May 27, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security
Le secteur de la défense pourra jouer un rôle important pour le rebond économique du pays, estime Christian de Boissieu. Il ne se délocalise pas. Il suscite la création d'emplois qualifiés. Un plan de relance dans la défense permettrait ainsi de renforcer la sécurité et la souveraineté, tout en stimulant l'investissement privé.
Par Christian de Boissieu (professeur émérite à l'université Paris-I et vice-président du Cercle des économistes)
Publié le 20 mai 2020 à 8h50Mis à jour le 20 mai 2020 à 11h03
La crise actuelle affecte l'économie française avec une ampleur inégalée depuis 1945 : la récession est à la fois imparable et profonde. Tous les secteurs sont touchés. L'ampleur du rebond dépendra, entre autres facteurs, de la capacité de l'Etat à accompagner la reprise, ce qui passe par un plan de relance aux deux niveaux, national et européen. L'enjeu est alors d'identifier les secteurs pertinents.
Par hypothèse, le secteur de la défense est orienté vers la sécurité et la souveraineté, au moment même où ces valeurs s'affirment avec force. Il pourrait également jouer un rôle important pour relancer l'économie du pays. Le secteur industriel de la défense ne s'est pas délocalisé ; il n'a donc pas à se relocaliser comme d'autres activités stratégiques. Il crée un grand nombre d'emplois qualifiés. Les entreprises de défense occupent une place centrale dans le système national d'innovation. Elles réalisent, pour leurs activités civiles et de défense, 25 % de la R & D effectuée par les entreprises françaises. Elles ont une activité de dépôt de brevets importante, plusieurs entreprises de défense se classant chaque année dans le top 10 des brevets déposés à l'Inpi, et elles participent grandement à la structuration des réseaux de recherche.
Un plan de relance incluant la défense aurait un impact économique notable, renforcé par la dualité militaire/civil des activités de défense. Les dépenses d'équipements militaires ou de R & D sont des dépenses d'investissement ; elles suscitent des retombées de nature à stimuler la productivité.
Pour des raisons stratégiques, les chaînes de production et de recherche sont également plus nationales que dans le reste de l'économie. Les études montrent que ces spécificités se traduisent par un effet multiplicateur des dépenses publiques élevé (multiplicateur d'impact sur le PIB d'environ 2 au bout de dix ans). Elles indiquent également que, loin de les évincer, les dépenses d'équipement militaire ou de recherche dans la défense sont complémentaires des investissements privés. Financer la R & D défense permettrait ainsi de soutenir la recherche française à un moment où celle-ci va être fortement affectée.
En outre, la relance par la défense non seulement ne dégrade pas la balance commerciale, à la différence de nombreux secteurs, mais, au contraire, l'améliore en stimulant la recherche, en augmentant l'efficacité des processus de production et en renforçant, aux yeux de l'extérieur, l'efficience opérationnelle du matériel militaire français.
Par ailleurs, la base industrielle et technologique de défense a toujours eu une forte dimension locale en contribuant à l'aménagement du territoire et au maintien de l'activité dans de nombreuses zones industrielles sous-dotées. Cette proximité ne serait que renforcée par une relance passant aussi, et sans exclusivité, par la défense.
Une telle relance doit d'abord être nationale, mais elle doit s'accompagner d'une initiative de l'Union européenne. C'est l'occasion unique de faire enfin décoller l'Europe de la défense. Ainsi, la proposition initiale d'un budget de 13 milliards d'euros pour le Fonds européen de défense pour les six prochaines années, soit moins de 1 % du budget de l'UE, doit être retenue au moment où les autres continents ne cessent d'augmenter leurs dépenses de défense.
Un plan de relance dans la défense permettrait ainsi de renforcer la sécurité et la souveraineté tout en stimulant l'investissement privé, la recherche civile et en provoquant un impact économique important. Autant d'éléments nécessaires dans la période qui s'ouvre.
Christian de Boissieu est président du Conseil scientifique, de la chaire Economie de défense, IHEDN et membre du Cercle des économistes.
https://www.lesechos.fr/idees-debats/cercle/opinion-un-plan-de-relance-pour-la-defense-1204431
September 6, 2023 | International, Aerospace
U.S. weapons maker Lockheed Martin cut its full-year delivery forecast for F-35 jets as delays at supplier L3Harris Technologies held up development of an upgraded version of the aircraft, the company said on Wednesday.
July 16, 2018 | International, Aerospace, Naval
Christopher Woody The Navy recently completed initial testing of the MQ-8C Fire Scout, an unmanned helicopter capable of carrying three times as much payload as an earlier version. The Navy hopes to deploy the MQ-8C aboard littoral combat ships, augmenting their limited range and firepower. More testing is needed however, and the Navy is still evaluating how the arm the drone helicopter. On June 29, US Navy crews completed the first comprehensive initial operational test and evaluation of the MQ-8C Fire Scout, an unmanned helicopter the Navy hopes will increase the lethality of the service's new littoral combat ships. The aircraft carried out several mission scenarios from the USS Coronado, an LCS commissioned in 2014. The Coronado's crew and members of Air Test and Evaluation Squadron 1 performed simulated engagements in order to review the MQ-8C's target-identification, intelligence-gathering, and surface-warfare abilities. The testing showed "cohesion between the surface and aviation platforms," the Navy said in a release published on July 9. "The results, lessons learned, and recommendations reported on following this underway test period are absolutely invaluable to the future of the MQ-8C Fire Scout's mission effectiveness and suitability to perform that mission," Lt. Cmdr. Seth Ervin, leader of the Air Test and Evaluation detachment on the Coronado, said in the release. The testing also looked for ways to simultaneously operate both the Fire Scout and a MH-60S Seahawk manned helicopter onboard an LCS, finding that such operations were possible but required extensive planning and coordination. "It has been challenging and rewarding to be one of the first maintainers afforded the opportunity to take both aircraft aboard the ship. Working together, we made the overall product more functional and efficient for the fleet," Aviation Machinist's Mate Second Class Salvatore Greene, a member of the testing squadron, said in the release. The Coronado previously hosted tests of the smaller MQ-8B, which has been used in Afghanistan to detect improvised explosive devices. The larger MQ-8C, which is based on the Bell 407 manned helicopter, retains the hardware and software for the smaller model but has twice the range and can carry a payload three times bigger. The MQ-8C can also fly for 11.5 hours because the redesign for the Fire Scout program fitted the Bell 407's passenger and cargo spaces with fuel tanks, according to Jane's 360. The MQ-8B was to be equipped with a multimode maritime radar and the Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System, consisting of modified 70 mm Hydra rockets fitted with a guidance system. The MQ-8B was limited to three tube launchers, but Capt. Jeff Dodge, the Navy's Fire Scout program manager, told USNI News the service was looking to put seven tubes on the MQ-8C. Limited space aboard the LCS complicates decisions about arming the Fire Scout. The LCS has one magazine that would store all weapons used by aircraft and the ship's own weapon systems. Dodge said in April that the Navy was still deciding how to fit Fire Scout armaments in with the LCS's own weapons. Those complicating factors had effectively put a hold on efforts to arm the MQ-8C until 2023, Dodge said at the time. The MQ-8C can land and takeoff autonomously from any aviation-capable ship and can carry out anti-submarine, anti-surface, mine warfare, and search-and-rescue operations, according to Northrop Grumman. Northrop has also touted the MQ-8C as a range-extender, adding up to 300 miles by providing targeting data for the LCS's over-the-horizon surface missile. The company plans to upgrade the MQ-8C with a new radar and datalink that allow it to send air-to-air and surface targeting information to surface ships. The MQ-8C did its first ship-based flight in December 2014 on the USS Jason Dunham, an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer. It also did underway-testing aboard the littoral combat ship USS Montgomery in April 2017, when it took its first flight from an LCS. Initial operational testing and evaluation for the MQ-8C began on April 16. Pierside testing focused on maintenance and cyber capabilities will continue on the Coronado through mid-July, the Navy said. Initial operational capability is expected by the end of this year. The Navy hopes to have the MQ-8C aboard the LCS fleet by the early 2020s. http://www.businessinsider.com/navy-mq-8c-fire-scout-unmanned-helicopter-passes-test-to-work-with-lcs-2018-7
January 16, 2020 | International, Land
By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — The U.S. Army is taking a step back on its effort to replace its Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle after receiving only one bid in its competitive prototyping program, but this does not mean the end of the road for the future optionally manned fighting vehicle, service leaders told reporters Jan. 16 at the Pentagon. Until now, the Army has been tight-lipped ever since it appeared the competitive effort was no longer competitive, as the service had received only one prototype submission. “Today the U.S. Army will cancel the current solicitation for the Section 804 Middle Tier acquisition rapid prototyping phase of the [optionally manned fighting vehicle]. Based on feedback and proposals received from industry, we have determined it is necessary to revisit the requirements, acquisition strategy and schedule moving forward,” said Bruce Jette, the Army's acquisition chief. “Since its inception, the OMFV program has represented an innovative approach to Army acquisition by focusing on delivering an essentially new capability to armored brigade combat teams under a significantly reduced timeline compared to traditional acquisition efforts. The Army asked for a great deal of capability on a very aggressive schedule and, despite an unprecedented number of industry days and engagements to include a draft request for proposals over a course of nearly two years, all of which allowed industry to help shape the competition, it is clear a combination of requirements and schedule overwhelmed industry's ability to respond within the Army's timeline,” Jette said. “The need remains clear. OMFV is a critical capability for the Army, and we will be pressing forward after revision." In October, the Army ended up with only one bidder in the OMFV competition — General Dynamics Land Systems. The service had planned to hold a prototyping competition, selecting two winning teams to build prototypes with a downselect to one at the end of an evaluation period. Defense News broke the news that another expected competitor — a Raytheon and Rheinmetall team — had been disqualified from the competition because it had failed to deliver a bid sample to Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, by the deadline. A bellwether for what was to come in the prototyping competition happened earlier in the year when BAE Systems, which manufactures the Bradley, decided not compete, Defense News first reported. And, according to several sources, Hanwha also considered competing but decided against the opportunity. The CEO of BAE Systems' U.S.-based business, Jerry DeMuro, told Defense News in a recent interview that the company didn't regret its decision not to pursue OMFV as the requirements and schedule were previously laid out, but said it continues to talk to the Army about future opportunities. “It was a very challenging program,” DeMuro said. “It always comes down to three things: requirements, schedule and funding. The schedule was very, very aggressive, especially early on, and at the same time trying to get leap-ahead technologies. There's a little bit of dichotomy there. “The requirements that were being asked for was going to require, in our estimation, significantly more development that could not be done in that time frame and significantly more capital than the Army was willing to apply.” Jette said the Army had a large number of vendors interested in the effort, hosted 11 industry days and had a number of draft requests for proposals on the street, but, he said, “it's always a challenge for industry. I was on the outside two years ago, and you get an RFP in after the discussions — it still cannot align with what you thought, and that is what you have to respond to is the RFP.” The acquisition chief believes what happened in this case is there was “a large number interested, they started paring down, which started causing us some uncertainty about the competition, but we still had viable vendors in. And when you get out to actually delivering on those requirements, we had one vendor who had challenges meeting compliance issues with delivery, and the second vendor had difficulty meeting responsive issues, critical issues within the requirement — not knowing how to fulfill that.” When pressed as to whether GDLS met the requirements with its bid sample, the Army's program executive officer for ground combat systems, Brig. Gen. Brian Cummings, who was present at the media roundtable along with the Next-Generation Combat Vehicle Cross-Functional Team leader Brig. Gen. Ross Coffman, said the Army could not discuss results and findings regarding the company's submission. Several sources confirmed a letter was circulating around Capitol Hill from GDLS to the Army secretary that strongly urged the service to continue with the program without delay. So now it's back to the drawing board to ensure the Army gets the prototyping program right. Jette took pains to stress that the OMFV effort is not a failed program with the likes of Comanche, Future Combat Systems, Crusader or the Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter. “This is a continuing program. This is an initial effort at trying to get to a programmatic solution yielded, input that we needed to evaluate, which said we needed to revise our approach, not abandon the program or that it was a failure.” Some major failed programs in the past, Jette noted, were canceled after spending large amounts of money and still moving along even though problems were identified as the service proceeded. Crusader cost about $2 billion, Comanche about $6.9 billion and Future Combat Systems about $19 billion, Jette said. “We've spent a very small amount of money in trying to get to where we are, and in fact a good bit of the technology development that was part of the assessment phase is still totally recoverable," he added. Army Futures Command chief Gen. Mike Murray told the same group of reporters he is hesitant to call OMFV a program because it's a prototyping program, not a program of record. “We are still committed to this. This is like a tactical pause,” he said. The effort so far “gave us a great deal of clarity in understanding what is truly doable,” Jette noted. Army leaders said they would be unable to estimate how long its renewed analysis on the program might take before proceeding with a new solicitation to industry, or what that would mean for the program's schedule in its entirety. The original plan was to field OMFV in 2026. Last month, Congress hacked funding for the OMFV prototyping program, providing $205.6 million in fiscal 2020, a reduction of $172.8 million, which would have made it impossible to conduct a competitive prototyping effort. What happens to that funding or congressional support for the overall program is unclear. While sources confirmed to Defense News in early October that the failure with the OMFV prototyping effort revealed rifts between the acquisition community and the Army's new modernization command, Army Futures Command, Jette said while there is a bit of “scuffing here and there" the two organizations are working together “much better.” Murray added it is his view that the acquisition community and Army Futures Command is moving forward as “one team” with “one goal in mind.” https://www.defensenews.com/land/2020/01/16/army-takes-step-back-on-bradley-replacement-prototyping-effort/