28 janvier 2019 | International, Aérospatial

Les Européens achètent de plus en plus d’avions de chasse américains

Par : Nicolas Gros-Verheyde | EURACTIV France

La Slovaquie, la Roumanie, et bientôt la Bulgarie et la Croatie : les avions de chasse américains séduisent toute l'Europe.

Pour les armées européennes, voler non américain se fait rare. Seuls six pays n'ont pas équipé leur flotte aérienne de chasse avec du matériel américain. La Suède et la France s'équipent uniquement en national (respectivement le Gripen et le Rafale), et l'Allemagne avec du matériel européen certes (Eurofigther), mais fabriqué sur son sol. Tandis que l'Autriche, la République tchèque et la Hongrie se sont équipées, le premier, en Eurofighter, les deux autres, en Gripen suédois.

Un équipement made in US ou panaché

Plusieurs pays, notamment dans le sud de l'Europe (Espagne, Grèce, Italie) ont choisi de panacher, prenant un produit européen (Eurofighter ou Mirage) et un produit américain (F-16 ou/et F-35). Un exemple suivi par le Royaume-Uni. Bien que fervente défenseure du lien transatlantique, la Royal Air Force équilibre ses achats entre le made in USA (F-35) et le made in Europa (l'Eurofighter renommé Typhoon outre-Manche). Un pragmatisme qui a un fondement très industriel. Une partie de ces avions sont fabriqués dans les usines britanniques.

Les pays d'Europe centrale ou orientale, proches de la Russie sont plus monogames. Sauf les trois exceptions mentionnées (Autriche, Hongrie, Tchéquie), ils s'équipent exclusivement en matériel américain, en général avec des avions F-16 (Lockheed Martin). Il en est de même des pays du nord de l'Europe (Norvège, Danemark, Pays-Bas, Belgique) tous équipés en matériel américain.

La tendance ne s'inverse pas

Aucun signe ne montre une inversion de tendance. Au contraire ! Les derniers pays qui viennent de s'équiper (Belgique, Roumanie, Slovaquie) l'ont fait avec du matériel américain. Et les Bulgares et Croates s'apprêtent à suivre ce chemin. Tandis que les Grecs qui vont devoir renouveler leur flotte se t'tent pour déterminer leur choix, qui sera largement guidé par le poids économique de l'investissement. Même les Suisses, équipés actuellement de F-18 de chez Boeing,, se demandent s'ils ne vont pas reprendre américain à nouveau.

Cette prééminence américaine pose un défi à l'industrie européenne, et à la velléité d'autonomie stratégique et industrielle des « 27 ».

L'équipement en avion de chasse est, en effet, un investissement lourd. Le renouvellement n'intervient que tous les 20 ans en cas d'achat d'occasion, et à 40 ans en cas d'achat en neuf.

Autant dire que les acquisitions prévues aujourd'hui vont réduire d'autant les capacités de l'industrie européenne jusqu'à 2060 minimum ! D'autant que l'arrivée de l'avion américain de nouvelle génération F-35 dans la flotte de plusieurs États (Belgique, Danemark, Italie, Pays-Bas, Royaume-Uni) risque de « siphonner » durablement les budgets de ces pays. Le futur avion franco-allemand-espagnol prévu pour 2035-2040 risque d'avoir un marché « bouché » et réduit à l'espace de ses pays constructeurs.

Cette inconséquence européenne est troublante. Mais plutôt que d'accuser les États-Unis d'interventionnisme industriel, les Européens devraient se regarder dans le miroir. L'industrie aéronautique européenne est aujourd'hui éclatée entre trois constructeurs (Airbus, Dassault, Saab). Ce qui l'empêche d'avoir un modèle unique et donc de faire des économies d'échelle. Elle ne dispose pas d'une offre de « second choix », les fameux F-16 d'occasion, qui permet de s'équiper à moindre coût. Et les pays européens sont incapables de proposer une offre complète, politique, économique, académique et opérationnelle, comme le font les Américains. Offre qui va de l'accueil des stagiaires officiers dans les écoles militaires aux facilités financières pour l'équipement, à la présence militaire, parfois permanente, dans le pays, à titre de réassurance politique.

Or, acheter un avion de chasse est une décision éminemment stratégique. Il ne s'agit pas seulement d'acquérir un véhicule aérien avec des capacités. On achète une « assurance-vie » et une protection militaire. Et on assure ainsi à cet allié un « retour » sur l'investissement politique et militaire. On bénéficie d'une culture stratégique et d'un réseau académique puissant. Tant que les Européens ne pourront offrir l'équivalent, l'avion de chasse, made in US, a de beaux jours devant lui.

https://www.euractiv.fr/section/commerce-industrie/news/les-europeens-achetent-de-plus-en-plus-davions-de-chasse-americains/

Sur le même sujet

  • Army Takes Its Radio Network Commercial

    21 août 2018 | International, C4ISR

    Army Takes Its Radio Network Commercial

    By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR. ARLINGTON: As the Army reboots its battlefield radio networks, it's jettisoning exquisitely custom-made military waveforms and moving to simpler — but more capable — commercial radio protocols. The move is underway on three fronts, Maj. Gen. David Bassett, the two-star Program Executive Officer for command, control & communications – Tactical (PEO C3T), says: The Army's already moving its backpack-mounted tactical radio, the Manpack, from the milspec Soldier Radio Waveform (SRW) to the commercial TSM waveform, with both Harris and Rockwell Collins now integrating TSM in their radios. (Special operators already use TSM). They're currently selecting vendors to do the same for their handheld Leader Radio, mainly used by junior and non-commissioned officers on foot. Bassett's staff told me to expect an award sometime in September. They're exploring alternatives to the Wideband Networking Waveform (WNW) as the “backbone” of the Army's tactical network. TSM is one candidate but there are others, including some still in development, Bassett told me in an interview here. It's all part of a wider effort to rebuild the Army's command, control, and communications (C3) networks for war against a high-tech great power. Speaking at a cyber and networks conference held here Aug. 2 by the Association of the US Army, Bassett said the Army will conduct operational testing of new command systems — including two lower-complexity alternatives to complement the current mainstay, JBC-P — and start fielding them, he said, “this fall.” Why the rush? Army systems like WIN-T(Warfighter Information Network – Tactical) worked adequately as long as we had big bases in Afghanistan and Iraq, with plenty of time to set up extensive infrastructure and minimal enemy interference. China and Russia, however, have cutting-edge cyber and electronic warfare attackers to hack the network software, powerful electronic warfare units to jam its transmissions, and long-range precision guided missiles that can easily target large, stationary command posts. So last year Army Chief of Staff Mark Milley ordered a crash program of improvements, cancelling planned WIN-T upgrades in favor of new technologies, many from the thriving commercial IT sector. “It was kind of a shock to the system,” the Army's Chief Information Officer, Lt. Gen. Bruce Crawford, told the AUSA conference. “The Army came forward and said there were some programs it wanted to halt and some things it fundamentally wanted to do differently.” Appealing To Industry Gen. Milley's announcement met with initial resistance, including on Capitol Hill, but inspired intense interest from industry. Maj. Gen. Bassett himself had come to the AUSA conference from a meeting in Raleigh, one corner of North Carolina's thriving“research triangle,” where he had briefed 400 representatives from some 126 companies. “Down in Raleigh, the challenge that I gave them was learn how you fit into our network design. Propose solutions that will fit into our network,” Bassett said. “We want them to become part of that infrastructure rather than competing with it.” https://breakingdefense.com/2018/08/army-takes-its-radio-network-commercial-can-you-hear-me-now

  • QinetiQ Signs Next-Phase Demonstrator Contract to Deliver Multi-Platform Innovative Synthetic Training Capability to the Royal Navy

    25 novembre 2022 | International, Naval

    QinetiQ Signs Next-Phase Demonstrator Contract to Deliver Multi-Platform Innovative Synthetic Training Capability to the Royal Navy

    The QinetiQ-Inzpire-BAE Systems team will deliver Phase 2 of PETC to the Carrier Strike Group in the summer and autumn of 2023

  • Pentagon Seeks New SatCom Tech For ‘Fully Networked C3’

    10 mars 2020 | International, C4ISR

    Pentagon Seeks New SatCom Tech For ‘Fully Networked C3’

    "Our fully networked C3 [Command, Control, & Communications] will look completely different" from current satellites and terminals, said OSD's Doug Schroeder. By THERESA HITCHENS SATELLITE 2020: The Pentagon wants industry ideas on how to craft a “fundamentally new architecture” for command, control and communications (C3) that will allow “any user using any terminal to connect to any other user using any other terminal,” says Doug Schroeder, who oversees the effort under the Office of Research and Engineering (R&E). This kind of omnipresent, all-service connectivity across land, sea, air, and space is essential for the Pentagon's rapidly evolving of future war, known as Joint-All Domain Operations. “Our Fully Networked C3 communications will look completely different. We have a new vision. We're crafting it with the help of industry,” he said. “We're relying on very heavily on industry, starting with this Broad Agency Announcement dated March 6,” which asks for companies to submit white papers in short order. According to Schroeder, the Space Development Agency (SDA) will be the funding authority. Vendors whose short, 10 to 15 page white papers are chosen will be invited at the end of April to a Pitch Day. Winners then will be given three months to develop a proposal; contracts for prototypes will be granted 24 months later. Speaking to a relatively sparse audience here at the annual commercial satellite industry conference, Satellite 2020 — which is underway despite the threat of the COVID-19 Coronavirus — Schroeder stressed: “We are going to take our new direction from you.” The new strategy, called Fully Networked C3 (FNC3), is being spearheaded by R&E director Mike Griffin and his assistant director for FNC3, Michael Zatman. According to the BAA, the first issued under the effort, the new strategy is being designed to “enable the DoD to reliably communicate with all its tactical and strategic assets.” C3 is one of Griffin's Top Ten areas of technology innovation for which DoD is developing an agency-wide development strategy. Specifically, DoD now is looking for “Beyond-Line-Of-Site (BLOS) communications systems for airborne, surface, and subsurface systems that is [sic] compatible with both FNC3 enabled systems and legacy systems,” the BAA states. The BAA calls for White Papers to be submitted by March 30 for three different types of BLOS technologies: 1. Protected Radio Frequency (RF) BLOS Communications. 2. Multi-User/Multi-Point High-Data-Rate Laser Communications. 3. Communications with submerged assets. R&E intends to “develop, prototype, and demonstrate each innovative communications capability with the goal of transitioning the technologies into programs of record,” the BAA said. To ensure speedy results, DoD will use Other Transaction Authority (OTA) for prototyping (found under 10 U.S. Code § 2371b.) Much of the detail about the effort is contained in classified annexes. What we do know: Beyond-Line-Of-Sight communications relayed through satellites generally require equipping platforms — such as aircraft, ships, and ground vehicles — with high-throughput voice and data links, capabilities all of the services have expressed interest in. In particular, after years of little progress, Griffin has reinvigorated DoD interest in optical communications via laser links, in large part due to fears about Russian and Chinese RF jamming. Commercial industry has been rushing to develop optical links to enable satellite-to-satellite data transmission, and the Space Development Agency is interested in that capability for its so-called transport layer of small satellites in Low Earth Orbit. Radio-frequency communications with submarines when underwater are generally limited to terse text messages, transmitted at very low frequencies (three to 30 kilohertz) and extremely low frequencies (three to 300 hertz) and requiring very large antennas to receie them. Research work is ongoing at MIT on how to link traditional underwater sonar to airborne RF receivers, a methodology called Translational Acoustic-RF) communication. Research also is ongoing, including at MIT's Lincoln Lab, on using narrow-beam lasers to allow one underwater vehicle to communicate with another. BLOS communications can also be accomplished without using satellites. Alternative method include tropospheric scatter using microwave radiation, high frequency (HF) wireless, unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) relays, and passive reflector systems. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/03/pentagon-seeks-new-satcom-tech-for-fully-networked-c3

Toutes les nouvelles