demandés pour Sikorsky pourraient représenter une trop grosse somme pour l’entreprise.


Suite de l'article

Partager cet article
18 juin 2015 4 18 /06 /juin /2015 12:57
Aéronautique : Rafaut ouvre son capital à ACE Management

Rafaut réalise essentiellement des équipements d'interface pour l'emport et le tir des armements pour les avions de combat, dont le Rafale, et les hélicoptères - photo Rafaut


18/06/2015 Michel Cabirol – LaTribune.fr


La société de gestions de portefeuille spécialisée dans l'aéronautique et la défense ACE Management prend une participation de 30% dans la PME de la région parisienne Rafaut.


C'est une très bonne nouvelle pour Rafaut et la filière aéronautique militaire. Dirigé par Serge Rafaut depuis 1960, cette PME familiale de mécanique aéronautique ouvre son capital au fonds ACE Management, qui va prendre via Aerofund III 30% du capital de l'équipementier civil et militaire.

Cette opération de type "owner buy-out", un dispositif financier qui facilite la transition managériale, va permettre à cette PME de la région parisienne, qui réalise un chiffre d'affaires de l'ordre de 30 millions d'euros, d'accompagner son développement, lié à l'exportation du Rafale et à la hausse programmée des cadences de production dans l'aéronautique civile. Surtout elle va faciliter la transmission managériale prévue de longue date par Serge Rafaut, Bruno Berthet étant confirmé dans ses fonctions de PDG.


Une PME de haute technologie de la région parisienne

Rafaut, une PME de la région parisienne (Villeneuve-la-Garenne), qui a également un site de production à Salbris (Loir-et-Cher) - soit environ 115 salariés - réalise essentiellement des équipements d'interface pour l'emport et le tir des armements pour les avions de combat et les hélicoptères.

Elle fabrique également des commandes de vol et des équipements mécaniques spéciaux pour des avions civils et des hélicoptères. Pour ACE Management, qui gère plus de 450 millions d'euros de capitaux, cette opération permet de pérenniser et de consolider une PME sur la filière aéronautique et de défense.

Partager cet article
18 juin 2015 4 18 /06 /juin /2015 11:20
H160 - photo Airbus HC

H160 - photo Airbus HC


16 juin 2015 Par Olivier James - Usinenouvelle.com

Les rumeurs de rapprochement entre Airbus Helicopters et Sikorsky vont bon train au salon aéronautique du Bourget. Un scénario qui reste très hypothétique.

Le marché des hélicoptères s'agite ! Lundi 15 juin, le conglomérat industriel américain United Technologies (UTC) a fait connaître son désir de se séparer de sa filiale de fabrication d'hélicoptères Sikorsky aux profits en fortes baisses. De quoi faire dire le lendemain même à Guillaume Faury, le pdg d’Airbus Helicopters qu’il "surveillait de près" cette opération. En moins de 24 heures, le salon du Bourget donne à voir un marché des hélicoptères en pleine reconfiguration.

C’est que ce marché est à la peine depuis quelques années. Entre la diminution des budgets militaires dans nombre de pays et la baisse de régime du secteur gazier et pétrolier, grand client d’hélicoptères civils, la filière fait grise mine. Quant au prometteur marché chinois, il reste bien trop encadré pour vraiment offrir des débouchés commerciaux massifs.


Un rapprochement d’égal à égal
Dans ce contexte, le rapprochement entre deux acteurs importants aurait du sens sur le papier et participerait à la consolidation de la filière. Mais Airbus Helicopters (filiale d’Airbus Group) compte-t-il vraiment racheter Sikorsky, dont le prix s’élèverait à environ 8 milliards de dollars ? Impossible avec les propos sibyllins de Guillaume Faury d’en conclure quoi que ce soit. "C’est une importante évolution, nous  regardons ce que fait UTC" , a affirmé le pdg d’Airbus Helicopters. Et de rajouter : "we keep an eye" (on regarde de près, en Français).

Sur le papier, le rapprochement aurait belle allure. Les chiffres d’affaires des deux groupes sont très proches : Sikorsky affiche 6,7 milliards d’euros de vente, contre 6,5 milliards pour Airbus Helicopters. Quant aux complémentarités industrielles, elles pourraient être au rendez-vous : la majeure partie des ventes de Sikorsky proviennent du militaire (70%), alors qu’Airbus Helicopters est le numéro un mondial des hélicoptères civils (même si son chiffre d’affaires est réparti à 50/50 sur les deux segments).


Un rapprochement impossible ?
"Ils auraient tout intérêt à racheter Sikorsky pour empêcher un autre concurrent de le faire", estime une source anonyme dans le secteur des hélicoptères. Parmi les concurrents les plus sérieux, Textron et Lockheed Martin. Mais ce scénario a ses limites. Sikorsky produit en effet le Black Hawk (best-seller de l’armée américaine) et le Marine One, l’hélicoptère utilisé par le président des Etats-Unis. Laisserait-on un européen produire ces appareils ?

"Il me semble peu probable qu’une société américaine dont de nombreux contrats sont liés au Département de la Défense des Etats-Unis passe sous contrôle européen", souligne une source proche du dossier. Impossible, alors, ce rapprochement ? Le système de base de données du FBI est bien fourni par une société française. Son nom : Safran.

Partager cet article


  • : RP Defense
  • : Web review defence industry - Revue du web industrie de défense - company information - news in France, Europe and elsewhere ...
  • Contact


Articles Récents