Back to news

August 29, 2024 | International, Aerospace

France's Macron hopes to clinch sale of 12 Rafale fighter jets to Serbia this week

On the same subject

  • Palantir wins competition to build Army intelligence system

    March 29, 2019 | International, C4ISR

    Palantir wins competition to build Army intelligence system

    By Shane Harris The Army has chosen Palantir Technologies to deploy a complex battlefield intelligence system for soldiers, according to Army documents, a significant boost for a company that has attracted a devoted following in national security circles but had struggled to win a major defense contract. Industry experts said it marked the first time that the government had tapped a Silicon Valley software company, as opposed to a traditional military contractor, to lead a defense program of record, which has a dedicated line of funding from Congress. The contract is potentially worth more than $800 million. The Army's decision to go with Palantir, which was co-founded by Peter Thiel, the billionaire investor and sometimes adviser to President Trump, brings to a close the latest chapter in a fierce competition. In March 2018, the Army chose Palantir and Raytheon to vie for the next phase of the Distributed Common Ground System (or DCGS-A, for Army), which lets users gather and analyze information about enemy movements, terrain and weather to create detailed maps and reports in real-time. The system is designed to be used by soldiers fighting in remote, harsh environments. But critics within the Army and in Congress have for years complained that DCGS-A cost too much and didn't deliver the intelligence and capabilities that soldiers needed. Some soldiers said the system was too hard to use and searched for alternatives. Many became backers of Palantir, which sells to governments and businesses, including in the financial and health care sectors. Palantir and its advocates argued that their software was cheaper and could meet all the Army's requirements. But Army brass defended their decision to pay for a custom-built platform. In 2016, Palantir successfully argued in court that the government was required by law to consider purchasing commercial products, when available, rather than custom ones. That sent the Army back to the drawing board and led to the face off between Palantir and Raytheon. Before his death. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) praised the new approach on Twitter, noting that after the Army had already spent $3 billion in development costs, “it was time to find another way.” Raytheon and Palantir were allowed to test their respective software platforms with a live audience of soldiers, who told them what they liked and didn't and what they would change. The two companies then refined their offerings to suit the Army's needs. Traditionally, the government first chooses a company to build a system according to a set of detailed requirements. But this approach let the Army take both companies' products for a test drive before settling on the winner. “The Army changed its approach to acquisition,” Doug Philippone, a former Army Ranger who leads Palantir's defense business, said in an interview. He said the company was always confident it could win if it were allowed to adjust its technology after getting feedback from soldiers, who he said put the software through a rigorous test, even parachuting out of airplanes with reinforced laptops containing Palantir's software. Chris Johnson, a spokesman for Raytheon, said the company was disappointed in the outcome. “We will wait for the Army's de-brief to understand their decision.” The Army did not provide a comment for this story. Raytheon and Palantir may compete for subsequent phases of work on the program. Unlike most Silicon Valley start-ups, which aim to make their fortunes building consumer applications and software, Palantir at its founding set its sites on Washington, believing that its data analytics tools would find an eager market among U.S. spy agencies and the military, which are constantly trying to manage ever-expanding streams of information. Philippone said the Army win had validated Palantir's strategy. “We founded the company around solving this particular mission,” he said. The company faced initial skepticism from investors, who thought it couldn't overcome entrenched bureaucratic interests and what they saw as political favoritism that led the Pentagon to spend billions every year with the same small group of Beltway contractors. “Everyone told us we should stay away from Washington because it was corrupt and we didn't know how to play golf with senators,” Joe Lonsdale, a Palantir co-founder, said in a 2011 interview. The company got an early investment in 2005 from In-Q-Tel, the CIA's venture capital arm, which tries to quickly develop technologies that the intelligence agency might use. The In-Q-Tel connection helped Palantir get meetings with U.S. officials and intelligence analysts, and even test its software with the CIA's counterterrorism center, according to people familiar with the matter. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/palantir-wins-competition-to-build-army-intelligence-system/2019/03/26/c6d62bf0-3927-11e9-aaae-69364b2ed137_story.html

  • Boeing gets U.S. approval to offer F-15EX to India

    January 29, 2021 | International, Aerospace

    Boeing gets U.S. approval to offer F-15EX to India

    By Aditi Shah Boeing will compete with Sweden's Gripen and France's Rafale among others for the Indian air force's plan to buy 114 multi-role aircraft to replace its Soviet-era fleet. Ankur Kanaglekar, director, India Fighters Lead, Boeing Defense, Space & Security, told reporters discussions on the F-15EX had taken place earlier between the two governments. “Now that we have the marketing licence it allows us to talk to the Indian Air Force directly about the capability of the fighter. We have started doing that in a small way,” he said, adding conversations were expected to gather pace during the Aero India show next week. India and the United States have built close defence ties, with the Indian military buying over $20 billion worth of weapons in the last 15 years. Lockheed Martin is also pitching its F-21 fighter to the Indian air force, offering to build the plane in the country to win the deal estimated to be worth more than $18 billion. Boeing is bullish on India for both its defence and commercial aviation businesses, even as the COVID-19 pandemic has hit demand for air travel, forcing airlines to first get their finances in order before ordering new planes. Boeing expects domestic passenger traffic to return to 2019 levels by the end of this year, Salil Gupte, the company's India head said, adding international traffic would return to pre-COVID levels only by 2023. One of the planemaker's biggest customers is Indian low-cost carrier SpiceJet Ltd, which has a large order for its narrowbody 737 MAX planes. Boeing on Wednesday got the green light from the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) to return its 737 MAX planes to service after a 22-month ban and Gupte said it was working to get approvals from the Indian regulator. https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN29X0UP

  • Les Européens achètent de plus en plus d’avions de chasse américains

    January 28, 2019 | International, Aerospace

    Les Européens achètent de plus en plus d’avions de chasse américains

    Par : Nicolas Gros-Verheyde | EURACTIV France La Slovaquie, la Roumanie, et bientôt la Bulgarie et la Croatie : les avions de chasse américains séduisent toute l'Europe. Pour les armées européennes, voler non américain se fait rare. Seuls six pays n'ont pas équipé leur flotte aérienne de chasse avec du matériel américain. La Suède et la France s'équipent uniquement en national (respectivement le Gripen et le Rafale), et l'Allemagne avec du matériel européen certes (Eurofigther), mais fabriqué sur son sol. Tandis que l'Autriche, la République tchèque et la Hongrie se sont équipées, le premier, en Eurofighter, les deux autres, en Gripen suédois. Un équipement made in US ou panaché Plusieurs pays, notamment dans le sud de l'Europe (Espagne, Grèce, Italie) ont choisi de panacher, prenant un produit européen (Eurofighter ou Mirage) et un produit américain (F-16 ou/et F-35). Un exemple suivi par le Royaume-Uni. Bien que fervente défenseure du lien transatlantique, la Royal Air Force équilibre ses achats entre le made in USA (F-35) et le made in Europa (l'Eurofighter renommé Typhoon outre-Manche). Un pragmatisme qui a un fondement très industriel. Une partie de ces avions sont fabriqués dans les usines britanniques. Les pays d'Europe centrale ou orientale, proches de la Russie sont plus monogames. Sauf les trois exceptions mentionnées (Autriche, Hongrie, Tchéquie), ils s'équipent exclusivement en matériel américain, en général avec des avions F-16 (Lockheed Martin). Il en est de même des pays du nord de l'Europe (Norvège, Danemark, Pays-Bas, Belgique) tous équipés en matériel américain. La tendance ne s'inverse pas Aucun signe ne montre une inversion de tendance. Au contraire ! Les derniers pays qui viennent de s'équiper (Belgique, Roumanie, Slovaquie) l'ont fait avec du matériel américain. Et les Bulgares et Croates s'apprêtent à suivre ce chemin. Tandis que les Grecs qui vont devoir renouveler leur flotte se t'tent pour déterminer leur choix, qui sera largement guidé par le poids économique de l'investissement. Même les Suisses, équipés actuellement de F-18 de chez Boeing,, se demandent s'ils ne vont pas reprendre américain à nouveau. Cette prééminence américaine pose un défi à l'industrie européenne, et à la velléité d'autonomie stratégique et industrielle des « 27 ». L'équipement en avion de chasse est, en effet, un investissement lourd. Le renouvellement n'intervient que tous les 20 ans en cas d'achat d'occasion, et à 40 ans en cas d'achat en neuf. Autant dire que les acquisitions prévues aujourd'hui vont réduire d'autant les capacités de l'industrie européenne jusqu'à 2060 minimum ! D'autant que l'arrivée de l'avion américain de nouvelle génération F-35 dans la flotte de plusieurs États (Belgique, Danemark, Italie, Pays-Bas, Royaume-Uni) risque de « siphonner » durablement les budgets de ces pays. Le futur avion franco-allemand-espagnol prévu pour 2035-2040 risque d'avoir un marché « bouché » et réduit à l'espace de ses pays constructeurs. Cette inconséquence européenne est troublante. Mais plutôt que d'accuser les États-Unis d'interventionnisme industriel, les Européens devraient se regarder dans le miroir. L'industrie aéronautique européenne est aujourd'hui éclatée entre trois constructeurs (Airbus, Dassault, Saab). Ce qui l'empêche d'avoir un modèle unique et donc de faire des économies d'échelle. Elle ne dispose pas d'une offre de « second choix », les fameux F-16 d'occasion, qui permet de s'équiper à moindre coût. Et les pays européens sont incapables de proposer une offre complète, politique, économique, académique et opérationnelle, comme le font les Américains. Offre qui va de l'accueil des stagiaires officiers dans les écoles militaires aux facilités financières pour l'équipement, à la présence militaire, parfois permanente, dans le pays, à titre de réassurance politique. Or, acheter un avion de chasse est une décision éminemment stratégique. Il ne s'agit pas seulement d'acquérir un véhicule aérien avec des capacités. On achète une « assurance-vie » et une protection militaire. Et on assure ainsi à cet allié un « retour » sur l'investissement politique et militaire. On bénéficie d'une culture stratégique et d'un réseau académique puissant. Tant que les Européens ne pourront offrir l'équivalent, l'avion de chasse, made in US, a de beaux jours devant lui. https://www.euractiv.fr/section/commerce-industrie/news/les-europeens-achetent-de-plus-en-plus-davions-de-chasse-americains/

All news