Rafales on the upswing? French fighter eyes additional Mideast sales

Sur le même sujet

• 

  7 novembre 2018 | International, Aérospatial

  Bell Seeks FAA IFR Certification of 407 GXi, As Required by Navy in Trainer Competition

  While the FAA has validated the design of the Bell 407 GXi, Bell [TXT] continues to seek IFR certification of the rotorcraft in advance of the U.S. Navy competition to replace its fleet of TH-57 Sea Ranger training helicopters."Validation of an aircraft design... Full article: http://www.defensedaily.com/bell-seeks-faa-ifr-certification-407-gxi-required-navy-trainer-competition

• 

  17 août 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

  China’s industry reaps the benefits of political connections, international trade

  By: Mike Yeo MELBOURNE, Australia — China's defense companies continue their strong showing in the Defense News Top 100 list, with two of its companies in this year's top 10. The Aviation Industry Corporation of China, or AVIC (landing in 6th place), and China North Industries Group Corporation Limited, also known as NORINCO (8th place), reported defense-related revenue figures of $25.07 billion and $14.77 billion respectively. A third Chinese company in last years top 10, China Aerospace and Science Industry Corporation, or CASIC, dropped one place to 11th in this year's list. Overall, eight Chinese state-owned defense companies made it into this year's Top 100 ranking of defense companies around the world, including China's two largest shipbuilding conglomerates — China Shipbuilding Industry Corporation and China State Shipbuilding Corporation — which merged in November 2019 to create China State Shipbuilding Corporation Limited, or CSSC. Signs of growth China's industrial base has been the beneficiary of the country's economic reform efforts and globalization since the 1970s. The state of Chinese industry took a quantum leap with the end of the Cold War; the Asian economic powerhouse reaped the benefit of an exposure to advanced technology and modern manufacturing methods. These advances have transferred over to its defense industry, partly as a result of the transfer of civilian technologies, which are not restricted by Western sanctions on arms sales, implemented in response to China's human rights record, or obtained from countries that are not a party to those sanctions, like Russia and Ukraine. As a result, China's defense industry is today virtually unrecognizable from its early days when it mostly made both licensed and unlicensed copies of Soviet-era equipment. The most obvious of this is the continuing acquisition by China of the Russian Sukhoi Flanker family of fighter jets, which has subsequently seen the Asian country churn out increasingly capable analogs of their Russian counterparts. Beginning in the early 1990s with the acquisition and license production of the Su-27 interceptor, which has since morphed into the Shenyang J-11B equipped with indigenous avionics and weapons, China has subsequently imported the multirole Su-30 and Su-35 interceptors. The former has formed the basis of the Shenyang J-16, and it is likely both Russian types may form the technological basis for continued upgrades to the J-11 design. The unprecedented modernization of the People's Liberation Army over the past two decades in lockstep with China's economic development has also meant that the defense industry has been lavishly funded to equip a captive home market. Meia Nouwens, research fellow for Chinese defense policy and military modernization at the London-based International Institute of Strategic Studies, which helped Defense News compile the Top 100 data for Chinese defense companies, noted that President Xi Jinping is prioritizing defense at a national level as part of an effort to simultaneously pursue geostrategic goals and economic development. The national leadership's political will to transform China into a global power “should not be overlooked,” she said. She added that China's defense industry is capable of producing high-quality, high-tech defense products, although companies “still seeks to cooperate with international counterparts in academia and industry to gain access to cutting-edge know-how, skills and technology.” This has taken place alongside a large investment in domestic research and development, which Nouwens said has led to breakthroughs, specifically in the development of China's air-to-air missiles and quantum technology. For his part, Xi has promoted “the slimming down of large conglomerates, increased coordination with the [People's Liberation Army], enhanced effectiveness and sought to reduce the duplication of efforts,” she added. Export potential China's ongoing military modernization efforts means the local defense industry doesn't need to rely on the export market to sustain itself. Nevertheless, Nouwens said, Chinese defense conglomerates may be encouraged to increase exports given that Xi wants them to become increasingly self-sufficient and globally competitive. She added that the trend of defense exports and transfers being a cornerstone of Chinese diplomacy is likely to continue. The most obvious manifestation of this is China's continued export of materiel to Pakistan as well as the assistance Beijing has provided to developing the South Asian country's own defense industrial base. A side effect of this support included wedging China's geostrategic rival India, who is also frequently at odds with Pakistan. Nouwens also touched on the two-tier policy when it comes to China's defense exports, with its top-of-the-line equipment unavailable for export. However, she noted, China has improved the capabilities of defense articles available for export, including submarine technology, more modern frigates and collaboration with Pakistan in developing the JF-17 fighter jet. The latter has also been exported to Myanmar and Nigeria. One of China's most prominent exports remains its unmanned aircraft, with Nouwens noting that this market segment provided China with a “perfect combination of a capability that addressed a certain gap at a cost significantly cheaper than competitors on the market.” The window of opportunity has narrowed, however, with the U.S. having relaxed its own UAV export regulations. Countries like Jordan, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, which have all acquired Chinese unmanned aircraft, may now turn to American designs instead; Jordan has already put up its Chinese-built CH-4 drones for sale. Despite reforms, Nouwens said, China's defense industry is bloated and, in some cases, requires further streamlining, with several of the industry's conglomerates involved in sectors as varied as hospitals and schools. https://www.defensenews.com/top-100/2020/08/17/chinas-industry-reaps-the-benefits-of-political-connections-international-trade/

• 

  25 novembre 2019 | International, Aérospatial

  Lockheed And Pentagon Joust Over Lucrative F-35 Data Rights

  Steve Trimble, Lee Hudson and Michael Bruno An ongoing legal dispute between the U.S. government and Lockheed Martin over intellectual property (IP) rights in the F-35 program has emerged as the source of a 2.5-year delay in activating a key system required to complete initial operational testing and the full-rate production decision. Involving the Pentagon's largest single weapons program ever—and with full-rate production critical to Lockheed's long-term profitability—the dispute has waylaid progress for both sides. But not only is the matter holding up the program, it may set a precedent for the military's increasing reliance on software and the government's desire to reap data-based rewards. “We still do have concerns,” says U.S. Air Force Lt. Gen. Eric Fick, F-35 program executive officer. “We don't need all the data, but the data that we need, it's important that we pursue it.” “We also have fundamental standards that we need to set down so that it is very, very clear,” adds Ellen Lord, undersecretary of defense for acquisition and sustainment. The military's open-air test ranges lack the capacity to fully test the F-35's advanced capabilities, so the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) office is relying on the activation of the Joint Simulation Environment (JSE). The JSE creates a synthetic world that allows operational testers to gauge the F-35's performance in theater-level scenarios, with multiple aircraft flying against an adversary's full arsenal of fighters, missiles and electronic warfare capabilities. The JSE was supposed to be activated in late 2017 but now is scheduled to achieve the first-use milestone in July 2020, Robert Behler, the head of DOT&E, told lawmakers Nov. 13 during a House Armed Services subcommittee hearing on F-35 readiness. The DOT&E has completed 91% of open-air missions during the Initial Operational Test & Evaluation phase required to qualify the F-35 for a full-rate production decision, but the testers still need to use the JSE to complete all of the testing. According to Fick's testimony, the IP dispute has delayed activation of the JSE. The JSE requires Lockheed to supply the software to enable a function nicknamed “F-35 in a Box,” he says. This is a software module that allows the JSE to virtually replicate each of the F-35's sensor subsystems, along with the sensor fusion brain embedded in the operational flight program. The government would then add software modules to replicate various threats, including aircraft, weapons and sensors of various adversaries. A dispute arose because Lockheed asserted an IP claim over nine specific algorithms that were included in the “F-35 in a Box” software package, the general says. The program office responded by bringing in the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) to review Lockheed's records. The DCAA's auditors determined they could not find the proof in Lockheed's records that the nine algorithms had been developed solely at Lockheed's expense. Since Lockheed failed to prove its claim, the DCAA determined the nine algorithms belonged to the government. Lockheed has appealed the DCAA's decision to the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals, where it is still being adjudicated, the general told lawmakers. The dispute over the JSE feeds into a larger source of tension between the government and contractors over IP rights. Lord testified that her office is in the final stages of approving a new, Pentagon-wide policy on preserving the government's rights to IP in acquisition contracts. The policy will be modeled on an approach adopted late last year by the Army, which requires program managers to establish the government's IP rights on specific systems up front, rather than treat the issue as an afterthought. “Before we put together an acquisition strategy, you have to think about what information is critical to a program, particularly in terms of sustainability, so that you're not always held hostage to the prime on that through the life of the contract and [so] that you can find better cost solutions through a variety of different providers,” she said. Still, the new approach could challenge the business models of prime contractors and suppliers, who traditionally have eaten costs up front or bid low to win weapons contracts, with the intent of making money in the two-thirds of the life cycle of the program that includes sustainment. At an Aviation Week defense conference years ago, defense executives were asked to address the idea of giving up IP rights to the government and were determined to resist. “No!” yelled one executive in the closed-door gathering. Indeed, the new policy—which will not require explicit congressional blessing, as it is internal rulemaking—still faces questions by industry lobbying groups, including the Aerospace Industries Association (AIA). John Luddy, AIA's vice president for national security policy, said IP policymaking is “probably the most important” issue currently between his trade lobby group and defense leaders. Industry is not yet behind the emerging Pentagon policy, he indicated during the ComDef 2019 conference in October, because it does not strike the proper “balance,” in industry's view, to allow it to reap profits while letting the government contract to sustain weapon systems more affordably. “We think [it] is headed toward the right kind of balance, but I would just encourage that to continue—we're engaged quite a bit with the department on that,” Luddy said. “We have to find that balance.” Diana Maurer, director of defense capabilities and management at the Government Accountability Office, noted that her auditing office flagged the IP issue in 2014 and is happy to see the Pentagon make progress on the issue. But the changing nature of warfare systems means the issue will likely only grow. “Weapon systems today are essentially flying or sailing or moving pieces of software, and the intellectual property is an important piece of that.” https://aviationweek.com/defense/lockheed-and-pentagon-joust-over-lucrative-f-35-data-rights