La France, dès début 2015, a signé plusieurs contrats pour la vente de Rafale. photo Ministère de la Défense

03/06/2015 par Justine BOQUET – Air & Cosmos

Début juin est paru le rapport au Parlement 2015 sur les exportations d'armement en France. 2014 fût une très bonne année. Ainsi comme l'a déclaré Jean-Yves Le Drian « avec 8,2 milliards d'euros, les prises de commandes de l'industrie françaises progressent de 18% par rapport à 2013 ».

En effet, au regard de l'évolution des prises de commandes françaises depuis 2005, on remarque une hausse continue depuis 2012. Le résultat 2014 « est le meilleur jamais enregistré par ce secteur », avec une forte augmentation de la part des contrats supérieurs à 200 millions d'euros.

Avec 5 735 millions d'euros de commandes passées, la région proche et moyen-orient représente le plus gros client de la France en 2014. Il faut dire que l'Arabie Saoudite, les Emirats Arabes Unis et le Qatar ont vu leurs acquisitions explosées depuis 2013. Ils sont respectivement le 1er, 4ème et 15ème client export de la France sur la période 2005-2014.

Toutefois le commerce intra-européen est toujours autant florissant, l'UE ayant passée – l'année dernière – pour plus de 300 millions d'euros de commandes à la France. Le Royaume-Uni, l'Espagne et l'Allemagne sont, quant à eux, les 8è, 17è et 19è principaux clients de la France sur la même période.

Enfin le continent asiatique représente un potentiel de vente intéressant, avec 981,2 millions d'euros de commandes passées. On retrouve parmi les clients majeurs de Paris l'Inde (n°2), la Malaisie (n°7), Singapour (n°9), l'Indonésie (n°11), la Corée du Sud (n°14), le Pakistan (n°16) et la Chine (n°18).

Le Brésil, les Etats-Unis, le Maroc, la Russie, l'Egypte, l'Australie et le Mexique ont eux aussi été des acheteurs importants pour l'Hexagone sur la période 2005-2014.

Plus récemment, entre 2010 et 2014, l'Arabie Saoudite s'est positionnée comme étant LE client majeur de la France avec 12 milliards d'euros de commande. Elle est suivie par l'Inde et le Brésil (6 milliards), les Emirats Arabes Unis (4 milliards), les Etats-Unis et le Maroc (3 milliards) et enfin le Royaume-Uni, la Malaisie, Singapour et la Russie (2 milliards).

Malgré ces résultats plus que satisfaisants, la France ne parvient pas à se démarquer du conglomérat européen. Les parts de marché pour l'exportation d'armement entre 2010-2014 sont majoritairement détenues par les Etats-Unis avec 48,2%. La France se perd donc dans l'UE, qui représente 28,2% des parts de marché.

Les contrats récemment conclus devraient permettre à Paris de maintenir ce cap voir même de progresser davantage. Ainsi, en février 2015, la France a signé avec l'Egypte pour la livraison de 24 Rafale. En mai, c'est le Qatar qui a passé commande, et ce pour le même nombre d'appareils.

3 juin 2015 par Jérôme Jadot - .franceinfo.fr

Le ministère de la Défense a publié les chiffres des exportations d'armes françaises, en forte hausse en 2014. Une augmentation de 18% pour des ventes s'élevant à plus de huit milliards d'euros, portée par des contrats à plusieurs centaines de millions d'euros.

C'est un incontestable bol d'air pour la balance commerciale française. Dans un rapport publié mercredi, le ministère de la Défense se réjouit de la bonne santé des exportations françaises d'armes, en hausse de 18% en 2014. "La meilleure performance à l'export depuis 15 ans", précise le texte.

Suite de l’article

02 juin 2015 Par Anne-Katell Mousset - Usinenouvelle.com

Le journal économique espagnol El Confidencial a obtenu de nouvelles informations sur le crash de l’avion de transport militaire A400M à Séville le 9 mai dernier.  "Une chaîne d’échecs de l’Allemagne à Séville", écrit le journal qui évoque "une série d’erreurs techniques et humaines dans le processus de contrôle qualité" de cet avion. Airbus avait déjà reconnu la semaine dernière un problème lors de l'étape d'assemblage final de l'avion. 

Des protocoles "sautés" sur le site de seville 

Le FADEC (Full Authority Digital Engine Control), ce système informatique particulièrement complexe de contrôle du moteur, n’aurait ainsi pas été vérifié en simulateur avant le vol d’essai, ont expliqué des sources du secteur aéronautique au journal. Lors de l’assemblage final, "beaucoup de protocoles de vérification ont été 'sautés'. Si un rodage des moteurs à haute vitesse au sol avait été fait, ils se seraient arrêtés avant le décollage", ont relaté ces sources.

Une "précipitation" des équipes qui s’explique, selon le journal espagnol, par un retard de "2700 heures" accumulées en amont, sur le site de fabrication allemand.

3 juin 2015 45eNord.ca (AFP)

Trois des quatre moteurs de l’avion de transport militaire A400M qui s’est écrasé à Séville (sud de l’Espagne) début mai, faisant 4 morts et 2 blessés graves, ont connu des problèmes de puissance au décollage, a annoncé Airbus Defence and Space, en citant les premières analyses de la commission d’enquête espagnole.

« Les moteurs 1, 2 et 3 ont subi un gel de la puissance après le décollage et n’ont pas répondu aux tentatives entreprises par l’équipage pour contrôler normalement la puissance tandis que le quatrième moteur a répondu normalement aux demandes de l’équipage », a indiqué le groupe dans un communiqué.

Airbus DS ajoute que les autres systèmes de l’avion ont fonctionné normalement et qu’il n’y a pas eu d’autre anomalie identifiée durant le vol.

Ces éléments coïncident avec les problèmes identifiés par l’avionneur le 19 mai dans une note d’alerte diffusée aux opérateurs de l’appareil.

« Quand les pilotes ont placé la manette des gaz sur +flight idle+ (ralenti, NDLR) pour réduire la puissance, celle-ci a effectivement été réduite mais elle est ensuite restée en ralenti sur les trois moteurs affectés durant le reste du vol, en dépit des tentatives de l’équipage pour récupérer de la puissance », poursuit l’avionneur.

Ces éléments sont basés sur l’exploitation des boîtes noires de l’appareil.

Le 19 mai, Airbus avait déjà ordonné à ses clients une inspection de leurs appareils A400M, leur adressant une note d’alerte pour leur demander de contrôler le système de gestion électronique des moteurs.

Dans son communiqué, Airbus DS souligne que ces éléments n’ajoutent pas d’autres recommandations à celles figurant dans l’alerte opérationnelle du 19 mai.

L’avion effectuait un vol d’essai avant sa livraison à la Turquie prévue pour juillet.

May 26, 2015: Strategy Page

China has arming its troops with the new ZH-05, a weapon that combines a 5.56mm assault rife with a computer controlled 20mm grenade launcher (with a max range of 700 meters). The ZH-05 has been seen with Chinese marines sent abroad warships working with the Somali anti-piracy patrol. Chinese special operations troops have the ZH-05 and the army ordered several thousand of them so that each four man infantry fire-team will have one. That puts China ahead of the other two countries (United States and South Korea) with similar weapons. The Chinese version is lighter, simpler and cheaper and the Chinese feel the ZH-05 is worth buying and issuing to the troops. There’s not been similar enthusiasm with the American and South Korean versions.

The U.S. began working on this type of weapon back in the 1990s as the OICW (Objective Individual Combat Weapon) and that mutated into the XM25 (the “X” in XM25 designates a system that is still in development). The South Korean one is the K11. The three weapons are different in important ways. The American and South Korean weapons both have a magazine for the computer controlled grenades while the ZH-05 is a single shot weapon, requiring 20mm rounds to be loaded manually each time. This makes the ZH-05 the lightest of the three weapons, weighing five kg (11 pounds) loaded (with a single 20mm round and a magazine with 20 rounds of 5.8mm ammo). The M25 got rid of the assault rifle element and upped the caliber to 25mm. Thus an M25, with a four round magazine, weighs 5.5 kg while the K11, loaded with a 20 round 5.56mm and five round 20mm magazines weighs 7.2 kg. The M25 is the only one of three to have been tested extensively in combat but because of misfire during a demonstration, budget cuts and troops finding there were not really that many situations calling for the M25, the system was cancelled (development funding was eliminated) in 2013.

The initial spectacular success and popularity of the XM25 grenade launchers in Afghanistan led the army to request that the weapon enter regular service as the M25 in 2014. But Congress, looking for ways to reduce military spending in 2013 cut all money for the M25. The army managed to scrounge enough cash to keep the M25 on the books and hopes to get the money to build 1,100 of them. Currently the M25 cost $35,000 each with the 25mm ammo going for $55 per round. SOCOM (Special Operations Command) apparently has some M25s but with few American troops in combat there is not a lot of demand for a weapon like this.

When the first evaluation models of the XM25 arrived in Afghanistan in 2011 the weapon soon became much sought after by infantry troops. There were never more than a few dozen XM25s in Afghanistan and limited supplies of ammunition. Despite that the weapon quickly developed a formidable reputation. The Special Forces have priority on the weapon because it is very useful for special operations missions. The army planned to buy enough so that they could issue one per infantry squad. There are 27 squads in an infantry battalion.

The XM25 grenade launcher went through several major design changes and it wasn’t until 2005 that the first XM25s were delivered to the U.S. Army for troop testing. In 2007 a few were sent overseas for testing in combat situations. While the troops have been very enthusiastic about the new weapon, there were a lot of suggestions, mostly about minor items. So the army kept tweaking and refining the weapon. It appeared that the XM25 was a success after only 55 of the 25mm rounds were fired in combat. The users protested having to give them up after the few months of field testing. All this was because the XM25s worked as advertised, firing "smart rounds" that exploded over the heads of Taliban hiding behind rocks or walls, or hiding in a cave or room. Enemy machine-guns have been quickly knocked out of action and ambushes quickly disrupted with a few 25mm shells. Encounters that might go on for 15 minutes or longer, as U.S. troops exchange fire with hidden Taliban, end in minutes after a few 25mm, computer controlled rounds were used. But over time it was found that there were not that many situations in combat calling for an M25 and some troops left them behind most of the time.

The XM25 was originally one of two weapons (the other being a 5.56mm rifle) incorporated in the 8.2 kg (18 pound) XM29 OICW. The OICW was originally developed as a replacement for the 40mm grenade launcher attached to the grenadiers M16 as well as providing a more accurate and capable grenade launcher. Didn't work out as intended. The big problem was effectiveness. The older 40mm, unguided, grenade rounds weigh 540 grams (19 ounces) each, the original 20mm OICW round weighed half that. This was one of the several major problems with the OICW. It was too heavy and ungainly, and the 20mm "smart shell" it fired did not appear capable of effectively putting enemy troops out of action consistently, especially compared to the 40mm shell it was replacing. So, in August, 2003, it was decided to take the 5.56mm portion out of the OICW and develop it as a separate weapon (the XM8) while the grenade launcher part that fired the "smart shell" continued development as the XM25. But the XM-25 would now use a 25mm shell, which would generate 50 percent more fragments (and heavier ones at that) than the 20mm shell of the OICW. China and South Korea insist that their 20mm grenades inflict sufficient hurt on the enemy to be effective. The U.S., with lots of combat testing believes that 25mm is the only way to go. China disagrees and insists its 20mm shell is quite lethal.

The 20mm and 25mm "smart shells" both use a computer controlled fuze. The XM25 operator could choose one of four different firing modes via a selector switch on the weapon. The four modes include "Bursting" (airburst). For this to work, the soldier first finds the target via the weapons sighting system. The sight includes a laser range finder and the ability to select and adjust the range shown in the sight picture. For an air burst, the soldier aims at an enemy position and fires a round. The shell is optimized to spray incapacitating (wounding or killing) fragments in a roughly six meter (19 foot) radius from the exploding round. Thus if enemy troops are seen moving near trees or buildings at a long distance (over 500 meters), the weapon has a good chance of getting them with one shot. M-16s are not very accurate at that range, and the enemy troops will dive for cover as soon as M-16 bullets hit around them. With smart shells, you get one (or a few) accurate shots and the element of surprise. The smart shells can be used out to 700 meters, but not as accurately. At those longer ranges, you can't put a shell through a window, but you can hurt a crowd of gunmen standing outside the building.

The other modes are "PD" (point detonation, where the round explodes on contact), PDD (point detonation delay, where the round detonates immediately after it has gone through a door, window or thin wall) and "Window", which is used for firing at enemy troops in a trench, behind a stone wall or inside a room. The round detonates just beyond the aiming point. For buildings, this would be a window or door frame, cave entrance or the corner of a building (to get enemy troops thought to be around the corner.)

The XM25 is still a heavy weapon, with the final version coming in at 5.5 kg (12 pounds). The 25mm shells weigh over half a pound each (270 grams). On the plus side, there is already a 25mm armor piercing round (using a shaped charge capable of penetrating over 50mm of armor) available. This makes the XM-25 capable of knocking out light armored vehicles. Then there are the types of 25mm ammo, like fuel-air explosive (or "thermobaric"). Such a shell would cause greater blast effect in an enclosed space, and actually suck most of the oxygen out of a cave or closed room long enough to make surviving troops at least a bit groggy. This gives the attacking troops an opportunity to rush in and kill the enemy or take prisoners. In combat, every little advantage helps. With the XM-25, hiding behind rocks, trees, walls or in caves will no longer protect you. There is also a flechette ("shotgun") round. The XM-25 also has a 4x thermal sight.

It was only in 2009 that South Korea revealed it had developed the K11, a $14,000 20mm/5.56mm weapon which appeared to be identical in concept to the U.S. Army XM29. The South Korean version weighs 6.1 kg (13.4 pounds) empty and combines a 5.56mm rifle, with one firing 20mm computer and laser controlled shells. The South Korean weapon appears to operate the same way as the 20mm shell of the XM-29. The South Koreans plan to issue the K11, on the basis of two weapons per squad (an infantry unit containing 10-12 men). The K11 was both cheaper and lighter than the XM29.

It's unclear if the South Koreans found solutions to the problems the XM29 and XM25 encountered, or simply developed an improved XM29 and decided it was useful in small numbers. South Korea used some K11s in Afghanistan and there were lots of complaints about reliability and effectiveness. This did not result in the K11 being cancelled, but the weapon does not have a good reputation among the troops. The South Koreans have found that the 20mm smart shell is effective out to about 500 meters. South Korean troops began receiving the K11 in 2010. In 2011 South Korea halted production of the K11 for a while because nearly half of those already distributed to the troops had design or manufacturing problems. This included some that had been sent to South Korean troops in Afghanistan. The K11 problems were fixed and so far over 4,000 have been built. The K11 manufacturer insists that problems have been fixed but troops and many commanders are not so confident.

The Chinese ZH-05 has three types of 20mm ammo. One is impact detonation, the second is air burst and the third is a shotgun type shell. The computerized fire control system only provides for the user to select at what range the air burst round will detonate. Because these 20mm rounds have fewer electronics in them they carry more fragments and the Chinese believe (but don’t know from combat experience) that this supplies adequate wounding capability.

source military-today.com

May 28, 2015: Strategy Page

Chinese airborne and light infantry units are being equipped with a Chinese made amphibious ATV (All Terrain Vehicle). This is an 8x8 vehicle apparently based on the Canadian Argo design, which has been around since the 1960s and has been regularly upgraded, refined, improved and extensively used all over the world. The Chinese ATV can carry six people (including the driver), weighs 1.7 tons and has a max payload of about a ton. If used amphibiously the ATV can only carry about a third of a ton. Max road speed is 60 kilometers an hour. The ATV is 3.9 meters (12.7 feet) long and 1.8 meters (5.9 feet) wide. The Chinese military has several thousand of these vehicles, many (if not most) of them with non-combat units.

28 mai 2015 by Royal Navy

Pour les sept ans à venir, la Bundeswehr a confié à Airbus Helicopters la mission d’assurer un niveau optimum de disponibilité, de fiabilité et d’aptitude au vol aux 15 hélicoptères H145M (anciennement EC645 T2). Photo Ch. Abarr  - Airbus Helicopters

02.06.2015 par Aerobuzz.fr

Les Forces armées allemandes (Bundeswehr) et Airbus Helicopters ont signé un contrat de services global concernant les nouveaux hélicoptères H145M, dont l’entrée en service au sein de l’armée de l’Air allemande est prévue dans le courant de cette année.

D’une durée de sept ans, cet accord global de services et d’assistance en coopération permettra d’assurer un niveau optimum de disponibilité, de fiabilité et d’aptitude au vol aux 15 hélicoptères H145M (anciennement EC645 T2) que comptera la flotte allemande. Ces appareils seront principalement exploités lors de missions accomplies avec les Forces d’intervention spéciales KSK (Kommando Spezialkräfte).

May 25, 2015: Strategy Page

Pakistan has apparently received the first three of twenty Chinese WZ-10 helicopter gunships. Pictures of two of them together have appeared. These first three were announced as a gift and were quickly delivered so Pakistan could try them out. This appears to have led to an order for 17 more. Or not, as the WZ-10 sale has been kept quiet. If Pakistan does buy 17 more WZ-10s it would be the first export customer. The sale is apparently a done deal as Pakistan is to receive two more WZ-10s by the end of the year.

China has been developing the 7 ton WZ-10 helicopter gunship since the 1990s. After 14 years of development there were several prototypes and a lot of unresolved problems. Attempts to buy or steal helicopter gunship technology from Russia and South Africa failed. In 2010 some of the prototypes were sent to Chinese Army aviation units for field testing. While not a failure, there were problems and at one point the WZ-10 was in danger of being abandoned. The Chinese persevered and fixed most of the defects by 2012 and put WZ-10 into production. The WZ-10 is armed with an autocannon (23mm to 30mm) and has four hard points that can carry 16 HJ10 laser guided missiles (similar to Hellfire) or even more unguided rockets.

Meanwhile China also put the smaller (4.5 ton) WZ-19 armed scout helicopter into production, partly as a backup if the WZ-10 failed. China wanted something more like the American AH-64 Apache and the WZ-10 was equipped to operate like the AH-64 or earlier AH-1 (which Pakistan has been using for a long time). The WZ-19 has been spotted in the air since 2010 and by 2012 was seen painted in military colors, meaning it was out of development and in service. The WZ-19 was earlier known as the Z-9W. The WZ-19 is yet another Chinese helicopter based on the Eurocopter Dauphin (which has been built under license in China since the 1990s. The WZ-19 is a 4.5 ton, two seat armed helicopter. It can carry a 23mm autocannon and up to a ton of munitions (missiles, usually). Cruising speed is 245 kilometers an hour and range is 700 kilometers. The WZ-19 is basically an upgraded Z-9W.

May 17, 2015: Strategy Page

The U.S. Navy’s X-47B UCAS (unmanned combat air system) continues to break or make records. Thus in 2015 this included the world's first fully autonomous aerial refueling in April, performed with a KC-707 tanker. During the last few years this unmanned combat aircraft has successfully carried out numerous operations aboard aircraft carriers. These tests were often firsts for UCAS. Thus an X-47B made its first catapult launch from an aircraft carrier on May 14th 2013. That was followed by several touch and go landings on a carrier. The first carrier landing, as expected, followed soon after. Later in the year more flight tests further stressed the capabilities of the automatic landing system, especially in high speed and complex (different directions) winds. The autolanding systems passed all these tests. The X-47B was also the first UAV to land and be off the carrier deck in less than 90 seconds, just like manned aircraft. There were a lot of other tests to see how effectively and reliably the X-47B could operate on the carrier and hanger deck and do it alongside manned aircraft. All this is part of a long-term navy plan to introduce an UCAS replacement for the F-35 (which is soon to replace the F-18s) in the 2030s. But if the UCAS progress continues to be swift and the costs low (compared to manned aircraft), the F-35 could find its production run much reduced to make room for an UCAS.

While software controlled landing systems have been around for decades, landing on a moving air field (an aircraft carrier) is considerably more complex than the usual situation (landing on a stationary airfield). Dealing with carrier landings requires more powerful hardware and software aboard the aircraft. The navy expected some glitches and bugs and appears to be rapidly catching up to the reliability of commercial landing software (which has been used very successfully on UAVs) within months rather than decades.

Rather than begin development on the slightly larger X-47C, which was be the first naval UCAV to enter service, the navy changed that plan and is now seeking new designs for a UCLASS (unmanned carrier-launched airborne surveillance and strike) aircraft. There will be a competition by development aircraft in 2016. It’s likely, but not certain, that one of those 2016 competitors will be the X-47C.

All this comes after the navy rolled out the first X-47B in 2008. This was the first carrier-based combat UAV, with a wingspan of 20 meters (62 feet, and the outer 25 percent folds up to save space on the carrier) and stay in the air for up to twelve hours. The 20 ton X-47B weighs a little less than the 24 ton F-18A and has two internal bays holding two tons of smart bombs. It is a stealthy aircraft. As it exists right now the X-47B could be used for a lot of bombing missions, sort of a super-Reaper. The navy has been impressed with the U.S. Air Force success with the Predator and Reaper. But the propeller driven Reaper weighs only 4.7 tons. The much larger X-47B uses a F100-PW-220 engine, which is currently used in the F-16 and F-15.

The X-47C was expected to be closer to 30 tons and have a payload of over four tons. The X-47B was never mean to be the definitive carrier UCAV, but the navy hoped it would be good enough to show that unmanned aircraft could do the job. Normally, "X" class aircraft are just used as technology demonstrators. The X-47 program has been going on for so long, and has incorporated so much from UAVs already serving in combat that it was thought that the X-47 may end up eventually running recon and bombing missions as the MQ-47C. But in February 2015 the navy stated that the X-47B was too costly and insufficiently stealthy to become it's carrier UCAV, and the two prototypes will be turned into museum exhibits upon completion of all flight testing, extant and length of which is not ultimately decided yet.

The U.S. is far ahead of other nations in UCAS development, and this is energizing activity in Russia, Europe, and China to develop similar aircraft. A Chinese UCAS, called the Li Jian was photographed moving around an airfield under its own power back in early 2013, which is the sort of thing a new aircraft does before its first flight (which took place in November, 2013). Since 2011 the Li Jian has been photographed as a mock up, then a prototype, and now taxiing around and in flight. The Li Jian is similar in size and shape to the U.S. Navy X-47B.

It’s generally recognized that robotic combat aircraft are the future, even though many of the aviation commanders (all of them pilots) wish it were otherwise. Whoever gets there first (an UCAV that really works) will force everyone else to catch up, or end up the loser in their next war with someone equipped with UCASs. China may have just copied pictures of the X-47B, or done so with the help of data obtained by their decade long Internet espionage operation. Whatever the case, the Li Jian is not far behind the X-47B.

These aircraft are meant to operate like current armed UAVs or like cruise missiles (which go after targets under software, not remote, control). Enemy jamming can interfere with remote control and you have to be ready for that. This means pre-programmed orders to continue the mission (to put smart bombs on a specific target, the sort of attack cruise missiles have been carrying out for decades) or attempt that but turn around and return to base if certain conditions were not met (pre-programmed criteria of what is an acceptable target). Fighter (as opposed to bomber) UCASs can be programmed to take on enemy fighters (manned or not) with some remote control or completely under software control. This is the future and China wants to keep up.

The U.S. Navy has done the math and realized that they need UCASs on their carriers as soon as possible. The current plan is to get these aircraft into service by the end of the decade. But a growing number of navy leaders want to get the unmanned carrier aircraft into service sooner than that. The math problem that triggered all this is the realization that American carriers had to get within 800 kilometers of their target before launching bomber aircraft. Potential enemies increasingly have aircraft and missiles with a range greater than 800 kilometers. The X-47B UCAS has a range of 2,500 kilometers and is seen as the solution.

The Department of Defense leadership is backing the navy efforts and spurring the air force to catch up. At the moment, the air force is cutting orders for MQ-9s, which are used as a ground support aircraft, in addition to reconnaissance and surveillance, because American troops are being pulled out of Afghanistan, and it is believed Reaper would not be very useful against China, North Korea, or Iran. But, as the Navy is demonstrating, you can build UCASs that can carry more weapons, stay in the air longer, and hustle to where they are needed faster. The more the navy succeeds, the more the air force will pay attention and probably use a lot of the navy developed UAV hardware and software technology.

01/06/2015 Economie et technologie

Un drone est un appareil sans pilote, autonome programmé pour une mission ou télécommandé à distance. C’est à la fois l’aéronef et la station au sol qui permettent de le diriger. Sa fonction première, c’est de voir, de prolonger le regard, d’augmenter la distance de vue.

Il existe deux sortes de drones : les drones de moyenne ou haute altitude, avec longue autonomie, pour le renseignement ; ou bien des drones tactiques, plus petits, avec peu d’autonomie mais discrets, pour surveiller le champ de bataille et aider le soldat sur le terrain.

Avec l’arrivée du démonstrateur de drone de combat Neuron, la connaissance sur la furtivité a considérablement été améliorée. Pour atteindre ces performances, les ingénieurs ont notamment travaillé sur les matériaux et sur sa forme.

Des défauts de procédure de contrôle pourraient avoir causé le crash de l'A400M en Espagne, selon le patron d'Airbus, Fabrice Brégier. photo Airbus Military

30/05/2015 latribune.fr

Fabrice Brégier, le PDG d'Airbus estime que la faille à l'origine de l'accident d'un A400M début mai en Espagne est à chercher au niveau des procédures de test.

Pas d'erreur dans la conception de l'A400M. C'est ce que 'affirme le patron de la filiale aéronautique civile d'Airbus Group. "La conception de l'avion n'est pas à remettre en cause", a affirmé Fabrice Brégier lors d'une émission organisée par FranceInter, ITélé et les Echos ce samedi. Il était invité à donner son opinion sur les causes possibles de l'accident survenu le 9 mai à Séville qui a causé la mort de 4 personnes et fait 2 blessés graves.

Procédures de tests

Deux jours plus tôt, Marwan Lahoud, le directeur de la stratégie chez Airbus Group, a admis dans le quotidien allemand Handelsblatt qu'un problème au niveau de la production finale a pu provoquer un crash. "Il n'y a pas de défaut structurel" a-t-il néanmoins nuancé. Il serait question d'un problème dans l'installation du logiciel de contrôle des moteurs.

Réagissant à ces informations, Fabrice Brégier a indiqué:

"Ensuite, il y a eu, effectivement, soit une faiblesse dans les procédures de test des avions avant la mise en vol, car il s'agissait du premier vol d'un avion de série, soit un problème qui provenait de la mise en oeuvre de ces procédures".

"On tire l'ensemble des conséquences d'un tel accident"

Si la responsabilité du programme A400M donc d'une enquête sur les causes de l'accident échoit à la branche défense d'Airbus Group, le dirigeant de la branche civile à souligné:

Au niveau du groupe, on tire à chaque fois l'ensemble des conséquences d'un tel accident, ou même d'un incident".

Fabrice Brégier, qui s'exprimait quelques jours avant l'ouverture du salon du Bourget, a assuré: "on n'a pas eu, à Toulouse, de problème au cours des 20 dernières années."