Back to news

October 18, 2018 | International, Aerospace

AIR2030: A la rencontre de Dassault et du Rafale

Alexis Pfefferlé

Une industrie de la défense en Suisse ?

Existe-t-il une industrie de la défense en Suisse ? Cette question, pertinente, fut posée par certains parlementaires à l'heure de décider si le programme AIR 2030 devait être conditionné à des affaires compensatoires.

La réponse à cette question en Suisse n'est pas aussi claire que ce qu'elle pourrait être en France ou en l'Allemagne, pays qui possèdent des industries lourdes dévolues entièrement au secteur sécurité & défense.

En Suisse, dont on rappelle que le tissu économique se compose à 90% de PME, l'industrie de la défense se compose d'une myriade de PME/PMI qui produisent principalement des machines ou des composants qui rentrent dans la chaine de production de groupes étrangers actifs dans le domaine.

Par exemple, nos machines à haute précision sont aussi utiles et demandées dans le domaine civile que militaire.

Selon SWISSMEM, l'association faîtière des PME et des grandes entreprises de l'industrie suisse des machines, des équipements électriques et des métaux (industrie MEM), l'industrie MEM concerne près de 320'000 emplois en Suisse et un chiffre d'affaire à l'export trois fois supérieur à celui de l'industrie horlogère. La part de l'industrie de défense est nettement plus faible mais permet de maintenir en Suisse des postes de travail à très haute valeur ajoutée.

A la lecture de ces chiffres, les affaires compensatoires prévues dans le programme AIR2030 sont indiscutablement une opportunité exceptionnelle pour l'économie suisse.

Dassault – Safran – Thalès, l'excellence industrielle française

Retour à Lausanne le mercredi 16 octobre, 0800, pour la seconde journée BtoB entre les industriels suisses et les avionneurs retenus dans le cadre du programme AIR2030.

Au menu de ce jour, le Rafale du consortium Dassault – Safran – Thalès.

Le Rafale est un biréacteur de 4ème génération voire 4ème génération +, selon les classifications, en vertu d'une certaine furtivité active et tactique.

C'est le fleuron de l'armée de l'air française et probablement le chasseur européen le plus avancé en matière technologique.

La présentation est dirigée par Monsieur Florent SEYROL, responsable du Business Développement et Coopération Internationale pour Dassault Aviation et par Monsieur Pascal DIDIERJEAN pour le groupe Safran.

Le programme Rafale étant un programme achevé en matière d'étude et bien rodé en matière de production, la présentation de Dassault est principalement axée sur la compensation indirecte.

Les maîtres mots de la présentation sont l'innovation et la recherche.

Poids lourd de l'industrie française et mondiale, Dassault c'est 4.8mia de chiffre d'affaire dont 20% sont alloués à la recherche et au développement. Hormis les pharmas, peu de sociétés suisses ont accès à un tel niveau de financement.

Le fil conducteur semble tout trouvé et le consortium formé par Dassault, Safran et Thalès, au travers de leurs divisions combinées, offre de nombreuses possibilités pour les sociétés suisses et des perspectives intéressantes en matière de croissance dans des secteurs allant de l'aéronautique à l'optique en passant par la motorisation et l'électronique.

Monsieur Florent SEYROL le souligne, Dassault a une taille internationale, l'expérience de la croissance et des grands contrats, et c'est également cette expérience que le groupe transmet à ses partenaires pour que ceux-ci puissent exploiter pleinement leur potentiel économique.

Monsieur Pascal DIDIERJEAN, pour le groupe Safran, abonde dans ce sens, illustrant son propos avec l'exemple de la technologie VTOL (Vertical Take-off and Landing aircraft), où la Suisse, je l'apprends, à une carte à jouer, surtout aux cotés d'un motoriste comme Safran.

Premier avionneur à le souligner, Dassault est également très sensible à l'innovation dans le milieu académique et les succès suisses des EPF ne sont pas passés inaperçus.

A l'heure des difficultés rencontrées par ces institutions dans le cadre des projets européens, des financements indirectes de ce type dans le cadre des affaires compensatoires seraient pertinents et bienvenus.

Pour Dassault, la force de la Suisse c'est l'innovation et investir dans notre pays et nos entreprises c'est investir dans les technologies du futur, un win win français.

On notera enfin que plusieurs sociétés suisses présentes se sont félicitées du contact franc et direct qu'ils ont pu avoir avec les représentants du consortium Rafale, plus faciles d'accès et moins rigides que certains concurrents.

RAFALE, points forts et points faibles

Points forts

  • Dassault-Safran-Thalès ont les moyens de leurs ambitions en matière de R&D et l'innovation suisse pourrait en profiter pleinement
  • Des coûts à l'export réduits compte tenu de la proximité géographique
  • Un calcul politique intéressant avec un allié influent à Bruxelles

Points faibles

  • Faible implantation en Suisse à l'heure actuelle
  • Certains cantons où il faudra être très persuasif lors de la votation

https://blogs.letemps.ch/alexis-pfefferle/2018/10/17/air2030-a-la-rencontre-de-dassault-et-du-rafale/

On the same subject

  • Army plans to stop building newest CH-47 variant in FY20, except for special ops

    March 15, 2019 | International, Aerospace

    Army plans to stop building newest CH-47 variant in FY20, except for special ops

    By: Jen Judson UPDATE — This story was updated to reflect the number of EMD Block II Chinooks under contract with the U.S. Army WASHINGTON — The Army is planning to stop procuring the newest version of the CH-47 F-model Chinook for the conventional force after fiscal year 2020, closing out the program at the end of the engineering and manufacturing development phase. While details on the plan are not yet available (more budget materials are slated to post March 18), the Army Under Secretary Ryan McCarthy told reporters, in a March 14 interview at the Pentagon, that the service will finish buying EMD versions of the Block II Chinook in FY20 and will only buy G-model Chinooks for Army Special Operations beyond that. Boeing is currently under contract to build three Block II EMD Chinooks. The Army decided to cut its production of Chinook Block II aircraft as part of a larger effort to find funding to cover major modernization priorities in the near-term including plans to design and bring online two new, state-of-the-art helicopters — a Long-Range Assault and an Attack Reconnaissance aircraft. Full article: https://www.defensenews.com/smr/federal-budget/2019/03/14/army-plans-to-stop-building-newest-ch-47-variant-in-fy20-except-for-special-ops/

  • How Republicans might accept a smaller defense budget

    February 12, 2021 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

    How Republicans might accept a smaller defense budget

    By: Joe Gould WASHINGTON ― California Republican Rep. Ken Calvert is willing to meet Democratic lawmakers partway in their reported plans to trim the defense budget: cut back on civilian employees, not equipment and modernization. “Like everything else in government, personnel is your biggest cost, and the civilian-to-uniform ratio ... is at an all-time high,” Calvert, the ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee's defense subpanel, said in an interview Wednesday. “Our inability to correct that trend is eating away at our military, our procurement, our readiness, all the above, and so we need to do this.” President Joe Biden is expected to release his federal budget plan in April, but battle lines are being drawn on Capitol Hill ahead of what is expected to be a tighter military budget than in recent years. While some key Republicans want to protect the military budget increases that came under then-President Donald Trump, or even build upon them, Calvert said he is open to “responsible reductions.” He is offering civilian cuts as an alternative to cutting end strength and weapons platforms. “Rather than reducing [personnel in] uniforms ― and I think there's some talk about doing that, especially in the Army ― we need to look at the civilian workforce, which is at the highest ratio to uniformed service members than it has ever been,” Calvert said. “If you're going to cut defense, are you going to cut procurement? People are arguing we need to build the Columbia-class submarine and Virginia-class submarine ― and I agree ― that we [keep the] Space Force, and [that] our satellite program is woefully behind ― and I agree. Where do you make your reductions when your overwhelming cost is personnel?” Under Calvert's bill, the Rebalance for an Effective Defense Uniform and Civilian Employees Act, or Reduce Act, a 15 percent cut to the civilian workforce overall and a cap for the Defense Department's Senior Executive Service at 1,000 employees would have to be in place by fiscal 2025 and remain through 2029. The defense secretary would be empowered to use voluntary-separation and early-retirement incentives toward the reduction. The legislation, which has been introduced several times before, was inspired by a 2015 study by the Defense Business Board that illustrated how the Department of Defense could save $125 billion over five years by slashing overhead. Still, the proposal to cut civilians would face new optics this year. As civilian voices were muted in favor of uniformed leaders under the Trump administration, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, a former general, committed under bipartisan pressure to “rebalance” Pentagon decision- and policy-making in favor of civilian leaders. It's also a different tact than that of the House Armed Services Committee's new top Republican, Rep. Mike Rogers, who plans to guard against cuts and would prefer a 3-5 percent increase in defense spending ― which Pentagon leaders say is required to carry out the 2018 National Defense Strategy. It's still early in the budgeting cycle, and the two may align. But in meantime, Calvert's approach offers something to fiscal conservatives, and it tracks with past efforts from Rogers' predecessor, former Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas. Even if Republicans can fend off a top-line cut or win an adjustment for inflation to keep shipbuilding and aircraft procurement on track, Calvert said he supports cutting the Defense Department's civilian workforce. “Hey, I hope Mike's right. I mean, he is a good friend, but I think he's a realist too,” Calvert said. “I worked with his predecessor on procurement reform, I'm trying to do some personnel reform, and we need those reforms on both sides.” For their part, Democrats swiftly rejected Calvert's legislation, making it one of the first skirmishes of the annual battle over the defense budget. The defense subpanel's new chairwoman, Rep. Betty McCollum, D-Minn., said she discussed the matter with Calvert and disagrees with him. “His proposal could lead to some of the most talented and committed DOD public servants losing their jobs,” McCollum said in a statement. “While we agree there is excess defense spending, my focus is on making smart investments that yield demonstrable outcomes by cutting waste and ending subsidies for outdated and unnecessary programs and facilities. In my view, the existing Department of Defense civilian workforce is mission critical to ensuring our national security.” The American Federation of Government Employees has historically opposed the bill, and a spokesman said funding and defense policy legislation passed last year prohibit civilian workforce cuts “without regard to impacts on readiness, lethality, military force structure, stress of the force, operational effectiveness and fully burdened costs.” With 768,000 federal employees working across all Defense Department components, the proposed cut amounts to 100,000 employees. Between 2015 and 2019, an average of just under 82,000 employees left DoD jobs each year. Calvert contends his 15 percent cut could be accomplished through attrition, not firings, and target “growth in middle management,” not the supply depots scattered around the country that have political backing. Previous cuts of civilian personnel have fueled increases in contracting costs ― and Calvert said he is open to cutting those too, in partnership with McCollum. “There would be discretion on the part of the people running the Pentagon; there are people you don't want to lose, they're in a special category, I get it,” Calvert said. “There are probably a lot of people you wouldn't miss, people up for retirement.” Democrats are more apt to take on nuclear modernization, which is projected to cost the Pentagon more than $240 billion in taxpayer dollars through 2028. In the balance is the contract for the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent, awarded to Northrop Grumman last year, to replace aging, land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles. Politico reports that progressive lawmakers and disarmament advocates are lobbying allies in the Biden administration for a pause in the GBSD program, while the Air Force and its allies in Congress, think tanks, and defense contractors are sharpening their arguments to preserve the program. Calvert acknowledged criticism of nuclear spending from House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith, D-Wash., but said big cuts to the nuclear triad lack the backing to succeed. (The panel rejected a funding cut for GBSD last year.) “I know Adam has been critical of that, but there's absolute support for redundancy of the deterrent within the Republican ranks, and so I don't see that going away. What I'm hearing so far out of the administration is that they feel the same way, so I don't think that's going to happen,” Calvert said. Austin and Deputy Defense Secretary Kathleen Hicks have voiced support for nuclear modernization broadly but stopped short of pledging to uphold the current nuclear modernization strategy in its entirety. Nuclear modernization cutbacks would “weaken the United States,” Calvert argued. “We're not just thinking about Russia; we've got China, who's rapidly militarizing space, and their missile capability is improving. Obviously we've got countries like North Korea or Iran that are building their own missile capability, so we have to have a strong deterrent to make sure we are ready for any contingency.” Jessie Bur of Federal Times and Leo Shane III of Military Times contributed to this report. https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2021/02/11/how-republicans-might-accept-a-smaller-defense-budget/

  • Rheinmetall affirms guidance as arms demand boosts Q2 earnings

    August 10, 2023 | International, Land

    Rheinmetall affirms guidance as arms demand boosts Q2 earnings

    Rheinmetall reported a rise in quarterly operating earnings and affirmed its full-year guidance on Thursday as it benefited from growing demand for weapons and ammunition amid the war in Ukraine.

All news