23 juillet 2018 | International, Aérospatial

Boeing serait "ravi" de participer au Tempest britannique

PARIS (Reuters) - Boeing serait "ravi" de participer au nouveau programme d'avion de combat britannique, même si le projet doit encore être précisé, a déclaré vendredi à Reuters Leanne Caret, patronne de Boeing Defense, Space & Security.

La Grande-Bretagne, qui n'a pas développé d'avion de combat seule depuis les années 1960, a dévoilé lundi son futur avion "Tempest" au salon de Farnborough, près de Londres, parallèlement au programme franco-allemand piloté par Paris à horizon 2040.

"Ils sont encore en train de mener leurs propres études militaires et de déterminer où ils vont", a dit Leanne Caret au salon de Farnborough. "S'il y a une opportunité pour Boeing de participer et de jouer un rôle, nous serons absolument honorés et ravis d'être du voyage".

Eric Trappier, PDG de Dassault Aviation a raillé jeudi le "réveil" des Britanniques vis-à-vis des avions de combat, tandis que ce projet crée une nouvelle lutte fratricide comme celle que se livrent actuellement le Rafale, l'Eurofighter et le Gripen suédois..

Il reste à savoir si les deux projets pourraient fusionner à la suite de la sortie de la Grande-Bretagne de l'Union européenne prévue en mars 2019 ou si Londres nouera de nouvelles alliances, peut-être avec le suédois Saab, constructeur du Gripen.

Une alliance entre le britannique BAE Systems, Saab et peut-être le brésilien Embraer, récemment allié à Boeing, pourrait faire émerger un sérieux concurrent au projet franco-allemand.

Boeing, qui construit les F/A-18E/F et F-15, pourrait ainsi trouver l'occasion de revenir dans un programme de développement d'avion de combat après avoir perdu le contrat du F-35 au détriment de Lockheed Martin en 2001.

Sur le même sujet

  • Will commercial and military launch programs ever be truly complementary?

    29 avril 2020 | International, Aérospatial

    Will commercial and military launch programs ever be truly complementary?

    By: Kirk Pysher In a few months, the U.S. Air Force will choose two of the four competing space companies to provide five years of launches in the National Security Space Launch (NSSL) program. One of the core objectives for this program is to increase affordability by leveraging the technologies and business models of the commercial launch industry. Is that a realistic expectation given the current commercial space market and historical precedents? Historically, the commercial launch market has seen significant variability. Launches of commercial communication satellite constellations began in the early 1970s with NASA serving as the launch provider. New launch providers began to emerge from the commercial world after the Commercial Space Launch Act of 1984 allowed the private sector to provide launch services. We then witnessed a remarkable growth in commercial space launches in the 1990s that peaked just before the turn of the century. Then, until about 2014, the commercial launch market stabilized at 20-25 commercial geostationary orbit satellites per year that were split essentially between three global launch suppliers. Since then, new entrants into the commercial launch market and pricing pressure from terrestrial-based communication systems have significantly impacted the viability of the commercial launch market, reducing profit margins and returns on investment across the board. The expected 20-25 commercial GEO missions is now in the range of 10-15 launches per year and is expected to remain at that level beyond the NSSL five-year period of performance. With new entrants into the commercial launch market, that 40-50 percent reduction in annual launch opportunities will now be competed among seven to eight global launch providers, putting further pressure on the viability of those launchers. Additionally, commercial launch revenue is also expected to decrease over that period by as much as 30 percent as satellite operators look to reduce their launch cost through shared launch, smaller spacecraft and reduced launch pricing. Given the projected commercial launch market and additional competition from new entrants, launch service providers will have difficultly building and maintaining viable commercial launch business plans, let alone having commercial launch-driven capital to invest in new technology. History has proven that no commercial launch service provider can succeed without having an anchor government customer. The commercial launch market simply has not been able to provide the stable, long-term demand needed to maintain affordable pricing, innovation and factory throughput for the Air Force to benefit from. History has also demonstrated that it is the Air Force with NSSL since 2003 that has provided the launch service providers with a stable number of launches. The defense and commercial launch markets have a fundamental difference. The former focuses strictly on satisfying national security mission requirements in space — needs that are driven by risk, strategy and geopolitical events regardless of vulnerabilities in commercial markets. The defense market began in the late 1950s with industry designing, developing and building launch vehicles for the U.S. government to place critical national security satellites into orbit. Early on, we saw a large number of launches in the beginning — peaking at more than 40 in 1966 — before activity levels decreased to level out by 1980. After more than 400 launches of defense-related satellites, the defense launch market finally settled into an average eight launches annually, whereas the commercial launch market is strictly tied to the ability of global satellite operators to close business plans and obtain institutional and/or private funding on new and replacement satellites. The global COVID-19 pandemic is a stark reminder of the vulnerability of all commercial markets. Airlines, aircraft manufacturers and commercial space companies are needing to seek tens of billions of dollars in government assistance; and private commercial space investors are also reassessing their risk postures, as is demonstrated by the recent OneWeb bankruptcy filing. Given the projected decline in commercial launch along with the historical precedents, there would be significant risk for the Air Force to expect to leverage benefit from commercial launch. In fact, I believe history has demonstrated that it is commercial launch that is able to leverage the benefits derived from the steady cadence of defense and civil government launches. The Air Force, in its role as anchor customer, needs to clearly understand commercial market dependencies and business cases of its key providers. With that understanding, the Air Force will mitigate any risk of critical national security missions being dependent on a finicky and fluctuating commercial market. Kirk Pysher is an aerospace executive with more than 20 years in the commercial launch market, serving most recently as the president of International Launch Services until October 2019. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/04/28/will-commercial-and-military-launch-programs-ever-be-truly-complementary/

  • Kuwait wants to spend over $1.4 billion on Patriot upgrades

    29 mai 2020 | International, Terrestre

    Kuwait wants to spend over $1.4 billion on Patriot upgrades

    By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — The U.S. State Department has OK'd a trio of packages to update Kuwait's Patriot missile defense systems, with a combined potential price tag of $1.425 billion. The three packages, announced on the website of the U.S. Defense Security Cooperation Agency on Thursday, include $425 million for sustainment and technical assistance, $200 million for a repair and return program, and $800 million for 84 Patriot Advanced Capability (PAC-3) missile segment enhancements. DSCA notifications are not final sales; if cleared by Congress, Kuwait will then enter negotiations over the package, during which quantities and costs can shift. The potential sales “will supplement and improve Kuwait's capability to meet current and future threats and provide greater security for its critical oil and natural gas infrastructure,” according to the DSCA. “Kuwait will use the enhanced capability to strengthen its homeland defense. Kuwait will have no difficulty absorbing this equipment and services into its armed forces.” The repair and return program involves shipping items that can't be serviced on the ground back to the U.S. military for refurbishment, and then inducted into the military's regular repair cycle. When the repairs are complete, the parts are shipped back to the country that owns them, which is then billed for the repairs. Work will be performed at a number of locations, primarily the Huntsville, Alabama, locations of Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, Leido and KBR. In addition, work on the PAC-3 missile segments will be done at Lockheed's Dallas, Texas, office. Kuwait has been a reliable customer for American military goods. Excluding Thursday's announcements, the country has been cleared for 13 Foreign Military Sales cases since the start of fiscal 2017, with an estimated price tag of $13.9 billion. https://www.defensenews.com/global/mideast-africa/2020/05/28/kuwait-wants-to-spend-over-14-billion-on-patriot-upgrades/

  • ANALYSIS | The Russians are spending big on infrastructure to absorb occupied Ukraine | CBC News

    13 janvier 2024 | International, Aérospatial

    ANALYSIS | The Russians are spending big on infrastructure to absorb occupied Ukraine | CBC News

    Armies rarely measure their success by the roads they've paved or the rail lines they've laid down — but that may be the metric Russia is using in occupied portions of Ukraine, where major infrastructure projects are underway or are being planned.

Toutes les nouvelles