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

  • How a Canadian business became a leader in cloud computing
  • OMFV: Army Seeks Industry Advice On Bradley Replacement

    February 27, 2020 | International, Land

    OMFV: Army Seeks Industry Advice On Bradley Replacement

    Having rebooted the Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle program, the Army is now is asking industry input on how to achieve nine goals, from survivability to mobility to streamlined logistics. By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR.on February 26, 2020 at 4:01 AM Two months ago, the Army cancelled its original solicitation to replace the M2 Bradley troop carrier after no company could meet the strict requirements. This afternoon, the Army officially asked for industry input on how to achieve nine broadly-defined “characteristics” for the future Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle. “Feedback may be submitted in any form (concepts, information papers, technical papers, sketches, etc.),” says the announcement on SAM.gov. “The Army would like to obtain this initial feedback prior to 06 March 2020.” This call for suggestions on how to move forward comes just weeks after the Army issued a surprisingly apologetic survey asking industry what they did wrong the first time around. It's part of a newly humble approach in which the Army doesn't prescribe formal requirements up-front but instead lays out broad objectives and asks industry how best to achieve them. The chief of Army Futures Command, Gen. Mike Murray, gave reporters a preview of the nine characteristics three weeks ago, but the list announced today is much more detailed – though still leaving plenty of room for companies to brainstorm solutions. Our annotated highlights from the announcement – the emphasis is in the original: Background: The OMFV, as part of an Armored Brigade Combat Team (ABCT), will replace the Bradley to provide the capabilities required to defeat a future near-peer competitor's force. The Army is seeking a transformational increase in warfighting capability, not simply another incremental improvement over the current Bradley Fighting Vehicle. Concept of employment: As part of an ABCT, the OMFV will not fight alone, but rather as part of a section, platoon, and company of mechanized infantry.... “Near-peer competitor” is Pentagon jargon for “China or Russia” – chiefly Russia in this case, since the plains of Eastern Europe are a far more likely arena for armored warfare than Pacific islands. That the Army wants “transformational” improvements, not “incremental” ones, shows there's still some real ambition in the vision for this vehicle. At the same time, the OMFV will still fight “as part of an ABCT,” meaning the existing Armored Brigade Combat Team organization — not as part of some all-new organization with all-new equipment, as was once envisioned for the cancelled Future Combat Systems. Survivability. The OMFV must protect the crew and Soldiers from emerging threats and CBRN environments. The OMFV should reduce likelihood of detection by minimizing thermal, visual, and acoustic signatures. In other words, the vehicle needs to give the crew a chance of survival against cutting-edge anti-tank missiles, precision-guided artillery, attack drones and other such “emerging threats,” as chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear contamination (CBRN). That does not mean the vehicle itself has to survive intact. The way this is worded, if a hit totals the OMFV but the soldiers inside can walk away, the Army will count that as a win. (The JLTV 4×4 truck takes this same approach to roadside bombs). So the OMFV doesn't necessarily have to have heavy armor protecting the entire vehicle. It could have a heavily armored crew compartment, light armor elsewhere, and an Active Protection System to intercept incoming threats. (The Russian T-14 Armata uses this combination). It also should avoid being spotted in the first place by eye, ear, or thermal sensor, which might favor designs with hybrid-electric motors that can switch from hot, noisy diesels to a battery-driven stealth mode. Mobility. The OMFV must have mobility that can keep pace with the Abrams in a combined arms fight through rural and urban terrain. That's the M1 Abrams main battle tank, which the existing M2 Bradley and M109 Paladin howitzer were also designed to keep up with. This is another aspect of that “concept of employment” that calls for the OMFV to slot into existing formations and work closely with existing vehicles. Note also the reference to “rural and urban terrain,” which will come up again: Traditionally the Army has avoided city fighting, but as urban sprawl covers ever more of the planet, technology and tactics have to adapt to brutal close-quarters combat. Growth. The OMFV must possess the growth margins and open architecture required for rapid upgrades and insertion of future technologies such as mission command systems, protection systems, and sensors. This characteristic is really where you get the potential for “transformational” improvements. The M2 Bradley was originally introduced in 1980 and, after 40 years of upgrades, it has very little margin left to handle additional weight or – even more important nowadays – power-hungry electronics. The Bradley's lack of room to grow has driven the Army to try replacing it three times already: the original OMFV requirements cancelled this year; the Ground Combat Vehicle cancelled in 2014; and the Future Combat Systems cancelled in 2009. Hopefully, fourth time's the charm. Lethality. The OMFV-equipped platoons must defeat future near-peer soldiers, infantry fighting vehicles, helicopters, small unmanned aerial systems, and tanks as part of a Combined Arms Team in rural and urban terrain. This is a more ambitious hit list than the Bradley, which sports machineguns for killing infantry, a 25 mm autocannon to destroy light armored vehicles, and the obsolescent TOW missile for taking on heavy tanks. The Pentagon is increasingly worried about small drones, which ISIS terrorists have used as flying IEDs and Russian artillery has used as spotters for barrages. With Russia and China developing increasingly sophisticated anti-aircraft systems, there's also a concern that US fighters may not be able to keep enemy attack helicopters at bay, forcing ground forces to handle that threat themselves. These aerial targets require more sophisticated tracking systems, and drones may be best dealt with by electronic jamming or lasers rather than bullets. Weight. The OMFV must traverse 80% of Main Supply Routes (MSRs), national highways, and bridges in pacing threat countries, and reduce the cost of logistics and maintenance. Designs must allow for future growth in components and component weights without overall growth of vehicle weight through modularity and innovation. Weight is the issue that has bedeviled Bradley replacements for two decades. The FCS vehicles, optimized for air transport, were too light to carry adequate armor; GCV was too heavy; and the original OMFV couldn't meet its air transport requirements and its protection requirements at the same time. With most bridges in Eastern Europe unable to safely take weights over 50 tons, too much heavy armor can cripple your mobility. Logistics. The OMFV must reduce the logistical burden on ABCTs and must be equipped with advanced diagnostic and prognostic capabilities. Advanced manufacturing and other innovative techniques should be included in the design that reduce the time and cost of vehicle repairs. There are two big factors that make a vehicle hard to keep supplied and in working order. One is weight – heavier vehicles burn more fuel – and the other is complexity. High-tech is usually high-maintenance. The US military is hopeful that AI-driven predictive maintenance can detect and head off impending breakdowns, and that 3D printing can produce at least some spare parts on demand without a long supply line. Transportability. The OMFV must be worldwide deployable by standard inter- and intra-theater sea, waterway, air, rail, and road modes of transportation. The original OMFV requirement very specifically called for two of the vehicles to fit on a single Air Force C-17 jet transport, which proved undoable with the weight of armor desired. This time, the Army isn't specifying any particular aircraft. In practice, armored vehicles are almost always shipped by sea and, where possible, stockpiled on allied soil well before a crisis erupts. On land, since tracked vehicles aren't designed to drive hundreds of miles by road, they're usually deployed to the battle zone by train or tractor-trailer, both of which have their own weight limits. Manning. The OMFV should operate with the minimal number of crew members required to fight and win. The OMFV should allow commanders to choose between manned or remote operation based on the tactical situation. This is the objective that gave the OMFV its name: Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle. Now, since it's a Bradley replacement, the OMFV is supposed to be a troop carrier – specifically, the heavily armed and armored kind known as an Infantry Fighting Vehicle – so by definition it needs to carry people. But the Army is intensely interested in having the option to run it by remote control, or maybe even autonomously, to (for example) scout out especially dangerous areas or carry casualties back to an aid post without pulling healthy soldiers out of the fighting line. Training. The OMFV should contain embedded training capabilities that are compatible with the Synthetic Training Environment (STE). STE is the Army's total overhaul of its training simulators, drawing on commercial gaming technology to develop an array of virtual and augmented reality systems using a common database of real-world terrain. Instead of having to use a simulator in a warehouse somewhere, the Army wants troops to be able to run virtual scenarios on the same vehicles they'll actually fight with. All these characteristics are intertwined – and after its past troubles, the Army is acutely aware that maximizing one, such as protection, may compromise another, such as transportability. That's another thing the service wants feedback on, the announcement says: “The Army is interested in industry partners' ability to meet the desired characteristics and what trades” – that is, trade-offs – “may be necessary.” https://breakingdefense.com/2020/02/omfv-army-seeks-industry-advice-on-bradley-replacement

  • Ratier-Figeac : nouvelle commande d'hélices pour les avions militaires américains

    May 20, 2021 | International, Aerospace

    Ratier-Figeac : nouvelle commande d'hélices pour les avions militaires américains

    Collins Aerospace, groupe américain dont fait partie Ratier-Figeac, annonce avoir reçu un contrat pluriannuel pour la fourniture de nouveaux systèmes d'hélices NP2000 pour les avions Hawkeye E-2D de Northrop Grumman. Ces systèmes hélices seront fabriqués par Ratier-Figeac (Lot), qui a récemment investi dans la construction d'un centre d'excellence des hélices d'avion, qui devrait être inauguré à l'automne, comme le précise Jean-François Chanut, président de Ratier Figeac et directeur général de la branche Propeller Systems de Collins Aerospace. L'assemblage final des pièces sera réalisé aux Etats-Unis, sur le site de Windsor Locks (Connecticut). « Avec sa nouvelle hélice NP2000 et son système numérique de commande d'hélice électronique, Collins Aerospace continue de fournir aux opérateurs d'E-2D Advanced Hawkeye un temps et un coût de maintenance réduits, ainsi qu'un confort et une sécurité améliorés pour l'équipage », souligne Collins Aerospace. La Dépêche du Midi du 20 mai

All news