Embraer sells A-29 Super Tucano to the Uruguayan Air Force

On the same subject

• 

  March 4, 2020 | International, C4ISR

  EXCLUSIF Défense : le leader français de la vision nocturne va passer sous bannière américaine

  La société d'électronique californienne Teledyne est entrée en négociations exclusives pour reprendre Photonis pour près de 500 millions d'euros, de sources concordantes. Le dossier divise au plus haut niveau au sein de l'Etat. Par Anne Drif Publié le 3 mars 2020 à 6h14 Le leader mondial de la vision nocturne est sur le point de perdre son pavillon français. Donné favori, l'Américain Teledyne est bien entré en négociations exclusives pour racheter Photonis au fonds Ardian pour une valeur d'un peu moins de 500 millions d'euros, de sources concordantes. Ce dossier, qui divise au plus haut niveau au sein de l'Etat, serait déjà en procédure d'examen par la direction générale du Trésor. C'est à Bercy que revient l'arbitrage ultime en faveur de la cession au titre du contrôle des investissements étrangers, a réagi en janvier le Premier ministre sous le feu des critiques de 17 députés de tous bords . Les parlementaires, mais aussi un pan du ministère des Armées, lié aux technologies d'application militaire et des services de renseignement, s'opposent au passage sous bannière étrangère de cet actif jugé « critique » pour les opérations de terrain souvent nocturnes. « Après le rachat du fabricant des appareils de mesure des rayonnements nucléaires Canberra et Premium Analyse, spécialiste français de la détection du gaz tritium, par l'Américain Mirion, nous sommes en passe de créer de nouvelles dépendances technologiques vis-à-vis d'acteurs étrangers très proches du ministère américain de la Défense », critique un proche du dossier. Le groupe américain a réalisé plus de 60 acquisitions ces dernières années pour un total de 3,6 milliards de dollars avec l'objectif de se développer dans l'imagerie, les infrarouges, les rayons X, les instruments de contrôle pour la marine ou encore l'électronique pour la défense et le spatial. Il cherche désormais à se déployer hors de ses bases américaines pour réduire sa dépendance aux opérations extérieures menées par les Etats-Unis. Bercy plutôt ouvert Un opposant du projet pointe la mise en cause de Teledyne par le bras armé du Trésor américain en matière de sanction (OFAC) pour des exportations au Soudan. A ce stade, cependant, le ministre de l'Economie Bruno Le Maire s'est montré plutôt ouvert. « Aucune décision n'a encore été prise, a-t-il déclaré sur Sud Radio mi-février. Nous regardons toutes les options, pour intégrer Photonis dans une chaîne de valeur industrielle, qui permette le développement de l'emploi et la protection de cette technologie, et nous serons très attentifs au respect de nos intérêts de souveraineté. » Ancrage en France Un partisan du projet souligne l'ancrage de Teledyne en France au travers de deux filiales, e2v vers Grenoble dans les semi-conducteurs et Oldham Simtronics dans la détection de gaz vers Arras. « Qu'est ce qui doit primer ? La poursuite de l'approvisionnement technologique aux armées françaises ou risquer de rendre l'entreprise moins viable faute de repreneur et créer un incident politique en cas de rejet officiel ? Ces logiques doivent aussi être prises en compte », nuance-t-on au sein du ministère des Armées. Sur le plan industriel, l'absence de vente imposerait simplement au fonds actionnaire de garder l'entreprise plus longtemps, réagit un opposant. Le temps de trouver une alternative française ? Interrogé par les sénateurs, le directeur général de l'armement, Joël Barre, a affirmé avoirdemandé à Safran et Thales de se pencher sur le dossier. Sans succès à ce stade. https://www.lesechos.fr/industrie-services/air-defense/exclusif-defense-le-leader-francais-de-la-vision-nocturne-va-passer-sous-banniere-americaine-1181289

• 

  October 2, 2018 | International, Aerospace, Naval

  U.K. Carrier Program Brings ‘Two More for the Good Guys’ as Royal Navy Set to Partner More with U.S., French Navies

  By: Sam LaGrone ABOARD HMS QUEEN ELIZABETH, OFF THE COAST OF NEW JERSEY – The Royal Navy lays out the intentions of its largest warship to visitors immediately. “HMS Queen Elizabeth: Welcome to Britain's Conventional Deterrent,” reads a giant sign hanging in the carrier's second island, over a ladder well just off the flight deck. The 70,000-ton carrier and its sister ship, Prince of Wales (R09), and their embarked air wings of F-35B Lightning II Joint Strike Fighters are set to be the centerpiece of Britain's nascent carrier strike group construct. The move – after years of starts and stops – is reshaping the Royal Navy from a force that was a key NATO partner focused on anti-submarine and mine warfare in the Cold War to one that will blend closely with the carrier forces of American and French allies. “The U.S. has 11 carriers,” ship commander Capt. Jerry Kyd told USNI News last week. “We'll bring two more for the good guys, as we see it.” The ship was off the East Coast last week conducting the first shipboard F-35 tests with American aircraft, kicking off several years of testing ahead of a planned deployment in 2021. “We used to do this a lot in the U.K., but we've had a bit of a gap getting back into the carrier strike business,” Royal Navy Commodore Andrew Betton, commander of the U.K. carrier strike group, told USNI News last week. “[We're] working alongside our French and U.S. partners to understand the most effective way of fighting and operating a carrier strike group.” Last year, the heads of the U.K., French and U.S. navies signed a formal trilateral cooperation agreement for three navies to work together in the realm of carrier operations and anti-submarine warfare. “[We] share many national security challenges, including the threats posed by violent extremism and the increasing competition from conventional state actors,” the one-page agreement read. “More than ever, these threats manifest in the maritime domain. Given these common values, capabilities, and challenges it makes sense for our navies to strengthen our cooperation.” In particular, the Russian submarine force has been on an aggressive modernization drive and operating attack boats at a rate not seen since the Cold War – which is seen as the prime driver of the recent U.S. focus in the Atlantic. That boost in activity in the Atlantic comes as the U.S. and U.K. are in a period of naval reset after 17 years of operating in support of ground forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. The U.K. is working through a gap in fixed-wing aviation at sea, after London decided to scrap the Royal Navy's light carriers and fleet of GR7 and GR9 Harrier strike aircraft earlier in the decade. To maintain skills, the U.K. has relied on an extensive exchange program with the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps and the French to keep some carrier skills native in the Royal Navy. “We've had lots of individuals, pilots, maintainers, etc., operating onboard your flattops of various descriptions, but also we've had U.K. units join American [aircraft carriers] on deployments around the world and indeed the French carrier,” Betton said. “The mutual support and interoperability – we haven't stepped completely away from that, and what we're trying to rebuild now is the sovereign carrier strike group that we can plug in with allies as and where required.” While the intent of the Ministry of Defence was to field a completely U.K.-generated carrier strike group and air wing, the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force are still years off from that capability. The first operational deployment of the U.K. carrier strike group in 2021 will have an air wing built around U.S. Marine Corps F-35Bs assigned to the “Wake Island Avengers” of Marine Fighter Attack Squadron (VMFA) 211, in addition to the RAF's 617 Lightning F-35B Squadron. As of this summer, the U.K. has received about 16 of the 43 F-35Bs it's ordered, which prompted the planned deployment of the U.S. Marines on Elizabeth. The reliance on Marines for the first deployment was presented as a benefit of the program rather than a liability. “We're international by design, but there will be a sovereign core to the task force. But we very much look forward to working with allies, whether that is at range or as an integral part of the task group,” Royal Air Force Air Vice-Marshal Harv Smyth, the commander of the U.K.'s fast-jet units, told reporters last week on Elizabeth. “There are options there.” While the Royal Navy has operated fixed-wing aviation from ships in the recent past, the level of cooperation proposed between the U.S. and the U.K. for carriers strike group operations will be the largest in decades, Chris Carlson, a retired U.S. Navy captain and naval analyst, told USNI News on Friday. “With the Brits now trying to integrate their carrier with ours, there isn't anything in the recent past that gives them something to base this on,” he said. During the Cold War, the U.K. had a fleet of three 22,000-ton Invincible-class carriers that fielded Harriers that arguably provided little utility in maritime operations and air defense operations, Carlson said. “Harriers had short legs. They didn't have a really good air intercept radar, it was just really hard for us to put them in, so [the Invincibles] were looked at as being the centers of ASW escort groups because they could carry a ton of helicopters and the Brits were really good with ASW.” The new cooperation between the U.S., French and U.K. navies will be key to making the British and French get the most out of their carrier forces. Both the U.K. and French are short on carrier escorts and will have to rely on allies. “It's making a virtue out of a necessity,” Carlson said. “They're going to have to partner with us. They're going to have to partner with the French because neither one – the French or the Brits – can do sustained operations with a decently balanced [carrier strike] group.” The current plan is for the Royal Navy to continue testing the carrier strike group into the next decade, with more F-35B testing off the East Coast of the United States next year and a group sail to certify the strike group in 2020, Elizabeth commander Kyd said. “That'll be another two years before we're ready to go out,” he said. “The first deployment is '21. Who knows where, but we'll be ready.” https://news.usni.org/2018/10/01/video-u-k-carrier-program-brings-two-good-guys-royal-navy-set-partner-u-s-french-navies

• 

  February 2, 2021 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  These five items should top Biden’s defense priorities

  By: Sean Kennedy The Biden administration has the opportunity to institute reforms in several crucial areas at the Department of Defense. First and foremost, it should eliminate the overseas contingency operations account. The continued justification for the OCO has reached the stage of parody. Originally intended for emergency spending in response to the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the account has transitioned into a slush fund designed to inflate spending at the DoD far above the baseline budget and for purposes unrelated to foreign wars. In fiscal 2015, approximately 50 percent of OCO funding was for nonemergency items. An August 2019 Congressional Budget Office report noted that approximately 85 percent of funding for the OCO in FY20 and FY21 “is designated for base-budget and ‘enduring' activities,” funding maintenance in support of foreign operations that will continue regardless of force size. OCO spending has long outpaced the military's presence in combat zones. In FY08, the U.S. deployed an average of 187,000 troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. OCO spending topped $187 billion that year, equating to $1 million per service member. The DoD currently has approximately 5,000 troops stationed in these countries, meaning the $70.7 billion in OCO spending in FY20 equates to $14.1 million in funding per service member — more than 14 times the amount in FY08. With President Joe Biden unlikely to substantially increase the military's footprint in Afghanistan and Iraq, outsized OCO spending will continue in FY21 and beyond, barring reform. The DoD has received approximately $2 trillion from the OCO since 2001. Were it considered to be a federal agency, the FY20 OCO funding would make it the fourth largest, dwarfing spending at all other agencies except the departments of Defense, Health and Human Services, and Veterans Affairs. The incoming administration must also expand efforts to make DoD finances more transparent and accountable. The bookkeeping is so abysmal that areas within the DoD have been on the Government Accountability Office's list of programs at high risk for waste, fraud, abuse and mismanagement since 1995. The financial black hole is nowhere more evident than in the DoD's inability to pass a clean audit, unlike every other federal agency. On Nov. 16, 2020, the Pentagon announced that for the third straight year it failed its financial review. Progress has been incremental, with seven of 24 DoD agencies thus far producing clean audits. However, the DoD estimates that it will not be able to pass an audit before 2027, or 37 years after it was required to do so by law. The DoD must also determine the replacement mechanism for the chief management officer position, which was the No. 3 civilian slot until it was eliminated in the FY21 National Defense Authorization Act. Despite identifying $22.3 billion in savings between FY18 and FY21, legislators bowed to Pentagon pressure, distributing the duties and responsibilities of the role to various existing positions with far less authority. The acquisition side is also a mess, including several infamous procurement disasters that epitomize the Pentagon's systemic problems. The foremost example is the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The program has been under continuous development since the contract was awarded in 2001, and has encountered innumerable delays and cost overruns. Total acquisition costs now exceed $428 billion, nearly double the initial estimate of $233 billion. The total costs for the F-35 are estimated to reach $1.727 trillion over the lifetime of the program. On Jan. 14, 2021, then-acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller labeled the Joint Strike Fighter a “piece of sh*t.” Enough said. Many of the problems with the F-35 program can be traced to the decision to develop and procure the Joint Strike Fighter simultaneously. Whenever problems have been identified, contractors needed to go back and make changes to aircraft that were already assembled, adding to overall costs. Of course none of this has stopped the Pentagon from asking for Joint Strike Fighter funding, and members of Congress from supplying it, oftentimes exceeding the request from the DoD. This trend continued in FY20, when legislators added $2.1 billion in earmarks to fund the acquisition of 22 Joint Strike Fighters beyond the amount requested by the Pentagon, bringing the total amount of earmarks for the program to $8.9 billion since FY01. Lastly, the Biden administration would do well to introduce some stability into Pentagon leadership. Every defense secretary brings to the job different priorities for the government's largest bureaucracy. President Donald Trump burned through two confirmed and four acting secretaries, the most for any administration. President Biden should endeavor to reverse this churn. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2021/02/01/these-five-items-should-top-bidens-defense-priorities/