14 juin 2019 | International, Aérospatial
Pascal Schmuck avec ats
Le Gripen E de Saab est exclu de la procédure d'évaluation pour un nouvel avion de combat. La décision a été prise par l'Office fédéral de l'armement (armasuisse) après que le constructeur suédois a indiqué qu'il ne participerait pas aux essais en vol.
Un rattrapage ultérieur des tests en vol et au sol irait à l'encontre de l'égalité de traitement de tous les candidats et n'est pas une option, indique jeudi armasuisse dans un communiqué. Saab avait précédemment indiqué que le calendrier de développement de son avion n'était pas adapté au plan suisse visant à tester des appareils pleinement opérationnels dès 2019.
Solutions alternatives
Saab avait soumis diverses solutions alternatives pour pouvoir participer aux essais en vol de cette année. Armasuisse avait rejeté la proposition du constructeur suédois de mettre à disposition un Gripen C pleinement opérationnel en plus d'un avion d'essai Gripen E pour les tests en vol et au sol.
Saab estime que d'autres concurrents ont également démontré leurs capacités sur des plateformes existantes, qui diffèrent des versions définitives à livrer.
Dans la procédure d'évaluation en vue de l'acquisition d'un nouvel avion de combat - en remplacement du F/A-18 - l'avion furtif Lockheed Martin F-35, le F/A-18 Super Hornet de Boeing, le Rafale du constructeur français Dassault et l'Eurofighter d'Airbus restent en course. Ils ont subi de nombreux essais en vol à Payerne (VD).
Les essais en vol font partie de la procédure d'évaluation concernant l'acquisition d'un nouvel avion de combat à partir de 2025, pour un montant maximal de six milliards de francs. Le choix du type d'appareil reviendra au Conseil fédéral.
«Le meilleur choix»
Dans son communiqué, Saab se disait convaincu que le Gripen E représente le meilleur choix pour la Suisse. Ce modèle se distingue de ses concurrents en étant le tout dernier système d'avions de combat, selon le constructeur suédois. Sa production a déjà commencé et le premier avion sera livré cette année.
L'offre soumise en janvier dernier est toujours valable. Saab est prêt à s'engager à livrer 40 Gripen E-fighter dans les délais et à respecter toutes les spécifications et le budget prévu. L'offre inclut également un programme de support complet, impliquant les fournisseurs locaux, afin d'assurer des coûts d'exploitation les plus bas possible, ainsi que la plus grande autonomie.
Déjà un échec en 2014
Lors du dernier processus d'acquisition d'un nouvel avion de combat, Saab avait déjà proposé à la Suisse l'achat du Gripen E, en commun avec les forces aériennes suédoises. A l'époque, le calendrier de développement prévoyait une livraison à la Suisse en 2021.
Mais, en mai 2014, la population a rejeté en votation l'achat de 22 avions de combat Gripen pour 3,1 milliards de francs. Saab a alors modifié le calendrier et l'a adapté aux besoins de la Suède et du Brésil.
Comparaison au second semestre 2020
Pour chaque candidat, armasuisse, en coopération avec l'Etat-major de l'armée, les Forces aériennes, la Base logistique de l'armée et la Base d'aide au commandement, rassemblera dans des rapports spécialisés les résultats de la phase d'analyse et d'essais.
Ces rapports techniques constitueront la base d'une comparaison systématique et complète entre les différents candidats, qui sera effectuée au cours du second semestre 2020. Ils serviront également à déterminer pour chaque modèle d'avion la taille nécessaire de la flotte.
Sur cette base, armasuisse préparera un deuxième appel d'offres, conformément au calendrier actuel, et le remettra aux candidats. Une fois les résultats reçus, l'office fédéral comparera les différents postulants sur la base des rapports spécialisés et déterminera l'utilité globale pour chacun d'entre eux.
Un rapport d'évaluation sera ensuite établi, dans lequel l'utilité globale sera comparée aux coûts d'acquisition et de fonctionnement pendant trente ans. (nxp)
https://www.tdg.ch/suisse/Saab-retire-le-Gripen-des-essais-pour-l-armee/story/19614607
14 novembre 2022 | International, Aérospatial
Acquérir des avions de combat pour plusieurs milliards d'euros est toujours un investissement important. Mais il n'est qu'une partie des dépenses qu'il
12 mars 2019 | International, Aérospatial
By: Valerie Insinna EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE, Fla. — The F-35 fighter jet's logistics backbone has proven so clunky and burdensome to work with that the U.S. Air Force's instructor pilots, as well as students learning to fly the aircraft, have stopped using a key piece of the system, Defense News has learned. The Autonomic Logistics Information System, built by F-35 manufacturer Lockheed Martin, was supposed to consolidate training, maintenance and supply chain management functions into a single entity, making it easier for users to input data and oversee the jet's health and history throughout its life span. ALIS has been a disappointment to maintainers in the field, with updates coming behind schedule and many workarounds needed so it functions as designed. But the Air Force's F-35A instructor and student pilots at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, and Luke Air Force Base, Arizona, were so disappointed with the performance of ALIS' training system that they bailed entirely, confirmed Col. Paul Moga, commander of Eglin's 33rd Fighter Wing. “The functionality in ALIS with regards to TMS — the training management system — was such a source of frustration and a time waste to the instructor pilots and the simulator instructors and the academic instructors that we at [Air Education and Training Command] in coordination with us [at Eglin] and Luke made a call almost a year ago to stop using the program,” Moga said during a Feb. 26 interview. Moga said the command's F-35 training squadrons are “not going to start using TMS again until it works.” So in the meantime, F-35A training squadrons have adopted a legacy system, Northrop Grumman's Global Training Integrated Management System. GTIMS is used by the Air Force, Army and Navy across a number of aircraft inventories to manage training schedules and cut the man-hours and costs associated with doing that work, according to a Northrop fact sheet. At this point, GTIMS provides a more agile, efficient user experience than ALIS' training management system, Moga said. But it doesn't sync with ALIS, so pilots and instructors must do “double data entry” so that each system has a record of flight records, currencies and qualifications. Full article: https://www.defensenews.com/air/2019/03/08/key-piece-of-f-35-logistics-system-unusable-by-us-air-force-students-instructor-pilots/
29 juillet 2020 | International, Terrestre
By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — The U.S. Army is still considering two different paths to build prototypes for its future long-range assault aircraft following an industry day earlier this month, but is pushing toward a contract award in fiscal 2022, according to the service's FLRAA program manager. While the Army continues to sift through industry feedback to help it choose a route, the service remains on track to publish a draft request for proposals by the end of the year, followed by a finalized RFP in FY21, Col. David Phillips told reporters July 24. The Army chose Bell and Lockheed Martin's Sikorsky to enter into a competitive demonstration and risk reduction effort ahead of the start of the FLRAA program of record. The service is on a tight timeline to field a brand-new, long-range assault aircraft by 2030. The CDRR effort will consist of two phases that will last roughly one year each. Bell and a Sikorsky-Boeing team respectively designed, built and flew technology demonstrator aircraft as part a Joint Multi-Role Technology Demonstration phase prior to entering the CDRR effort. The companies will deliver initial conceptual designs, an assessment of the feasibility of requirements and trade studies using model-based systems engineering. “Due to the success of phase one (awarded on 16 March) the Army is looking at the scope of a second phase which would refine the digital designs from the system to subsystem level and further burn down risk as FLRAA enters into the [program of record,” Phillips said in a written statement to Defense News on July 27. The Army provided two schedules to get through the design and prototyping phase in an RFI in May to gain industry feedback. The first schedule lasts 52 months, putting the end of the prototyping period somewhere in the ballpark of early summer 2026. The schedule allows for a preliminary design review for just the air vehicle from the winning team — picked in the second quarter of FY22 — eight months after the contract award. The team would then have another preliminary design review for the weapon systems 17 months past contract award, which roughly falls around August 2023. The Army would hit the engineering and manufacturing development phase around October 2023, followed by a critical design review in early 2025. The first prototype would be delivered in the summer of 2025, with five more prototypes delivered through the summer of 2026. The alternative schedule would allow for a preliminary design review for both the air vehicle and the weapon systems at the same time at roughly 10 months following a contract award. This approach aims to get to an engineering and manufacturing development decision around March 2023. A critical design review would follow at the start of 2024, with a first prototype delivery expected around February 2025. All six prototypes should be delivered to the Army by roughly March 2026. The total time frame for the second option is 48 months post contract award. While the difference in schedules is just roughly four months, every week counts as the Army works to field new capabilities as fast as possible. Army leaders have often said that schedule is king when it comes to fielding the service's top modernization priorities. FVL is the third-highest priority, preceded only by a Next-Generation Combat Vehicle and Long-Range Precision Fires. The Army is driving toward entering a production and deployment phase in 2028 ahead of the first unit receiving the aircraft in 2030. “We believe FLRAA's design and requirements approach is inverting the defense procurement paradigm. Our approach gives the Army multiple opportunities to optimize requirements through digital engineering prior to entering the design, build, and test of the weapons system,” Phillips told Defense News. “Making informed decisions on requirements through design optimization will enable the Army to ensure FLRAA capabilities are affordable; meet [Multi-Domain Operations] requirements; and deliver on an aggressive schedule that does not sacrifice rigor for speed.” Multi-Domain Operations is the Army's war-fighting doctrine designed to operate and fight against anticipated future adversaries across land, sea, air and cyberspace Bell and Lockheed are also competing head-to-head to design and build the Army's future attack reconnaissance aircraft, which will follow a nearly simultaneous schedule as the FLRAA competition. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2020/07/28/army-still-mulling-different-paths-to-build-long-range-assault-helo-prototypes/