g4lly

Le fait qu'il volent plus bas 10m vs 3m ne change pas grand chose du moins a ce moment là de l'interception. Le radar de poursuite associé a l'optronique vont avoir du mal a rater un bidule filant 800kmh et crachant des flammes !

http://www.defpro.com/daily/details/359/ A new concept of recoilless grenade weapons Dynamit Novel Defence also presented a new development in recoilless grenade weapons (RGW), called “Wirkmittel 90”, which further increases the company’s spectrum of shoulder-fired weapons. The system is based on the RGW 90 family, however, introduces an entirely new concept. The Wirkmittel 90 solution, which currently is being researched in cooperation with the Bundeswehr, will surpass the usually effective range of unguided shoulder-fired weapons of some 500 to 600 metres, to precisely target, for instance, light armoured vehicles, dismounted enemy soldiers or light structures at ranges up to 1,200 metres. The system is scheduled to be operational by 2014. The grenade integrates a new programmable fuse that can be set to different modes, depending on the target. Hence, the warhead may detonate either straight on the target, above the target in mid-air or delayed for wall-breaching use. This has been accomplished by integrating a new weapons sight and a new fire-control computer in the reusable firing device. The barrel will be exchanged after the grenade has been launched. The already fielded RGW 90 has already proven its value in various tests due to its dual-mode warhead, providing a High Explosive Anti Tank (HEAT) round against armoured vehicles or a High Explosive Squash Head (HESH) round to penetrate walls, bunkers or other fortified emplacements. Why not use guided anti-tank weapons for such high ranges? Even though it enters the spectrum of this technologically higher weapon class, the Wirkmittel 90 is lighter (at 10 kg it can be carried by one person, including a paratrooper), is less expensive (why use a costly guided missile on an un-armoured Jeep?), and offers various modes of application. Thomas Meuter, Head of Public Relations, stresses that the company’s approach with the RGW-family and the Wirkmittel 90 is to provide different capabilities in one weapon. The company wants to increase the soldiers’ capabilities beyond the traditional anti-tank mode of application. DND’s shoulder-fired weapons family allows attacking lightly protected targets (e.g. enemy emplacements, light-armoured vehicles), armoured vehicles and bunkers. Its wall-breaching capability perfectly meets troop requirements in military operations in urban territory (MOUT), especially because RGW’s may be fired from within a rather small room as the blast to the rear is widely deflected to the sides. This allows soldiers to observe a target from a well-sheltered emplacement and quickly aim and fire without leaving cover for an extended time. As Meuter explains, Dynamit Nobel Defence has identified a trend in the military which requires a precision strike capability with a light and flexible weapon against a variety of targets – lightly or heavily armoured – at distances exceeding 500 metres. The existing weapons of the RGW 90 family have already proven to be in demand: DND has sold the system to the Slovenian and the Singapore Armed Forces. Furthermore, the United Kingdom will soon be provided with the RGW 90 after an important tender was won. “With the help of an interface, it is technologically possible to adapt both, the Panzerfaust as well as the RGW 90, to any weapon station currently available in Germany. It may be added as a single-shot solution or as a multi-grenade launcher, for instance, with four or six integrated barrels. This provides the weapons station with an additional valuable capability,” stated Meuter. As the system can still be used in a dismounted shoulder-launched mode, it furthermore saves transport capacity within the vehicle. It remains to be seen if the military will identify the same requirement for a weapon which closes the gap between light weapons and 20 mm calibre munitions and will, to a certain extent, be a worthwhile alternative to guided anti-tank weapons. In a next step, according to company officials, it may be worth considering an air-to-ground configuration carried by unmanned aerial systems.

Devant les limites atteintes par les blindages passif les blindage reactif sont de plus en plus proposé sur les blindé léger ... http://www.defpro.com/daily/details/359/ CLARA low fragment reactive armour Passive armour has reached its physical limits due to weight and the continuously advancing armour-piercing weapon technology (RPG-7 can penetrate steel plates thicker than 40 cm, which would be far too heavy for any vehicle type). Active armour can also counter only a limited range of threats, leaving a gap that has been closed by reactive armour. DND has joined the ranks of reactive amour producing companies with a special solution called CLARA, which has now received a less inspired designation by German authorities, which by denomination limits its capabilities to counter hollow explosive charges. However, the company emphasises that the light and insensitive appliqué armour protects armoured vehicles and its crews from various shaped charges and projectile forming explosive devices. According to company officials, it may also be further developed to use sensor technology in order to expand the range of threats it can counter, including tandem warheads. It also integrates a certain level of passive protection and can counter blast and EFP-type IEDs and ammunition up to a 12.7 calibre which hits the vehicle where the reactive armour has been applied. One of the adverse effects of any active or reactive armour is fragmentation when the explosive device is countered. Over many years, DND has been developing a low fragment counter measure which is primarily based on the use of composite material (boxes and screws) as well as on a special insensitive low burning rate (LBR6) explosive agent (1.5D certified). The armour segments which protect the side and front of an armoured vehicle increase the vehicles width by some 35 cm on each side. The segments consist of two boxes placed on top of each other. The lower and heavier box (F1 element) weighs some 40 kg while the smaller box on top (F2 element) weighs approximately 20 kg. The average added weight of the system is 260 kg per square metre. The parts of the vehicle which cannot be equipped with CLARA may be protected by slat armour. The CLARA armour can be mounted by a single person. Yet, a team of persons can up-armour a vehicle within only 15 minutes. Company officials say there is no alternative to reactive armour when it comes to shaped charges. Also, CLARA provides the advantage of low fragmentation. In Germany, among the countries to first seriously develop reactive armour solutions, the problem of fragmentation almost lead to a stalemate in development activities. As Dr. Wolfgang Böttger states, CLARA takes into account this particular “primal fear of the Bundeswehr” and has proven in various tests to provide a dramatic reduction of fragmentation. Certified for FENNEC, fit for other vehicles In cooperation with the German system provider of armoured wheeled and tracked vehicles, Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW), DND has demonstrated the system’s efficiency on the FENNEK light-armoured reconnaissance vehicle. Each side of the FENNEK has been equipped with some 720 kg of reactive armour plus an additional slat armour protection and the vehicle’s own passive armour. Tests showed that not only the fragmentation could be reduced, but also the protection of the vehicle crew had been substantially increased. Reportedly, the blast effect during the counter measure produces a slight shock, not more than a vehicle hitting a pothole. Even though the respective reactive armour box will be entirely destroyed when triggered, the adjacent segments will not be affected. If attacked by a common RPG-7 shaped charge, the reactive armour disintegrates the penetrating charge, which subsequently leaves only slight dents on the vehicle’s passive armour. CLARA has already been officially certified for use on the FENNEK. The company now hopes to be awarded contracts for the equipment of future German Armed Forces’ vehicles such as the PUMA infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) as well as for up-armouring vehicles of the existing Bundeswehr fleet as, for instance, DINGO, BOXER, FOX or LEOPARD II. According to Dr. Böttger, the greatest advantage of the system is that it is already available and certified. The PUMA IFV, which is scheduled to enter service in 2010, will quickly require an adequate protection which other German companies can reportedly not provide within this short time frame. Alternatively, the Bundeswehr would either have to purchase reactive armour abroad or wait (IBD Deisenroth is expected to complete an active armour solution around 2012/13). Furthermore, according to company officials, Singapore appears to be as keen as the German Armed Forces to be provided with a low fragment armour solution, which would allow a further push in DND’s already strong export position.

http://www.defpro.com/daily/details/360/ Countries push further into the High North to secure territorial claims 06:05 GMT, July 22, 2009 A topic that does not often make it into the news, due to more imminent military matters, is the so-called high north. However, the more or less unintentionally concealed evolution of the political and military situation in the Arctic region and its surrounding countries slowly approaches an inevitable clash of undetermined intensity. This especially relates to the rivalry of European and North American countries with Russia and its rather unhesitating actions in the region. Russia’s claims on Arctic territory and its presumed resources, so far covered by perpetual ice, has raised multiple concerns and protests in other countries, which are all part of the NATO alliance. The sovereignty claims of Canada, Denmark, Norway, Russia and the US, based upon geological and other data, are now being examined by the UN. Denmark to establish Arctic military command One of the most recent phenomenons of this lingering development has been the news about Denmark’s decision to set up an Arctic military command and task force. As different press sources reported in recent days, details of the Danish government’s plan for the period 2010 to 2014 had become public. According to these reports, Denmark is considering expanding its activities at the USAF Thule air base in northern Greenland. The Arctic Command is to be established as a joint service and to lead a new Arctic task force. In addition to the use of existing Danish military capabilities that are adapted for operations in arctic conditions, the plan also considers using combat aircraft for surveillance tasks and to safeguard Danish sovereignty in and around Greenland. The Danish Air Force operates some 60 license-built and USAF surplus F-16 fighter aircraft. According to the defence plan, which had been approved by Danish MPs last month, the increased military activities will be focused on Greenland and the Faroe Islands, which are strategically located between Island and Great Britain. Greenland, which has been ruled by Copenhagen over the past three centuries, has recently been granted increased autonomy by which it will receive a greater share of revenues from its natural resources. However, the recent push from Copenhagen does not raise understanding everywhere in the western countries. According to the Copenhagen Post, Axel Fiedler, former head of the Greenland Command, called for a more cautious approach. “Why start talking about fighters to Greenland? There is no threat whatsoever towards Greenland and no one denies the sovereignty of Greenland,” he recently said. Placing the stakes – first come, first serve The “unnecessary militarization,” as Fiedler calls it, is not a unilateral phenomenon, which is also the official justification of the Danish plan, stating that the increasing activity “will change the region's geostrategic significance and thus entail more tasks for the Danish Armed Forces.” The effects of global warming will disclose new vital sea lanes for maritime trade and access to what is presumed one of the world’s richest areas for natural resources – as much as 25 % of the world’s untapped oil and gas are thought to be in the Arctic – and will lead to an inevitable run on this last terrestrial frontier. Next to Russia, which earlier this year published its plan to set up a military force to protect its interests in the Arctic, Canada is also greatly involved in increasing high north activities. In addition to smouldering border disputes with Denmark, Canada announced in 2007 plans to build two military facilities in the country’s north to underscore its sovereignty in the region. On the other side, Russia has carried out two Arctic expeditions (to the Mendeleyev underwater chain in 2005 and to the Lomonosov ridge in the summer of 2007) to support its territorial claims. Moscow has pledged to submit documentary evidence to the UN by 2010 on the external boundaries of Russia's territorial shelf. The United States, with a direct access through the Alaskan peninsula and its Air Force Base at Thule, is also preparing to deploy forces more frequently to the Arctic. As the NavyTimes reported early this year, Rear Admiral David Gove, the oceanographer and navigator of the Navy, said increased maritime traffic, combined with international disputes over resources, would mean US sailors would soon have to expect more deployments to the icy North. Gove stated that “it’s going to affect how we operate and how we deploy forces. Within a few years it will be more routine.” Increasing activities of Canadian and US forces in the Arctic will expectedly be answered by a show of force by Russian submarines and long-range bomber flights. However, according to RIA Novosti, a Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman yesterday said, in response to Denmark’s plans, that “Russia is opposed to the unleashing of an arms race in the Arctic Region and suggests as an alternative the boosting of bilateral cooperation in issues of navigation safety, search and rescue and the prevention of ecological disasters.” As defpro.com reported in May (see: http://www.defpro.com/daily/details/310/), the Norwegian Minister of Defence, Anne-Grete Strøm-Erichsen, emphasised in a speech at the Atlantic Council of Finland the importance of “bilateral and multilateral interaction between Russia and the other states.” She further said, “The [NATO] Alliance is at the core of the security and defence strategies of all but one Arctic Ocean state. It therefore cannot avoid defining its role in the area. The challenge will be to devise policies that address fundamental Western security interests, while at the same time recognising Russian concerns.”

http://www.defpro.com/daily/details/361/ 08:13 GMT, July 23, 2009 Due to the quite open information policies of the US Department of Defense and the UK Ministry of Defence, as well as to the quick-moving advances in the so-called social media such as Twitter, Youtube and Facebook, a flood of information and news coverage on military operations in southern Afghanistan has become available to the public. The Helmand operations in the run-up to the Afghan elections held in August have, for more than a week, been complemented by a large-scale operation in the northern Kunduz province. This is the largest military operation in this area since the beginning of the ISAF mission. But due to this operation being in an early stage, and to the more restrictive information policy of the involved nations, little verified information has yet to be made available. The operation, which is being carried out by the Afghan National Army and Afghan police with the assistance of mainly German ISAF forces, is aimed at gaining increased control of the Kunduz region and to minimise Taliban influence. Some 800 to 1,000 soldiers of the Afghan National Army, supported by 100 members of the Afghan police and 300 German soldiers of the Quick Reaction Force (QRF), have been operating in the Kunduz province and have been involved in more or less intensive skirmishes with insurgents. The allied forces concentrated on the Chahar Darreh district, as well as on two other districts near Kunduz where the Taliban have gained great influence. As the BBC reported earlier this month, due to a lack of presence of Afghan or ISAF forces, the Taliban had freely carried out patrols, closed girl schools and forcefully collected up to 10 % “taxes” from farmers. New enemy tactics changing the scenario Yesterday, German Defence Minister Franz Josef Jung, along with Chief of the Defence Staff General Wolfgang Schneiderhan, held a press conference to shed some light on the developing situation. With the change of combat intensity came a change of vocabulary: “necessary escalation”, “deterrent effect” and other terms not often used by the political and military leadership in Germany stirred up the press and discussions on the true nature of the German involvement in Afghanistan (see also http://www.defpro.com/daily/details/341). In any case, the military leadership seems to have understood that it is far too dangerous to leave this once-quiet area in the hands of the Taliban. The operation involved the deployment of heavy equipment, such as the infantry combat vehicle MARDER and mortars. As a soldier told a German daily, “everything that is available is being used.” This may become extremely important as the Taliban are reportedly making use of new tactics in the region. While in the past they confined themselves to strike by using road-side bombs, Schneiderhan stated that since March “they have used their weapons more intelligently.” The recent attacks on convoys and patrols have shown that the Taliban act in a more military manner, carrying out well-prepared ambushes and using weapons such as rocket propelled grenades (RPG-7). However, the Defence Minister has not tired of emphasizing that the German forces are not engaged in a war, but are part of “stabilisation effort” in Afghanistan. Multiple air and ground assets involved Nevertheless, the increased combat intensity cannot be denied. Even though, according to the Defence Minister, the operation is limited to a radius of some 30 km around Kunduz, the size and the measures are unprecedented in the North. For the first time in the history of the ISAF mission, combat air support (CAS) has not only been requested, but used to attack enemy positions. Previously, it had been enough for fighter aircraft to make a show of force by approaching enemy emplacements at low altitudes and dropping flares. As the military leadership recently told the German parliament, on July 15 and July 19, for the first time, bombs were dropped in the North by combat aircraft after they had been requested by ground forces. As the online platform of the German SPIEGEL magazine reported, besides ISAF combat aircraft, a PREDATOR armed unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) of the US Army has also been involved in the combat operation, firing a HELLFIRE missile at an entrenched Taliban site near Kunduz after Afghan soldiers had been attacked by machine gun fire and RPGs. So far, no German casualties have been reported, through the spokesman of the Afghan Ministry of Defence, Mohammad Sahir Asimi, reported the deaths of four Afghan soldiers. Other soldiers and police officers have reportedly been wounded by enemy fire and booby traps. Asimi also said 16 insurgents had been killed and twelve wounded in the course of the operation. As a spokesman of the German Armed Forces in Afghanistan stated, only minor damage to equipment has been reported by the German Armed Forces, the worst being a slightly damaged DINGO armoured infantry vehicle that was shot at by insurgents. According to General Schneiderhan the operation is to last for another week - although some unverified press sources state that the operation's aim of regaining control of the respective provinces may already have been accomplished. Reportedly, subsequent operations of the Afghan National Army in cooperation with ISAF forces in the North are being scheduled before and during the elections.

http://www.defpro.com/news/details/8761/ 12:13 GMT, July 23, 2009 WASHINGTON |The United States and Canada will begin in August a 42-day joint expedition to the Arctic to survey the continental shelf in the Arctic, the U.S. State Department has announced according to RIA Novosti. Hydrocarbon deposits and other natural resources under the Arctic Ocean, made increasingly accessible by new technology and climate change, have made the extent of the continental shelf a matter of national interest as countries vie for sovereignty over the seabed. "The mission, scheduled from August 6 to September 16, will continue the collaboration in extended continental shelf data collection in the Arctic started during last summer's joint survey, with plans for further cooperation in 2010," the State Department said on Wednesday. The second U. S.-Canadian Arctic expedition will involve the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Healy and the Canadian coast defense ship Louis S. St-Laurent. Under international law, the five Arctic Circle countries - the U.S., Canada, Denmark, Norway and Russia - each have a 322-kilometer (200-mile) exclusive economic zone in the Arctic Ocean. However, under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, if a country can show its continental shelf extends beyond the 200-mile limit, it can claim rights to more of the ocean floor. The question of conflicting territorial claims on the arctic seabed has become a point of dispute between the United States, Russia, Canada, Norway and Denmark, especially after Russia undertook two Arctic expeditions - to the Mendeleyev underwater chain in 2005 and to the Lomonosov ridge in the summer of 2007 - to support its territorial claims in the region. A titanium Russian flag was planted on the seabed of the Arctic Ocean and researchers conducted deepwater seismic probes. The expedition to the Lomonosov ridge irritated a number of Western countries, particularly Canada, whose foreign minister accused Moscow of making an unsubstantiated claim to the area. The Arctic region is believed to contain vast oil and gas reserves and other mineral riches, likely to become accessible in future decades due to the global warming. Russia first claimed the territory in 2001, but the UN demanded more evidence. Moscow has pledged to submit an official claim on the external boundaries of Russia's territorial shelf by 2013.

Turbo l'a fait avec Leclerc contre Porsche Cayenne ... ca traine sur internet.

HyLiner The air transportation of tomorrow will have to live up to the highest economical and ecological standards. HyLiner is a hybrid aircraft that will meet these expectations. "Hybrid” in this case refers to a combination of individual technologies into an ideal whole. The mission (short- and long takeoff), flight dynamics, propulsion, steering and materials all belong to the hybrid concept. The goal – based on a collection of potential ideas and technologies – is the development of concepts, designs and eventually flying models for an ultra-quiet, low-emission mid-range aircraft with extremely short take-off capabilities. The Hyliner with tilt wing rotors can take off vertically like a helicopter and cruise like a fixed-wing aircraft. It is a multi-modal transportation concept able lift wagons with passengers or goods off a train, transport them over a short distance by air and put them down in another place either onto rails, or onto a ship or a road vehicle. Passengers could so travel by various means of transportation without actually having to leave their seats. EADS is one of the founding members of Bauhaus Luftfahrt, which is an internationally oriented think tank that develops sustainable, innovative solutions for future air transportation. Its research projects take a holistic approach to the complex system of aviation, taking into account technical, economic, social and ecological aspects. C'est une sorte de rame de metro en dessous :lol: Les autres projets sont la http://www.eads-nv.com/1024/en/eads_innovation/media/technology/advanced_concepts.html

Seether "Out of my Way"

QUAD POLARIS SPORTSMAN 700 au 13 RDP http://servir-et-defendre.com/viewtopic.php?f=121&t=2513

On voit que l'interception est super tardive ... malgré la portée du 30mm. D'ou la logique de monter en portée avec du 57 ou du 76 guidé ... Je remet ta video directement ici http-~~-//www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CHDjOCyixU

C'est un drone mais aussi un convertible ... http-~~-//www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Lw6eQp8RsU American drones are already lethal; so far this year, the unmanned aircraft have allegedly killed at least 365 people, in assaults on Pakistan. Now, new video of a hovering combat robo-craft shows the potential for military drones to be faster, more maneuverable - and deadlier. The Excalibur aircraft, a 13 foot-long, 10 foot-span, half-scale test model, took an inaugural proof-of-concept flight on June 24, Aviation Week reports. Aurora Flight Sciences, the company behind the new drone, is planning a full-sized version that will carry four Hellfire missiles, at speeds of up to 400 knots. The Predator drone, by comparison, carries just two Hellfires, and cruises at just 70 knots. Unlike the Predator, the Excalibur doesn’t need a runway to take off. It just floats into the sky, thanks a titling turbojet and three battery-powered lift fans. This isn’t the first time Aurora have created innovative models for unmanned military aircraft. For a Darpa project last year, they dreamed up a three-vehicle air machine that could dock in the stratosphere and stay aloft for five years. They’ve also worked with military researchers on micro-drones that mimic the navigational know-how of bats and bugs. And now Aurora’s got an added boost of Pentagon expertise. Former Darpa director Anthony Tether recently joined the company’s Board of Directors. But any military deployment is still a ways off: Aurora paid for the first flight themselves, and still plans to do several more test runs. The company’s hoping for funding to build the full-size model. http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/07/video-hovering-killer-drone-takes-flight/

Pas discrete la torpille d'ailleurs ... étonnant ce sillage.

Houla on dérive vers la mécanique des milieu continu !!! Pour comprendre ce qu'il se passe en cas de contrainte ponctuelle sur un blindage homgene, il faut le considérer non pas comme solide, mais comme un liquide compressible tres tres visqueux qui ne sécoule que tres tres lentement sous les contrainte habituelle. quand on applique brutalement une contrainte - une pression en fait - sur une face les élement de cette face vont etre ecrasé entre la contrainte externe et le reste de l'épaisseur de u matériaux. Il se retrouve donc compressé ... sous cette pression il compresse ses voisins réciproquement. Donc il compresse la "couche" suivante qui elle meme se compresse et compresse la couche suivante etc. Les couches internes sont incluse dans le matériaux, donc leur mouvement a l'intérieure du matériel liquide est contraint de tout coté, il tire vers l'arriere, et pousse vers l'avant et pareil sur les coté. Une fois que la couche suivante est aussi comprimé que la couche précédente le mouvement "s'arrete" la pression baisse et le matériaux retrouve un état "normal", et ainsi de suite couche par couche. Le probleme est la derniere couche. Elle n'appui sur rien ... elle ne fait que tirer sur la couche précédente. Et donc si la pression qu'on lui transmet est suffisante il est probable que la force induite soit supérieur a la 'solidité' des liaison entre les deux derniere couche ... et la elle s'arrache. Le mouvement ne s'arrete pas et l'énergie de l'onde de pression se transforme en énergie cinétiaue des morceau qui se sont détaché de la derniere couche. On obtient donc des projectile produit par le blindage lui meme a l'intérieur de la caisse :) sympa. Si le corps ou l'équipement du soldat est au contact du blindage on obtient le meme résultat meme dans le cas ou le blindage ne s'arrache pas. Le tissu interne du corps humain n'ont pas la resistance en traction de l'acier ... et y a des morceau qui risque de s'arracher allégrement. Pour éviter les schrapnel de blindage on organise plusieurs couche avec des joint déformable entre qui découple ondulatoirement les élément, et évite la transmission des l'onde de choc, enfin d'une partie. Apres on tapisse l'intérieur de la cabine d'un revetement indéchirable souple collé au blindage , qui retiendra les morceau qui s'arracheraient. Enfin pour l'équipage lui meme, on le découple de la caisse. Tout les élément telle que Assise commande repose pieds, appuis tete ceinture, etc. sont fixé a des élément de la coque peut exposé aux chocs ... donc en général le toit. S'il faut les attaché au reste de la caisse en plus on utilise des fixation souple et déformable qui s'allongeront palstiquement putot que transmettre brutalement la contrainte. On trouve les meme solution dans les carrosierie de voiture avec les zoner a déformation programmé. On obtient donc des fixation en métal "mou" pas tres rigide, des sangle "déchirable" ... qui seront déformé définitivement en cas de contriante supérieure a une limite fixé en labo. C'est destruction préservera l'équipage.

Le 747 n'écope pas ... c'est pas tres pratique. Une des solution envisagé fut l'achat d'hydravion Beriev 200. Mais c'est trop cher De plus "pas mal" de gens pense que ca ne sert a rien d'etindre la foret qui brule. Non seulement les moyen déployé sont considéré comme de peu d'effet mais en plus que les incendies ca serait bien pour la nature toussa... Reste que cette vision américaine a montré ses limites en Californie ou des quartier résidentiels entier on été dévasté par le feu. http://surlezinc.blogs.com/jcp/2006/07/beriev200_pompi.html Et un article de la région récit de la démo http://www.ambitions-sud.net/n38/n38fr-beriev.htm

Les SAMP/T francais sont sur KErax Avec quelques modele de présérie sur TRM Pour le matériel francais l'excellent site servir-et-defendre avec tout plein de photo original de matériels peu connus.

http://secretdefense.blogs.liberation.fr/defense/2009/07/otages-en-somalie-le-point-sur-la-situation.html Otages en Somalie : le point sur une situation dangereuse Plus d'une semaine après, les responsables français ne cachent pas leur inquiétude sur le sort des deux fonctionnaires de la DGSE enlevés le 14 juillet à Mogadiscio (Somalie). Ils sont « en vie » et « bien traités » assure Claude Guéant, le secrétaire général de l’Elysée. Pour le reste, le silence est de plomb. A peine Bernard Kouchner affirme-t-il savoir « qu’ils sont séparés » et qu’ils pourraient être détenus par « deux groupes différents ». Le chef de la diplomatie française le reconnaît : « il y a des informations très contradictoires » venant de Somalie. C'est le moins qu'on puisse dire. Tentons d’y voir plus clair. Qui sont ces « agents français » et que faisaient-ils là-bas? Officiellement, Paris parle de «conseillers français en mission officielle d’assistance auprès du gouvernement somalien». En clair, deux fonctionnaires de la Direction générale de la sécurité extérieure (DGSE). Ils seraient rattachés à la Direction des opérations, qui se voit confier des missions de liaison et de conseils là où personne d’autres ne peut aller. Comme les autres pays occidentaux, la France n’a plus de représentation diplomatique en Somalie.Pas plus que de réseaux ou d'agents de renseignement. Trop dangereux. Arrivés à Mogadiscio vers le 5 juillet, via le Kenya, ses deux hommes, civils ou militaires, ne sont pas des espions agissant sous couvert dans le cadre d’une opération clandestine. Ce sont des fonctionnaires envoyés officiellement mais discrètement par la France pour aider les autorités « légales » de Somalie, le « gouvernement fédéral de transition » de l’islamiste « modéré » Sharif Cheikh Ahmed. Leur rôle était double : évaluer les besoins en matière de sécurité du président somalien et servir d’éléments précurseurs pour la formation d’un bataillon militaire. En mai 2009, la France et les Etats-Unis se sont engagés à aider le gouvernement somalien à se doter d’une petite « garde prétorienne » comme le dit Kouchner : Paris et Washington formant chacun 500 hommes, à Djibouti et en Ouganda. Comment ont-il été enlevés ? (Pour lire la suite, cliquez ci-dessous) Les deux fonctionnaires logeaient à l’hotel Sahafi, situé à un carrefour très fréquenté de Mogadiscio ("kilomètre 4"), où séjournent également des ministres et des responsables du gouvernement. Cet établissement est situé non loin de Somalia House, le siège du gouvernement de transition, dans un quartier en principe protégé par la force africaine Amison. Le kidnapping a eu lieu mardi matin et s’est déroulé rapidement. L’hypothèse la plus vraisemblable est qu’il ait été le fait de soldats ou de miliciens proches des autorités légales. Les deux otages ont ensuite été « revendus » à d’autres groupes comme cela se pratique couramment en Somalie. Les deux Français se sont-ils fait passés pour des journalistes ? Ce n’est pas prouvé, même Reporters sans frontières le reconnaît. Le Quai d’Orsay conteste cette information, qui provient du directeur de l’hotel Sahafi. En langue somalie, Sahafi signifie « presse ». L’enlèvement a-t-il un lien avec la piraterie? C’est peu probable, estiment les autorités françaises, sauf si des pirates tués ou capturés par les forces spéciales françaises ont des liens familiaux ou claniques avec les ravisseurs. Négocier ou intervenir ? Même si les autorités françaises n'excluent a priori aucune solution, y compris une intervention de vive force, la priorité est aujourd'hui à la négociation avec les ravisseurs. Des contacts ont vraisemblablement été pris, via l'ambassade de France à Nairobi, mais semblent peu avancés. Qui les détient? Deux groupes sont évoqués : les Shabab (« jeunes » en arabe), milice islamiste radicale et le parti Hizbul-al-Islam de Cheikh Dahir Aweys, ancien dirigeants des Trbinaux islamiques, qui ont régné en 2006 sur Mogadiscio. Ces groupes, liés à Al-Qaida, s’apparente aux Talibans afghans. Ils agissent d’abord pour des raisons idéologiques et non mafieuses. Ce qui complique les négociations de libération. Mieux vaut en effet discuter avec un bandit avide de dollars qu’avec un fou de Dieu. D’où l’inquiétude qui règne à Paris.

http://secretdefense.blogs.liberation.fr/defense/2009/07/incendie-de-marseille-larm%C3%A9e-de-terre-reconnait-sa-responsabilit%C3%A9-et-prend-des-sanctions.html Incendie de Marseille : l'armée de terre reconnait sa responsabilité et prend des sanctions L'incendie aux portes de Marseille qui a ravagé hier 1100 hectares a bien été causé par des tirs militaires, reconnait ce matin l'armée de terre. "C'est une faute professionnelle grave, en violation complète des consignes. Le chef d'état-major vient, par mesure conservatoire, de relever le chef de section responsable - un adjudant - de son commandement", nous indique le colonel Benoît Royal du Sirpa-Terre. Parallèlement à celle de la gendarmerie, une enquête interne de commandement a été ouverte et ses conclusions devraient être connues mardi. Hier une section du 1er Régiment étranger d'Aubagne (13), la maison mère de la Légion étrangère, effectuait un exercice de tir au Famas (fusil d'assaut reglementaire) sur le terrain de Carpiagne, situé en Marseille et Cassis. Des balles traçantes ont été utilisées, contraitement à ce que prévoit les consignes en vigueur durant la saison de risque d'incendie dans les camps du sud de la France, du 1er mai au 1er novembre. Les balles traçantes sont équipées d'un dispositif pyrotechnique émettant de la lumière tout au long de la trajectoire - d'où les risques d'incendies comme pour les fumigènes, également interdits. A la suite des premiers constats de la gendarmerie, le préfet de région Michel Sappin avait vivement réagi estimant qu'il "est totalement inadmissible et scandaleux que les militaires continuent à exercer ces activités comme si de rien n'était en cette période",

Par les temps qui courent la constitution est un peu accessoire nan :lol: Quant a l'objectif St Cyrien de former des officier a tour de bras ... il a été présenté comme ... disons stratégique. Ca permettait de diffuser des cadres militaires un peu partout dans la société civile pour y gagner de l'influence.

Contre des fleches ... en cas de survie au premier tir, le DAL permet de riposter tres tres rapidement probablement avant le second tir. C'est dejà pas mal. Apres couplé a des contre mesure automatique comme on le fait avec les helico ... normalement c'est assez efficace contre les missiles a guidage laser ou a télémétrie laser. Apres si tous les char ne sont pas équipé de DAL ... c'est probablement qu'on envisage plus depuis 91 de faire des gros combat de char, et que l'evolution des missiles AT fait que le laser est devenu moins utilisé. Résultat on s'est tourné vers le hard kill et on a réservé les sous pour ca. Faut voire que la plus grosse menace pour les char actuellement c'est du RPG souvent non guidé et des IED ... Néammoins jusqu'a récement le projet de DAL sur Leclerc n'était pas completement tombé a l'eau ... GIAT propose encore son kit

Le fait d'avoir le bébé sous la main te donne implicitement le code des softs ... du moins si t'es motivés. Rien n'empeche de désassemblé les software et "hardware" de l'engin. Le truc qui se négocie c'est le droit de le faire ... mais bon ca ... encore faut il avoir les moyen de faire valoir.

Houla c'te mélange ;) Mais on est dans le bon. Il s'agit bien d'un Tarnow Alex/BOR mais en 7.62 wilk c'est un le Tarnow WKW Wilk/TOR en 12.7

une lunette optique classique plus une camera IR plus un telemetre laser plus un "ordinateur" de tir ... forcément ca pese un chouilla :) Mais en contrepartie il semble que les performance au tir sont bien meilleur autant sur FAMAS que sur FRF2. Ajouté a ca les capacité d'observation jamais vu a ce niveau. Un simple groupe de combat disposera de plusieurs capteur IR ... de quoi repérer plus beaucoup plus facilement l'ennemi meme en plein jour. Pour le systeme sur le FRF2 je serais tenté de dire qu'on est entre 1 et 2 kg tout compris avec la batterie etc.

C'est pas directement le LB mais ca parle d'avenir :) http://secretdefense.blogs.liberation.fr/defense/2009/07/desportes.html Le général Desportes appelle à "ne pas rêver américain" Le général Vincent Desportes, directeur du Collègue interarmées de défense, publie un excellent article dans le dernier numéro de Politique étrangère, la revue trimestrielle de l'Institut français des relations internationales (Ifri). Il y pointe les risques du "tout technologique", de l'imitation du modèle américain et des risques d'une recherche systématique de l'interopérabilité avec les Etats-Unis. Une réflexion utile au moment où la France réintègre pleinement l'Otan. "Si, malgré des budgets de défense très inférieurs aux budgets américains, les armées européennes persistent à se doter d'équipement de norme technologique américaine, il y a fort à parier que, dans peu d'années, les forces européennes dans leur ensemble devront abandonner des pans entiers de leurs capacités militaires. La cohérence d'ensemble ne pourra donc être rétablie que sous parapluie et leadership américain" écrit-il. Appellant à "ne pas rêver américain", il rappelle que "l'interopérabilité est un objet politique avant d'être un objet technique". "L'interopérabilité conduit à adopter la norme dominante, naturelle, du grand allié" poursuit-il, avant de plaider pour "une déconnexion du pilier européen" : "admettre la déconnexion technique des piliers européen et américain de l'Alliance". "Faut-il continuer à laisser la technique diriger la stratégie générale ou doit-on la remettre à sa juste place" s'interroge Vincent Desportes. Familier du monde militaire d'Outre-Atlantique, le général décrit "la culture américaine qui donne à la technique un rôle central dans la résolution des problèmes." Cette "dynamique du toujours plus technologique s'est avérée gagnante" en contribuant à l'effondrement soviétique, mais, après cette victoire, elle s'est maintenue et amplifiée, soutenue par d'importants intérêts. Une impasse militaire et budgétaire qui peut se décrire comme la "décroissance du rendement opérationnel de la technologie".

Manquerait plus qu'ils aient choisis sciemment la formule qu'ils évaluaient la moins bonne pour leur bébé! Reste que des formule différente peuvent aussi procéder d'objectif différent et concurrent... Dans le cas du rafale il semble que l'augmentation de portance et l'integration des surface de controle aient prévalue a une réduction de la trainée et une plus grande stabilité/instabilité. Moi je vois toujours pas en quoi éloigner les canard change grand chose dans le controle de l'instabilité ... juste que ca réduit la surface "mouillé" et que ca permet de les "aligner" avec les plan de l'aile. Mais des canard plus fin mais plus braqué est ce vraiment bien mieux ?