xav

"Envoyez le Clemenceau"

IOC delayed to 2015... http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a38d9dc26-e763-4439-b2f2-8c294637603e&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest Study: No Cost Difference for F-35 Alternate Engine http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4517151&c=AME&s=AIR

Je pense qu'il voulait simuler un atterrissage court... Mais c'est vrai que j'ai pas trouvé cela trés court.

concernant la politique: Dutch government could fall on Afghan troop deployment debate AMSTERDAM-The Dutch parliament has called an emergency debate on whether to keep 1,600 troops in Afghanistan in a political fight that is threatening to pull down the government. As the debate begins it appears a majority is set to instruct the Cabinet to depart the restive southern province of Uruzgan this year. The ruling Christian Democrats prefer to remain in Uruzgan. But its main coalition partner, the Labor Party, insists the soldiers leave after their NATO mission expires in August. An ultimatum from parliament would leave Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende with little choice but to agree or see his government collapse. A possible compromise would send most troops home and move the rest to a province seen as less dangerous. The debate begins Thursday afternoon. (copied from toronto stars)

Plein de news pas bonne :oops: Stunning Reversal -- Schwartz Expects a Cost Breach on JSF Posted by Amy Butler at 2/22/2010 1:59 PM CST In a stunning reversal Feb. 19, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz told reporters that a Joint Strike Fighter cost overrun is "possible, maybe even likely." This is only a few short weeks after he expressed more optimism that a breach of the Nunn McCurdy statute was not likely. Apparently, like Defense Secretary Robert Gates said during his Feb. 1 budget briefing, Schwartz says he now knows more about the program. Lockheed Martin officials continue to say the cost of the aircraft is coming in under the predicted costs of the most recent selected acquisition report (SAR -- a cost report that informs Congress of major shifts to pricing of Pentagon programs). The next SAR goes to Congress in March, and it is looking more and more likely that a "critical" breach will occur. This means that either the APUC (average per unit cost -- the total procurement cost divided by the procurement quantity) or the PAUC (program acquisition unit cost -- the cost of procurement, development and construction divided by the total procurement quantity) exceeds the original baseline price by 50%. The PAUC is the troublesome piece for the F-35. The cost predications Lockheed cites refer only to the flyaway price, which does not include the rising cost of development. According to a December 2009 CRS report, development cost about $47.1 billion. The Fiscal 201 budget request boosts that by about $2.8 billion. So ... assuming the Nunn McCurdy is breached, what is next? Typically, the secretary of defense must certify that: *the program is critical to national security *no alternatives exist to provide equal capability at a reduced cost *PAUC and APUC are reasonable, and *program management is adequate to control PAUC and APUC. The first two should be relatively easy for DoD,especially given the momentum behind the program. What is tough are the final two elements: are the prices reasonable and under control? It will be interesting to see how DoD defines reasonable (compared to what?) and how they are able to prove that management is sound enough to control future costs. Gates has fired Marine Corps Maj. Gen. Heinz ... and his replacement, a three-star admiral, is coming. But, Lockheed has not changed its management structure - Tom Burbage and Dan Crowley. During his press briefing Friday, Schwartz said that "Dan Crowley doesn't work for the SecDef," but that "he's short $600 million," referring to Gates's withhold of $614 worth of award fee from the company for its poor adherence to the test schedule and production of flight test assets. Schwartz did not, however, call for a change in leadership at Lockheed. "What occurred with the F-35 program was only a start," though, he said. What could happen after a Nunn McCurdy declaration, however, would be to catch the interest of a lawmaker who could order a full review of the program. Remember what happened with the USAF plan to lease tankers to Boeing in 2001-2002 and what that sparked. One inquisitive lawmaker could put a major strain on the program. It will be interesting to see whether Congress delves further into its oversight role in the massive program. http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3abeeb2766-2716-4993-a106-92de8bb38bd9&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest Pentagon Reports Document Continuing Lockheed-Martin Failures (excerpt) The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is facing even more delays and problems than have been made public, according to reports by the Defense Contract Management Agency. (Lockheed Marttin photo) Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), the CDI Straus Military Reform Project has obtained almost two years of monthly reports from the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) on Lockheed Martin’s production of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The documents do not paint a pretty picture, explains Straus Military Reform Project Director Winslow Wheeler. The Defense Contract Management Agency’s (DCMA) most recent reports cover the months July through November 2009. The full reports are available below. Their major points, as summarized by Winslow Wheeler, are as follows: -- The F-35 assembly line at Forth Worth, Texas is being cannibalized for parts to support flight testing. This may be the first time an assembly line has been cannibalized for parts. See the summary of the August report below. -- The continuing and sometimes deteriorating nature of the delays at Lockheed-Martin’s (L-M) Fort Worth plant refutes the L-M contention that things are getting better, and that the F-35 program learned from the past and with new design techniques is avoiding the kinds of problems experienced by “legacy” aircraft programs. -- The cause, nature and implications of the “stand-down” mentioned in the November report could well be important, but are unreported by the press and are a matter looking for explanation. (end of excerpt) Click here for the full article (with links to DCMA reports) on the CDI website. http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/release/112708/dcma-reports-document-lockheed%E2%80%99s-continuing-failures-on-jsf.html# Allez pour pas etre trop mechant voici une video du 17 février (mais il est pas beau quand meme!) http-~~-//www.youtube.com/watch?v=vo1xoNoi3uM&feature=player_embedded

02/25/2010 Rafale v Super Hornet Even though the company's chairman and chief executive, Charles Edelstenne, isn’t very optimistic about Rafale’s chances, (IOL609), according to our information Dassault last week submitted a tender to supply 28 armed aircraft to Kuwait. The total price, undermined by problems with arabic translation, is € 3.9 billion, plus € 800 million for weapons. Boeing, meanwhile, offers its F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and even offered to buy the old Kuwaiti F/A-18C and F/A-18D http://www.intelligenceonline.com/Identification/p_identification.asp?rub=login&lang=ANG&service=BRE&context=BOI&doc_i_id=81062901

Robert Gates qui manque pas d'air... Gates Not Happy With Europe's 'Demilitarization' NATO faces a "crisis" as European countries have grown averse to military force and failed to invest in weapons and equipment, US Defense Secretary Robert Gates said

On va quand meme pas leur filer des -5 / D / N !

http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0210/022210cdpm1.htm House Republicans joined forces with US Navy leaders to push DoD for another batch of Super Hornet + Growler multi-year supply deal, saying that this would make up fighter shortfalls and have a saving of upto $500 million.

C'est vrai que je trouve cela curieux qu'ils balance cela en derniere ligne/derniere phrase alors que c'est LE point le plus croustillant/intéressant/inédit de l'article. Bon aprés TTU ils sont trés fiable d'habitude non? (même si ils ne sont plus acheté par le ministere de la défense depuis une histoire avec Morin ou quelque chose de ce genre)

^ Ou veux tu en venir?

Un article sur la Rafale au Bresil sorti aujourd'hui chez TTU http://www.ttu.fr/francais/Articles/Industrie%20%26%20materiels/brasdeferbresil.html Les 2000-9 feraient partie du package pour faire pencher la balance en notre faveur... Les mirages sont ils en plus des Rafales? Ou bien en attendant les 1ers Rafales livrés (puis l'Adla les recuperes? Ou bien on les revend encore?)

Israel Commissions One Ton UAV Bomber Jerusalem: A new drone that can remain airborne for more than 24 hours and reach as far as Iran was added Sunday to the Israeli air force's arsenal, the military said. Described by the army as a "technological breakthrough" the Eitan -- which means strong in Hebrew -- is a Heron-TP type drone with a wingspan of 26 metres (85 feet), similar to that of the Boeing 737. It is 24 metres (79 feet) long, weighs 4.5 tonnes and can remain in the air for more than 24 hours, enabling it to fly as far as Iran, Israel's arch-foe. The drone was built by Israel Aerospace Industries in cooperation with the air force and is equipped with radar, cameras and high-tech electronic equipment including mapping devices. The drone can reach an altitude of 13,000 metres (43,000 feet) and carry payloads of about one tonne. "This aircraft constitutes a very important turning point in the development of unmanned aircraft," Air Force chief General Ido Nehustan was quoted as saying.

Je savais pas trop ou poster cela... mais ça vaut son pesant d'or... Tout le monde pensait que les M2000 Taiwanais étaient sous cocons, que la situation etait tendue entre Dassault/La france et Taiwan etc etc mais en fait non http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4478925&c=FEA&s=INT ;) Article du 1er Fevrier.

Il n'y a pas de photos ou de video d' AASM avec le moteur en route? (il y a une trainée blanche ou pas?)

4-year plan calls for fewer JSFs, more mobility By Bruce Rolfsen - Staff writer Posted : Sunday Feb 21, 2010 9:12:41 EST The Air Force has its marching orders. Every four years, Congress requires the Defense Department to map out where the services will head in the coming four years. For the Air Force, the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review gives the OK to ideas that have support but no money to make them happen — more trainers for foreign militaries and new light-attack and light-airlift planes. But the QDR, released Feb. 1, also lacks details and ignores some missions entirely. For generals and politicians, there’s plenty of room to make their cases about the best road forward. What’s there More trainers: Thousands of airmen – no number is specified — will be assigned to deploy and work with foreign air forces. A close partnership: Greater integration of Air Force and Navy missions is called for in a program labeled the “joint air-sea battle concept.” Besides cooperation at the tactical level, the QDR envisions a joint approach to deciding which aircraft and missiles can best perform long-range strike. Shrinking fighters: The QDR lays out a fleet of 1,224 “primary aircraft” for the Air Force. The total is 539 fewer planes than the 1,763 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters that the Air Force wants to buy in the next 20 years. Air Force officials refused to discuss the difference until after they brief lawmakers on their portion of the QDR, starting the week of Feb. 7. Greater mobility: A force of 1,056 tankers and airlifters is the QDR goal. The Air Force would still get only the 223 C-17s it already has on order but would pick up an unspecified number of small C-27 cargo planes. Defense Secretary Robert Gates hasn’t been shy about stopping production of the C-17. He dropped it from the 2010 defense budget; Congress put it back in. More ISR: Intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance — three missions that the Air Force has repeatedly said it is expanding. The QDR puts weight behind the words: 380 remote-controlled and manned surveillance planes and 65 round-the-clock patrols by 2015. The Air Force now has about 190 remote-controlled reconnaissance planes and flies 39 patrols. Better surveillance: Today’s remote-controlled planes lack the stealth and speed to avoid advanced missile defenses. The QDR calls for surveillance aircraft able to fly in heavily defended airspace. New gunships: The number of AC-130 gunships grows by eight, to 33. Starting in 2012, the service and U.S. Special Operations Command will convert 16 C-130Js into AC-130s, allowing the Air Force to retire eight AC-130Hs. What’s missing Specifics: The QDR is long on big ideas but short on details. For example, no mention is made of when a long-range bomber should be operational or how many airmen should be in uniform. CSAR’s future: When Gates killed the Air Force’s new combat search-and-rescue helicopter program in 2009, he promised a departmentwide review of the CSAR mission. The word “rescuer” doesn’t appear in the QDR. Operational tempo: The QDR promises to reduce operational tempo so that troops gone for a year have at least two years at home before deploying. But the review offers no deadlines or instructions for how the services should reach that goal. The “4.5 generation fighter”: Air National Guard advocates pushed the Pentagon to consider buying upgraded versions of the F-16 and F-15E instead of only the F-35. There’s no mention of pursuing the latest versions of the nonstealthy fighters. Electronic warfare fighters: The Air Force isn’t getting its own tactical electronic warfare protection. It will continue to depend on its own planes equipped with jamming pods or on Marine Corps and Navy jets. The Air Force’s cyberspace role: While the study trumpets plans for a joint cyber command, there are no specifics on how each service fits into the master plan.

De toutes façons il y a des projets de A310 patmar deja dans les cartons

Le probleme aussi des bombes GPS c'est qu'elles peuvent etre brouillées (Rappelez-vous l'ambassade de Chine qui fut bombardée pendant la campagne du Kosovo... il parait que les Chinois expérimentaient un tel système et ont reçu des bombes pour cela... enfin ça fait partie des rumeurs) La version AASM IR c'est pour contrer ce possible brouillage GPS local? Ou bien le systeme inertiel est censé suffire si le signal GPS disparait/devient incoherent?

Projet indien je crois http://i45.tinypic.com/149ssn.jpg

Désolé, voici les sources: http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2010/02/uae-missile-demands-and-more-r.html http://www.intelligenceonline.com/corporate-intelligence/2010/02/11/boeing-missiles-on-rafales%2C80112537-BRE-wallet

http://www.mbda-systems.com/mbda/site/ref/scripts/EN_Exocet-MM40-Block-3_108.html Quelle est la difference entre littoral et coastal ? littoral = plage et coastal = ? une vingtaine de KM à l'interieur des terres? Vraiment? les version AM et SM existent pas en Blk III? C'est prévu au moins?

UAE missile demands and more Rafale v. Raptor rumors The United Arab Emirates has dropped a bombshell on France's Dassault, according to this UPI story today. Before it agrees to buy 60 Rafale fighters, the UAE wants Dassault to integrate Boeing's standoff land attack missile-expanded response (SLAM-ER), instead of the MBDA AM-39 Exocet. Sacre bleu! And so continues the most tortuous contract negotiations since Boeing offered to lease 100 767s to the US Air Force. Meanwhile, back in Paris, the Armee de l'Air leaks to French newsweekly Air & Cosmos, providing a few more tidbits about what happened between the Raptor and the Rafale at the Al Dhafra exercise late last year. According to Air & Cosmos' sources, the USAF requested only two training sorties between the F-22 and the Rafale of three engagements each, with one-on-one combat within visual range. [in other words, the USAF says, "If you don't turn on your Spectra system, we won't turn on our ALR-94."] In those six engagements, the F-22 scored one gun kill, but the other five dogfights ended in a draw, Air & Cosmos says. Another sources tells the magazine the F-22 scored two gun kills, with four nulls. 1- C'est quoi ces conneries? Pourquoi comparer Exocet (meme si le Blk III a une ground attack capacity) et le SLAMER? Ils n'ont rien à voir les deux... En plus ils ont deja le black shaheen et au pire du pire ils peuvent toujour demander le SCALP 2- Admettons que Dassault est OK pour intégrer le SLAM/ER mais que Boeing ne veut pas... Les EAU peuvent quand meme pas tenir Dassault responsable de cela si? Et si Boeing est d'accord (dans un monde hypothetique) qui paye? Le client (EAU) ou Boeing + Dassault (histoire que ce soit donant donant, car au final les deux y gagnent)

Australia commits $2.6 billion to buy 14 F-35s. US tells Aussies to pay more Australia previously committed AUD $3 billion(US $2.6 billion dollars) to buy 14 F-35s, but this apparently isn't enough. Visiting US Deputy Secretary of Defense Bill Lynn instead brought the bad news; he doesn't know what the final cost would be, but it will cost more(than previously announced US $2.6 billion) and faces an additional 14 month delay, assuming accelerated testing goes well. Previous unit cost was US $185 million per plane, so this delay would push the unit cost past US $200 million per copy. At US $200 million per copy, one must ask question of why the US is even bothering with F-35, when an F-22 could be had for less. 200 millions $ l'unité

Les FREMM, NH90, et Tigre ont elles un cout actuel plus bas que le cout initial car ils sont exportés? (ça fait quand meme bizarre de voire cela alors qu'au final on en commande plus, et que dans la grande majorité des cas c'est l'inverse dans les contrats militaires les couts enflent... d'ou les nouveau types de contrat ''fixed costs") Bref donc si on exporte le Rafale, son cout actuel passera egalement en dessous du cout inital? Si oui, ça serait l'occasion d'en acheter plus... mais on voit bien que ce n'est pas (encore?) le cas avec les FREMM, NH90 et Tigre

Donc plutot un a340mrtt... Le 330/KC30 n'est pas assé gros pour eux?