Back to news

January 8, 2020 | International, Aerospace

Ce qui a changé entre l’échec du Gripen et aujourd'hui

Avions de combat : Le PS, les Verts et le GSsA lancent ce mercredi le référendum contre l'achat de nouveaux jets. Ils étaient parvenus à couler le Gripen en 2014. La situation de départ est cette fois-ci différente.

Ce 18 mai 2014, les bouchons de champagne avaient sauté au stamm de la gauche, à quelques pas de la gare de Berne. Au terme d'une campagne acharnée qui a même fait ensuite l'objet d'un documentaire, «La bataille du Gripen», de Frédéric Gonseth, 53,8% des votants avaient refusé d'acheter 22 avions de combat Gripen pour une somme de 3,126 milliards de francs. Tous les cantons romands avaient dit non.

Cette année, potentiellement en septembre, les citoyens suisses devraient à nouveau se prononcer sur l'achat d'avions de combat. Le Parti socialiste, le Parti écologiste et le Groupe pour une Suisse sans armée (GSsA) lancent le référendum ce mercredi contre l'arrêté de planification qui prévoit d'investir 6 milliards de francs pour acheter de nouveaux jets. Les fronts sont les mêmes qu'en 2014, mais le contexte a changé.

Un vote sur le principe et pas sur un type d'avion

En 2014, le choix d'acheter le Gripen E, modèle en cours de développement, avait suscité la critique et la méfiance. Les détracteurs de ce jet parlaient d'avions de papier. Des membres des forces aériennes s'étaient aussi étonnés, en coulisses, du choix du jet suédois, alors que d'autres avions avaient obtenu de meilleures notes lors de l'évaluation. L'analyse Vox qui avait décortiqué le scrutin avait ainsi montré que 13% des votants avaient mis un non dans l'urne par rejet du Gripen. Cette fois-ci, les Suisses n'auront plus à se prononcer sur un type d'avion. Une seule question leur sera posée: acceptez-vous de payer 6 milliards de francs pour acheter de nouveaux avions de combat? Le Conseil fédéral ne sélectionnera le modèle qu'après le scrutin, sur la base des évaluations conduites par ArmaSuisse. A noter que dans tous les cas, la Suisse n'achètera pas le Gripen: le constructeur Saab a renoncé dès lors qu'il a été écarté des essais en vol et au sol qui ont eu lieu l'an dernier sur la base militaire de Payerne. Il reste ainsi quatre jets en course: le Rafale de Dassault, l'Eurofighter d'Airbus, le Super Hornet de Boeing et le F-35 de Lockheed Martin (voir vidéos de présentation dans l'encadré).

Viola Amherd à la place d'Ueli Maurer

Gaffes en série, couacs de communication, allusions malheureuses: la campagne de 2014 avait été cauchemardesque pour le ministre de la Défense de l'époque, Ueli Maurer (UDC). Six pour cent des votants avaient déclaré, lors de l'analyse Vox, avoir dit non en raison de cette campagne cacophonique. Les électeurs du centre, qui se reconnaissent dans des partis traditionnellement acquis à l'armée, avaient joué un rôle déterminant. Aujourd'hui, c'est une centriste, Viola Amherd, qui est à la manoeuvre. La conseillère fédérale PDC met un accent particulier sur la transparence dans les achats de l'armée. Elle a aussi souhaité amener une caution à la fois scientifique et militaire à ce dossier. Elle a ainsi invité l'astronaute Claude Nicollier à rendre un second avis sur le rapport Air2030. La popularité et l'image de la Haut-Valaisanne joueront un rôle lors de la campagne.

De nouveaux avions sinon rien?

En 2014, le Gripen ne devait remplacer que la flotte des F-5. Les 32 F/A 18 devaient être remplacés dans un second temps. Aujourd'hui, les 30 avions de combat F/A-18 restants sont vieillissants. Il est prévu de prolonger leur durée de vie jusqu'en 2030. Ainsi, la gauche ne pourra pas déployer avec autant d'impact l'un de ses arguments clés de 2014: on peut dire non au Gripen, il reste des avions pour l'armée. A l'époque, selon l'analyse Vox, 24% des détracteurs du Gripen se disaient en effet partisans d'une armée forte, mais ils estimaient aussi que l'achat de ce jet n'était pas une nécessité vitale. Le message sera différent lors de la future campagne. Viola Ahmerd et ses alliés pourront marquer des points en affirmant que le scrutin déterminera la survie des forces aériennes. Fondamentalement, les référendaires ne contestent cela dit pas la nécessité d'avoir des avions mais uniquement pour faire la police du ciel. Ils estiment qu'on peut acheter moins et à un meilleur prix. Leur capacité de convaincre avec cet argument s'annonce déterminante.

Des mesures compensatoires plus basses

C'est une autre différence par rapport au vote de 2014. Les affaires compensatoires - ces contre-prestations exigées de la part du constructeur - se monteront à 60% du prix d'achat des avions. Pour le Gripen, c'était 100%. Sur ce point, la ministre Viola Amherd, critique face aux surcoûts engendrés par ces compensations, s'est imposée au parlement. Les entreprises romandes qui craignaient de ne pas voir la couleur des affaires compensatoires si elles étaient réduites à 60% se disent néanmoins satisfaites: les collaborations seront possibles au-delà du secteur de la sécurité. Elles s'étendront à onze autres domaines, dont celui des machines, de l'électronique ou encore de l'horlogerie.

https://www.24heures.ch/suisse/change-echec-gripen-aujourdhui/story/22057626

On the same subject

  • America’s bomber force is too small and getting smaller

    March 13, 2020 | International, Aerospace

    America’s bomber force is too small and getting smaller

    By: Gen. John Michael Loh (ret.) America's bomber force is now in crisis. In the Air Force's fiscal 2021 budget request, one-third of the B-1 fleet is set for retirement, B-2 survivability modernization is canceled and the new B-21 is at least a decade away from contributing significantly to the bomber force. The venerable B-52 requires new engines and other upgrades to be effective. The number of bombers are at their lowest ever, but demand for bombers increases every year, particularly in the vast and most-stressed region of the Indo-Pacific. Bombers are the preferred weapon system there because of their long range and huge payload capacity. At the end of the Cold War in 1989 and just prior to the Gulf War in 1990, America had over 400 bombers. After these proposed cuts, there will be only 140. This decline is curious in light of recent Air Force declarations and testimony before Congress. In the document “The Air Force We Need,” Air Force leaders insisted last fall they need five more bomber squadrons — about 65 more bombers. Just last month, the Air Force chief of staff testified that the need is for “200 bombers, of which 145 would be B-21s.” These numbers have been validated by think tanks such as MITRE Corp., the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, Rand, and the Mitchell Institute. In today's global threat picture, bombers become the coin of the realm. Bombers have dual strategic roles. They provide flexible deterrence with their nuclear capability, forcing adversaries to think twice before starting an attack. Bombers also carry the brunt of conventional operations. In our wars in the Middle East, the B-1s, B-2s and B-52s have all played central roles attacking fixed targets and in close-air support of ground troops. Their long range and on-station times, combined with huge weapons loads, make them the weapon of choice for combatant commanders in both the Middle East and Pacific regions. A single B-2 can carry and launch 80 precision-guided weapons, each assigned a different target, and can penetrate contested airspace. The B-1s and the B-52s have similar direct-attack capabilities plus the ability to carry and launch cruise missiles from standoff ranges. No other weapon system, in the air or on the sea, can come close to this massive firepower. The need for more bombers is increasing. Whether facing nonstate actors like ISIS, mid-tier threats like North Korea and Iran, or peer threats such as China and Russia, the ability to strike targets quickly and in large numbers is crucial. This flexibility was vividly demonstrated in the first three months of Operation Enduring Freedom after 9/11. Bombers flew 20 percent of all sorties, but dropped 76 percent of the munition tonnage. Despite those who thought bombers were only useful in long-range nuclear or strategic missions, the reality is that a wide variety of combat missions are simply impossible to execute without bombers. But bombers and their crews are worn thin. The Air Force bought 100 B-1s in the 1980s. When demand for them surged post 9/11, the Air Force retired 30 B-1s to free up funding to sustain the remaining force. This, combined with earlier divestitures, saw the Air Force fly 61 B-1s relentlessly for nearly 20 years. The fleet was in such bad shape in 2019 that mission-capability rates were less than 10 percent. The Air Force's request to retire a further 17 B-1s to boost the health of the remaining fleet looks like a repeat of the last B-1 retirements. Among the 140 bombers that remain, only the 20 stealthy B-2s have the ability to penetrate modern air defenses to strike critical targets — a priority of the National Defense Strategy. Yet the FY21 budget request cancels the B-2's Defensive Management System Modernization program and puts our only operational stealth bomber on a path to early retirement. Given the unmet demand for penetrating platforms and the time it will take for the B-21 to be delivered in numbers, halting modernization of the 20 stealth bombers we have today is risky. Finally, the 78 B-52Hs are planned to be re-engined in the years ahead. New, fuel-efficient and more reliable engines should increase their life and capability. The ultimate cost of this modification is not known. One of the unknowns is the extent of corrosive structural and wiring problems that will inevitably emerge when each B-52 is unbuttoned. Discovery of such problems is not new. When the Air Force upgraded its C-5M fleet with new engines, the Air Force had to retire the older C-5A fleet to pay for unknown repairs. Even if the B-52 re-engining goes smoothly, a significant portion of the force will be unavailable as each moves through the depot for modifications. Last year Congress increased funding for the F-35 fighter and added funds for unrequested F-15EX procurement. Now is the time for Congress to restore funding for existing bombers to avoid this shortfall in a most vital component of our nation's defense. The Air Force entered the new decade with the smallest bomber force in its history, and the FY21 budget request erodes it further. There comes a point where doing more with less does not work, especially with B-21s not available in numbers for several years. It is time to recognize the gravity of the situation and build up the nation's bomber force. A good “plan B” does not exist without bombers. Gen. John Michael Loh is a former U.S. Air Force vice chief of staff and had served as the commander of Air Combat Command. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/03/12/americas-bomber-force-is-too-small-and-getting-smaller/

  • UAE, US companies partner to provide cyber ranges in Gulf

    June 1, 2021 | International, C4ISR, Security

    UAE, US companies partner to provide cyber ranges in Gulf

    The two businesses will offer cyber training and testing environments to Gulf countries to emulate production environments.

  • DIU Seeks Prototype Sat Terminal For Army All-Domain Ops

    March 20, 2020 | International, Land, C4ISR

    DIU Seeks Prototype Sat Terminal For Army All-Domain Ops

    The mobile TITAN satellite ground station is a critical node in Army plans for all-domain operations. By THERESA HITCHENS WASHINGTON: The Defense Innovation Unit (DIU) wants commercial vendors to submit prototypes for the Army's planned mobile ground station that can fuse sensor data from multiple ISR satellites — including both national security and commercial — into a common operational picture for battlefield commanders. While this solicitation, released late yesterday, focuses on space-based sensors, ultimately the Tactical Intelligence Targeting Access Node (TITAN) is envisioned as a “unified” ground station that can take data not just from satellites, but also from high-altitude, aerial and terrestrial ISR sensors to provide targeting data directly to Army Long-Range Precision Fires (LRPF) networks. The Army describes TITAN as a “scalable and expeditionary intelligence ground station.” It is envisioned as a critical enabler of Army all-domain operations command and control. The satellite terminal is the first step in what will be a modular development of the TITAN terminal's capabilities over time — with a goal to deploy and initial operating capability early in fiscal 2022, as Brig. Gen. Rob Collins, Army program executive officer for intelligence, electronic warfare and sensors, explained at the giant Association of the United States Army (AUSA) show in October, DIU's Space Portfolio Director Steve Butow explained in an email that the prototype ground stations should be “capable of rapidly and semi-autonomously tasking, receiving, processing, exploiting, fusing, and disseminating space based sensor data to provide networked situational awareness and direct tactical support to Army commanders at echelon.” One of the key goals is “to reduce sensor to shooter latency.” Latency is the term of art to describe the time it takes to send information from the satellite to the user on the ground. The prototype ground stations — which as with all DIU projects are envisioned to be rapidly fielded — must be capable of “rapid deployment to diverse operational environments via strategic lift and once deployed, be capable of rapid setup, tear down, movement, and assembly to meet operational commander's needs.” They also must be able to function “for a reasonable period of time” through “any loss of non-local communications or networks.” American contractors have until April 3 to put forward a proposal. Proposed prototypes “should include everything required to operate during a designated exercise(s) and demonstration(s) as well during real world operations, including the vehicle/trailers, power generation/conditioning, antennae, communications/network hardware/software (to include line of sight and beyond line of sight), processing hardware/software, and analytical hardware/software,” the solicitation states. Further, prototypes should be able to store and process data from multiple commercial providers. This means that the “access node should be a modular, open systems architecture, making it easy to upgrade software/firmware, analytics/algorithms, and ingest additional data streams as commercial vendors and national data become available.” This includes being able to store and process both classified and unclassified data. The project will run for 24 to 30 months, and will include the delivery of at least two and as many as six working prototypes. They must be ready for immediate testing and evaluation in a theater exercise. DUI is looking at two phases. Phase 1 includes the “development, integration, testing, accreditation and delivery” of two prototypes by January 2022. Phase 2 “includes the testing, assessment, and refinement of the prototype systems based upon participation in and feedback from several exercises and evaluations,” both in the US and theaters abroad. Phase 2 also includes the option of delivering up to four additional prototype systems. DIU generally uses Other Transaction Authorities as a contracting vehicle, as will this program. The solicitation notes that DoD is “also pursuing a separate parallel effort for the objective TITAN ground station design to accommodate Aerial and Terrestrial sensors as well.” Thus, the contractor(s) chosen will need to work ensure designs for the satellite terminal can be integrated with, and that all the software is transportable to, that design via agreements with the other companies involved. The Army issued a Request for Information on Dec. 4 about technologies to enable the “objective” TITAN terminal that can integrate all types of ISR sensors. That RFI was updated on Dec. 18. The RFI explains that TITAN eventually will replace the Army's current Tactical-Intelligence Ground Station, Operational-Intelligence Ground Station, Advanced Miniaturized Data Acquisition System Dissemination Vehicle and Remote Ground Terminal. It also must be “to operate at Brigade, Division, Corps, and Field Army echelons, in vehicles and shelters organic to the formation,” the solicitation said. According to a Q&A transcript of the Army's Dec. 4 industry day on TITAN, the service currently sees potential deployment platforms: a larger version for integration with on one variant of the Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles (FMTV) with a shelter; and a smaller one to be integrated on “a four-seater tactical vehicle — either a Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV) or a Humvee. What is unclear is how this DIU effort relates to the earlier sole-source award to Peraton for the Satellite Ground Terminal (SGT) Prototype, that on the face of it is being designed to do exactly the same thing. Under that Nov. 19 award, which supports the Army's Tactical Exploitation of National Capabilities (TENCAP) program, Peraton was to develop a fully-tested prototype to the Army within 20 months. SGT is expected to transfer up to 1,000 times more satellite data to operators than currently possible, according to Peraton. Queries to the Army, DIU and Peraton about this were not answered at press time. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/03/diu-seeks-prototype-sat-terminal-for-army-all-domain-ops

All news