23 novembre 2018 | International, Aérospatial
Les avionneurs Dassault Aviation et Airbus ainsi que les motoristes français et allemand Safran et MTU vont enfin pouvoir faire plancher leurs équipes sur le programme SCAF, le système de combat aérien du futur. Il s'agit du principal programme de coopération franco-allemand dans le domaine de la Défense avec le programme de char de combat du futur. Le futur chasseur devra remplacer à l'horizon 2035-2040 le Rafale français et l'Eurofighter déployé dans les armées allemandes.
Se mettre au travail
En marge de la réunion des ministres des affaires étrangères et de la Défense qui a démarré à Bruxelles le 20 novembre, la ministre française des armées Florence Parly et son homologue allemande ont fait un point sur leurs grands programmes militaires en
coopération. Le délégué général de l'armement Joël Barre et son vis-à-vis allemand étaient également présents. Les partenaires ont décidé d'attribuer les premiers contrats d'études aux industriels dans le courant de l'année 2019 pour éviter de prendre tout retard.
"La réunion avait pour but de clarifier l'architecture industrielle des programmes en coopération. Ces études lancent réellement le programme SCAF. Les industriels vont pouvoir se mettre au travail", souligne une source proche de la ministre française des Armées.
Un premier contrat d'études générales sera confié début 2019 à Dassault Aviation et Airbus qui se partageront le leadership. Il s'agit de définir l'architecture et le concept du système de combat aérien du futur, qualifié de système de systèmes, avec en son cœur une flotte d'avions de chasse en communication avec des avions de renseignement, des satellites, des drones, des infrastructures terrestres.... Il faudra répondre notamment au type et au nombre de drones qui intégreraient un tel dispositif. Cette étude devrait durer environ deux ans. L'objectif est de présenter les grands choix d'architecture du SCAF en 2021.
Quid de Thales
Deux autres contrats d'études ont été également décidés en vue de préparer des démonstrateurs, étape majeure en vue de dérisquer un programme d'une telle envergure. Il est prévu qu'elles soient lancées au plus tard au moment du Bourget en juin 2019.
La première étude concerne le démonstrateur lié à l'appareil lui-même. Dassault Aviation, désigné leader de cette étude, est ainsi confirmé dans son rôle de chef de file industriel du programme SCAF. Il travaillera avec Airbus comme sous-traitant.
La seconde étude concerne le démonstrateur pour le moteur. Safran, fabricant du moteur M88 du Rafale est désigné comme maître d'œuvre leader. Il retrouvera une vielle connaissance, le motoriste allemand MTU avec lequel il a déjà collaboré sur le moteur de l'A400M, l'avion de transport militaire d'Airbus Military.
En avril dernier, au salon aéronautique de Berlin, Dassault Aviation et Airbus avaient confirmé leur volonté de collaborer sur le programme SCAF. "Nos deux entreprises s'engagent à travailler ensemble de façon pragmatique et efficace. Notre feuille de route commune pour le programme SCAF comprendra des propositions pour le développement de démonstrateurs à partir de 2025", avait alors précisé Eric Trappier, PDG de l'avionneur français.
Thales, qui produit l'électronique du Rafale mais n'est pas mentionné en premier rang dans l'attribution des études, fait figure de grand perdant. "Il sera sur la photo finale" souligne toutefois une source proche de la ministre française de la Défense soulignant le caractère crucial de son expertise dans le domaine dit de système de systèmes.
Aucun montant n'a été précisé pour le coût des études. Le programme d'un avion de combat de nouvelle génération se chiffre toutefois en dizaines de milliards d'euros. La France et l'Allemagneont déjà rappelé qu'ils comptaient ouvrir leur collaboration a d'autres pays européen et notamment l'Espagne. Quant au Royaume-Uni, il s'est engagé sur un projet d'avion alternatif avec le soutien de l'Italie.
17 mars 2021 | International, Aérospatial
The Office of Naval Research (ONR) Department for Aviation, Force Projection, and Integrated Defense in early March issued a Special Notice (N0014-21-S-SN06) soliciting proposals for the development and testing of an air-launched hypersonic,...
9 août 2019 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre
By: Jen Judson HUNTSVILLE, Ala. —The U.S. military is a few years from launching offensive hypersonic weapons that are currently under development. But building those initial missiles is one thing — manufacturing the weapons in multitude is another issue entirely. “I would say we really need to understand, again, how can we produce precision hardware at scale,” Michael Griffin, the Pentagon's undersecretary of defense for research and engineering, told a group of reporters Aug. 7 at the Space and Missile Defense Symposium in Huntsville, Alabama. “If we talk about ballistic missile defense or hypersonic offense and we talk about proliferating architectures, we need any dozens, many hundreds, maybe thousands of assets,” he added. “This takes us back to the Cold War where at one point we had 30,000 nuclear warheads and missiles to launch them. We haven't produced at that kind of scale since the wall came down.” As hypersonic missiles become a reality, industry is going to have to relearn how to effectively, efficiently and economically produce them, Griffin said. While industry has developed warheads, glide bodies and other components, there is no industrial base equipped to manufacture hypersonic weapons. Things are moving in the right direction when it comes to bringing industry up to speed and preparing for larger-scale manufacturing of missiles, Griffin said. But building these systems is challenging because, for example, hypersonics require a greater degree of thermal protection than what has been required of other weapons in the past, he noted. Building hypersonics is no longer a technical issue or a matter of understanding physics, but rather an issue of understanding the industrial engineering required to produce a larger number. “I'm not sure how much help the government can be there,” he said. “Mass production is not what we do. ... That is going to be an industry problem.” The Army is just weeks away from awarding a contract to a company that will work with the federally funded laboratory that developed a hypersonic glide body to develop manufacturing plans and strategies. Other companies will have a turn as well. The effort is spearheaded by the service's Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies Office. Griffin stressed that the weapons manufacturing process needs to be affordable. “Our adversaries have clearly found ways to make them affordable. China has these things now by the thousands. What do we do to learn, once again, how to produce sophisticated things at scale and affordably?” he said. China is able to field new systems every few years, Griffin noted, while the U.S. takes a decade or more to get through a cumbersome acquisition process. “It don't believe that the issues facing the United States aerospace and defense establishment are issues of specific technologies,” he said. “I believe that over the last 30 years ... we've become lost in our processes.” https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/smd/2019/08/08/hypersonics-by-the-dozens-us-industry-faces-manufacturing-challenge/
6 septembre 2019 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité
By: David B. Larter WASHINGTON — The U.S. Army faces problems on multiple fronts when it comes to sending business to small companies, the head of Army Futures Command said Wednesday. Gen. John Murray said small businesses struggle under a procurement system that can take years, and then struggle to scale their businesses to meet the Army's needs. “There is a lack of trust [on the part of small businesses] that the government can sustain [a] small-business model,” Murray told the audience at the third annual Defense News Conference. “The way we do budgeting, [program objectives memorandum] POM cycles and all that — a small business can't survive. We're going to have to prove to small businesses that we can adjust our POM cycles to meet their needs. “And from the small business perspective, there are only a few ways that they can scale to the size we are talking about in terms of production. One of those ways is partnering with a traditional [defense contractor], so that's going to be a challenge going forward.” Murray's comments come as the Army tries to engage with a range of partners — from universities and small businesses to the traditional prime contractors such as Raytheon and General Dynamics — to find ways to integrate new technologies into the force. The outreach to small businesses at Army Futures Command is about finding new ways to get after the challenges the service faces, Murray said, but that in and of itself comes with challenges. “This outreach to small business is not because there is anything wrong with traditional defense primes, it's really an outreach to find new ways to solve our problems,” he said. “I've been in the Army 37 years, and I think about solving our problems a certain way. I guarantee a lot of these small businesses think about how to solve problems a different way. “Part of the challenge I have with small business is comfortably describing our problem to them. I can't talk in acronyms, I can't talk with 37 years of experience, I need to talk very clearly and very plainly.” Murray said his teams have staged events aimed at the private sector, such as a recent one where startups gathered to figure out how to move artillery shells 250 meters using autonomous unmanned systems. Such events have been instructive, he noted. Ultimately, however, the Army will choose the business that best meets the service's requirements, he said. “What it really comes down to is what are our problems and where is the best place — whether that's small business or a university or a traditional prime — where is the best place to solve that problem,” Murray said. https://www.defensenews.com/smr/defense-news-conference/2019/09/04/the-us-army-faces-struggles-working-with-small-businesses/