Teledyne is Awarded a $34.9 Million Sole Source Contract from U.S. Navy for Repair and Maintenance of TWTs

On the same subject

• 

  October 4, 2018 | International, Aerospace

  Indian Air Force chief defends Rafale fighter deal against claims of crony capitalism

  By: Pierre Tran and Vivek Raghuvanshi NEW DELHI and PARIS — Indian Air Force chief, Air Chief Marshal Birender Singh Dhanoa defended the decision of India's ruling National Democratic Alliance to buy 36 Rafale fightersfrom France, calling it “a game changer" even as the opposition party criticizes the deal. Addressing annual news conference, Dhanoha said: "At the appropriate level, the Indian Air Force was consulted, but it is for the government to choose. It was decided to buy two squadrons through a government to-government deal, to meet up emergency requirements.” India and France signed the €7.8 billion (U.S. $8.99 billion) inter-governmental agreement Sept. 23, under which 36 Rafale fighter aircraft will be procured from Dassault Aviation for Indian Air Force (IAF) in fly away condition. France will invest 30 percent of the total contract value in India's military aeronautics-related research programs and 20 percent into local production of Rafale components to fulfil the mandatory offsets under the deal. The deliveries of Rafale fighters will start this month. India's main opposition party, Indian National Congress, has claimed on several occasions that the Rafale deal is grossly overvalued and tainted by crony capitalism. The Congress said the Modi government had failed to answer several questions on why public sector Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) had lost the manufacting deal to industrialist Anil Ambani's Reliance Defence Ltd. “The earlier deal for 126 medium multirole combat aircraft reached an impasse during negotiations," Dhanoa said,, referring to a $12 billion medium, multi-role combat aircraft program that was launchced in 2007 but scrapped 10 years later. "We had three options: wait for something good to happen, withdraw the global tender and start over again, or do an emergency purchase. We did an emergency purchase.” Dhanoa called the cost of 36 Rafale was “reasonable and adequate." The latest comments from Dhanoa come after Indian defence minister Nirmala Sitharaman called baseless congressional allegations of a reduction in the number of Rafale jets being purchased from France. Congress has demanded the government explain why instead of 126 Rafale fighter jets, only 36 are being purchased if they were cheaper under the NDA deal than the prior deal. Sitharaman is expected to hold the first annual defence ministers dialogue with her counterpart Florence Parly in Paris Oct. 12-13, as the two countries seek to expand bilateral defense and strategic ties. In France, Dassault said the company had picked Reliance as its Indian partner to meet requirements for local offset established by the Indian Defense Procurement Procedure and Make in India policy. The statement followed controversy sparked by remarks by former French president François Hollande, who said the Indian government selected Reliance as the local partner and that the company "had nothing to say on the subject, we had no choice, we took the partner which was presented.” Dassault put out its statement on the deal for 36 Rafale to India Sept, 21 statement, stating that, in accordance with the policy of Make in India, Dassault Aviation decided to make a partnership with India's Reliance Group. https://www.defensenews.com/global/asia-pacific/2018/10/03/indian-air-force-chief-defends-rafale-fighter-deal-against-claims-of-crony-capitalism

• 

  May 20, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  Study sees British defense sector hurting after Brexit

  By: Martin Banks   BRUSSELS – A report predicts that Brexit will be “more harmful and long-lasting” for the British army and U.K.'s defense sector than for the European Union. The exhaustive study by the Warsaw Institute, a leading European think tank, warns that the U.K.'s exit from the EU means existing arrangements and defense cooperation agreements “will need to be reassessed, completely changing the defense landscape of Europe.” It says, however, that an extension to the current transition period, set to end on Dec. 31, would “mitigate damage” caused by the split. Conversely for the EU side, it suggests that the British departure may have a “healing result,” as both France and Germany will be able to pursue “more comprehensive” defense policies for the remaining member countries. Such moves, it adds, was often blocked by the UK, “which believed that NATO would be sufficient as European peacekeeper.” Publication of the report by the Polish Institute is timely as the 1 July deadline set by both the EU and U.K. for deciding if there will be an extension to the talks is fast approaching. The document paints a largely grim picture for the post-Brexit defense sector, pointing out that companies from across Europe buy or sell parts to various British companies. A no-deal Brexit, which, given the lack of progress in the ongoing trade talks, most analysts currently say is by far the most likely outcome at the end of the year, “would mean price hikes and possible delays in European projects relying on British parts or know-how.” Companies likely to be impacted include industry giants like Airbus and products as “complex and important” for European security as the Eurofighter Typhoon. The independent institute, which specializes in geopolitics and international affairs, notes, “The expected crisis can be averted either by a free trade agreement or, should this option not be possible, a bilateral trade agreement between UK and several if not all EU27 states abolishing tariffs and border checks. “Should these measures not be in place, many projects run by European companies may be hit with delays or even cancellations.” The predicted consequences of Brexit for the British army and U.K.'s defense sector are more harmful and long-lasting than those expected to be felt by the EU. This, the non-profit Institute argues, is because Brexit “will strip the U.K. from valuable training opportunities and will take away some of its international power-projection abilities.” “The U.K. will no longer be able to affect the policies that are agreed upon as the part of the Common Security and Defence Policy," or CSDP. But the “biggest downside” of the divorce will be that fewer resources will be available to make up the future peacekeeping and advisory operations run by the EU worldwide. “There will also be less finances available for these operations coming from the CSDP as there will be less contribution paid towards it.” The third round of talks between the two sides concluded last Friday with little progress being made. The UK government has ruled out an extension to the transition period. David McAllister, Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs in the European Parliament, said, “From the very beginning, it was to be expected that the negotiations would not be easy. But we started them from a position of certainty, goodwill, shared interests and purpose.” The German MEP, also chair of the UK Coordination Group in the Parliament, added, “In my opinion, there is still a strong, shared interest of both the EU and the U.K. to sign an ambitious and comprehensive new partnership governing their future relations.” https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/05/19/study-sees-british-defense-sector-hurting-after-brexit

• 

  March 24, 2021 | International, Aerospace

  Weather for the war fighter: How the US military can outmaneuver adversaries from space

  The outcome of future conflict will depend on rapid, accurate and more fully informed decisions.