First European-Built F-35 For The Netherlands Presented

Sur le même sujet

• 

  2 mai 2022 | International, Autre défense

  L’industrie d’armement allemand redore son blason mais craint un rationnement sur le gaz

  DÉFENSE L'industrie d'armement allemand redore son blason mais craint un rationnement sur le gaz Mardi 26 avril, la ministre de la Défense, Christine Lambrecht, a surpris ses homologues de l'OTAN réunis sur la base américaine de Ramstein, en Allemagne, en acceptant d'acheminer en Ukraine des chars Guepard, un matériel fabriqué par le constructeur Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW). Par ailleurs, Olaf Scholz souhaite sanctuariser son plan de 100 Md€ sur 5 ans, en l'inscrivant dans la Loi fondamentale allemande, une proposition qui fait débat outre-Rhin. Parias de l'industrie, mal-aimées aussi bien dans la population que dans le monde politique, les entreprises d'armement allemandes, entièrement privées, sont revenues sur le devant de la scène depuis le déclenchement de la guerre en Ukraine. Dès le lendemain du discours d'Olaf Scholz, le patron du groupe KMW, Armin Papperger, avait surpris le secteur en proposant une liste d'équipements que son groupe pouvait livrer à la Bundeswehr ces prochaines années, pour un montant total de 42 Md€. Le tournant allemand en matière de Défense va-t-il permettre d'accélérer la formation d'une véritable industrie de défense européenne intégrée, dans laquelle les groupes allemands joueraient un rôle important ? Rien de moins sûr pour Christian Mölling, expert défense et sécurité à l'institut allemand de politique extérieure (DGAP) : « Le gros problème, c'est que l'Allemagne n'a pas encore effectué le basculement mental nécessaire au vu des circonstances ». Les projets de système d'armement commun dans l'air (FCAS) et sur terre (MGCS), en discussion depuis dix ans, ont peu avancé. La question est de savoir si ce dossier est susceptible d'effectuer une avancée décisive avec un couple franco-allemand Macron-Scholz, renforcé par les élections françaises. Autre préoccupation majeure de l'industrie lourde allemande : la crainte d'un rationnement sur le gaz en provenance de Russie. Des sociétés comme BASF, dans le secteur des hydrocarbures, verrait 40% de sa production se paralyser en cas d'arrêt brutal des livraisons ; le groupe sidérurgique ThyssenKrupp a, lui, annoncé la mise au chômage partiel de 1 300 salariés récemment. L'industrie allemande représente environ 37% de la consommation de gaz du pays, très dépendante des approvisionnements russes. Le Monde et les Echos du 29 avril

• 

  29 octobre 2019 | International, Aérospatial

  The US Air Force’s X-37B spaceplane lands after spending two years in space

  By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — In the early morning hours of Oct. 27, the U.S. Air Force's X-37B spaceplane landed at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida after a record-breaking 780 days in orbit. What was the Boeing-made plane doing in space for the two years it spent circling Earth? On that point, the Air Force is characteristically elusive, describing the X-37B's activities as “on-orbit experiments” in a news release. “The X-37B continues to demonstrate the importance of a reusable spaceplane,” Air Force Secretary Barbara Barrett said. “Each successive mission advances our nation's space capabilities.” According to the Air Force, the unmanned spaceplane is unique because it allows scientists to test experimental technologies in space for long periods of time. One of those technologies confirmed to be on board the X-37B is the Advanced Structurally Embedded Thermal Spreader, or ASETS-11, created by the Air Force Research Laboratory to “test experimental electronics and oscillating heat pipes in the long duration space environment,” the service said in 2017. “This program continues to push the envelope as the world's only reusable space vehicle. With a successful landing today, the X-37B completed its longest flight to date and successfully completed all mission objectives,” said Randy Walden, head of the Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office. “This mission successfully hosted Air Force Research Laboratory experiments, among others, as well as providing a ride for small satellites.” X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle Mission 5 ended at 3:51 a.m. after the spaceplane landed on the runway of Kennedy's shuttle landing facility on Sunday. That mission began Sept. 7, 2017, when the X-37B took off from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida, on board a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket — marking the first launch of the X-37B by Elon Musk's space company. So far, the X-37B has spent 2,865 days on orbit cumulatively over its five missions, with four of those missions extending past the 270-day on-orbit duration requirement to which the plane was designed. The Air Force plans to launch a sixth mission in 2020 out of Cape Canaveral. The service has two X-37Bs, which Walden characterized as “workhorses” during a Oct. 24 event, according to Breaking Defense. When asked whether the Air Force should buy additional spacecraft or execute a follow-on order, Walden was noncommittal. “The data is still out,” he said, adding that the two existing X-37Bs are “doing quite well.” https://www.defensenews.com/space/2019/10/28/the-air-forces-x-37b-spaceplane-finally-landed-after-spending-two-years-in-space/

• 

  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/