Toekomst Europese defensie industie

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

Typhoon: The last hurrah for the UK aerospace industry?
22 August 2011

Outgoing GKN plc Chief Executive Sir Kevin Smith tellls DMJ editor Anthony Hall what the UK aerospace industry must do to secure its future in tough economic times...

With the government focusing its defence industry policy towards a drive for exports, the invitation from UKTI DSO to visit the Pall Mall offices of GKN plc to speak to CEO Sir Kevin Smith was a timely one.

A business leader with over 30 years' experience in the aerospace industry, Smith has been chief executive of GKN since 2003 and a member of the government's Business Ambassador Network since its inception in 2008. In March, he announced his retirement at the end of the year, but if the interview had the tone of a valedictory, it was also spiced with some straight talking about the future needs of the UK's aerospace sector.

Smith's role as a Business Ambassador and his work as a member of the government's Asia Task Force have seen him promote UK aerospace to some of the world's biggest export markets. Having seen how trade is developing internationally, DMJ begins by asking him where he believes the UK's key markets will lie in the future.

"India is particularly strong for the UK," Smith reveals. "The Typhoon competition that's currently building there is important. The Middle East will continue to be strong for us and is an area we need to continue to focus on." He also points to the recent bilateral arrangements with Brazil as having the potential for some interesting developments, while in Japan, the new fighter programme involving Typhoon provides, in his considered opinion, "the best opportunity we've ever had to get equipment in there".

Markets in which the UK has traditionally performed strongly will always be very important, Smith maintains, citing the work to sell Hawk into the US training requirement as an example. "North America is going to be extremely important to us. Exporting there is difficult, but building relationships where we can take British products will remain important."

Growth in the market around Asia, in Smith's view, will be driven by China's development and how its neighbours see that in terms of potential threat. "I do feel that there is more growth in Asia as their economies give them the ability to spend more on defence," he says. As far as individual nations are concerned, Smith remains unconvinced that Japan will experience major market growth, save for a number of replacement programmes, but suggests that India will continue to grow strongly, again stressing the nation's importance as a UK defence customer and partner.

The normal process of Indian defence procurement, he explains, requires a long-term business relationship. Initial acquisition will move into a phase of license build, where Indian firms will manufacture the technology under a license agreement. "Then you're into support and upgrades that have long-term potential for value generation for the UK and the UK defence industry." This is why maintaining these relationships, particularly in regard to the Indian fighter programme, is so vital. "If we lose it now," says Smith, "we've lost it for a long time."

As regards other countries vying for business in the aerospace sector, Smith identifies North America and France, and to a lesser extent Sweden, as the UK's prime competitors, but also notes Russia's growing competitiveness, particularly in the Asian economies.

UK aerospace and future competitiveness
Smith describes a "lumpiness" in terms of global procurement that makes the success of Typhoon all the more important to UK defence: "It's the only product we have in that space in the market at the moment," he says, although he does point to the UK position within the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) programme, "which is valuable and can be produced in significant volumes," as well as the Hawk.

However, Smith strongly believes that what is required now is an entirely new development programme in Europe, which would have a positive long-term impact on the sector. The UK, he says, has "no aircraft that we own, develop and build". Its real strength has been in systems integration. "We also have a very good reputation for building military aircraft for various roles, but that continues to diminish. If the European governments don't order new platforms," he asserts, "there's no way that the UK industry can continue to compete at home or abroad."

For Smith, the retention of the UK's industrial expertise in the aerospace sector is vital, not just in economic terms but in supporting the defence of the country. "I have worked in and around the industry for a long time, and you were always brought up as being part of the defence capability of the country, and felt very proud of being involved in that. Whenever we've been in conflict, the ability to react rapidly and support our armed forces is something that the industry has always coalesced behind and always felt a real part of what was happening with our armed forces.

"I think we are responsive in the UK and can make things happen very quickly from an industrial point of view to support our armed forces," he continues. "We have some real strengths in terms of aircraft and structural manufacturing and the systems that go in them, and we can continue to develop that into new programmes."

It's not all good news, however: "We're going to struggle to maintain the industry we have today and its competitiveness," he asserts. "Clearly times are very difficult; economically things are really tough, and the armed services in particular are at the front of that. When you go through a period when you have to make cuts, you have to take care of the capabilities that really matter, in terms of the defence of the UK, as well as in terms of the economic value creation that industry is responsible for – not just in terms of exports, but also the spin-offs into other sectors. In my time, for example, the spin-off from military aircraft manufacture into civil aviation has been extremely valuable to the development of that industry."

What has been lost, he believes, is a principle of understanding the value of industrial capabilities in the same way as the value of the armed forces and defence capabilities are understood. Specifically linking the off-the-shelf procurement strategy to this, he suggests that such thinking is "potentially detrimental to the industry in the long term".

Another priority in economically stringent times must be to maintain industry's technological base, Smith outlines. In doing so, industry retains the ability to respond and react as economic times improve and resources become available to invest in defence. "Being able to demonstrate technologies, even if you can't build them at this point...I think that's really important," he says. "Once you lose those capabilities, it's very, very difficult to rebuild."

When asked how easy it would be in his opinion to raise technology in the UK back up to the highest level, Smith is less than optimistic: "I think we have lost a lot. When I worked in the Military Aircraft Division at British Aerospace in the 1990s, we were producing the two variants of the Tornado – the IDS and the ADB – in collaboration. We had Sea Harrier incorporated in production and we had the AV8 in collaboration with the US Marine Corps, which then went back into the Royal Air Force for the GR7 and the Harrier TMK10. We had the 60, 100 and 200 series Hawk and the T45 Hawk collaboration for the US Navy, and we were doing the early phases of development of Eurofighter. Then in the latter part of the 1990s, we moved into the Nimrod programme. A lot of the capability to do that has gone, and continues to disappear. We don't make a whole aircraft anymore and have probably lost that capability as a nation."

While stressing that collaboration is important, and that sustaining the capability to develop advanced systems and weapons systems across Europe is key, he concedes that nationally, once the UK loses its own capability, it cannot be rebuilt: "It goes, and I think that is demonstrated by how the aerospace industry, although it still has a strong position globally, is substantially based on decisions that were made a long time ago."

Once again, the Eurofighter/Typhoon provides a pertinent example. Launched in the late 80s and early 90s, it is viewed today by most of those outside the UK aerospace industry as its defining aircraft. However, this owes little to current practices, Smith explains: "The industry we have today is not a product of what's happened over the last two or five years. It's a product of what happened 10 years ago. The decisions we take or don't take now affect the ability to sustain the industry in the next 10-15 years. The Typhoon could be the last hurrah."

This is why a new European aircraft programme is so important, he says. "In the US, you have the JSF Programme, which is just starting to come into production, and behind that, they have programmes that they're demonstrating technology on today, which are going to be the production programmes in 10 or 15 years' time." The concern, he says, is that the UK isn't developing a demonstration phase.

"I know it's very difficult to commit to major procurement programmes at this point, but to have a long-term understanding of how to develop a defence capability and the industry to support it, and therefore what sort of technologies we should be working on today, I think a demonstration phase is important." Only through collaboration, he says, can this be achieved, adding: "I believe our collaborative homeland has been Europe."

"I love the aviation industry," Smith concludes. "I feel very proud to have been a part of it and very proud that we have the second biggest aviation industry in the world, and a very strong part of that is the defence side." The civil side continues to grow, and he wants to see that continue, but "the technology development on defence and the global positioning of our industry from the defence side is hugely important". The UK, he says, should be doing absolutely everything it possibly can to make sure the core muscle of that industry continues to be supported and developed. "Guys like me have a significant role to play, but in the defence sector you can't do it without government alongside us, and from a UK point of view, we can't do it without European governments alongside us."

http://www.defencemanagement.com/feature_story.asp?id=17236

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

July 21, 2011 12:29 am

New front set to open in tank mergers

By John O'Doherty

Please respect FT.com's ts&cs and copyright policy which allow you to: share links; copy content for personal use; & redistribute limited extracts. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights or use this link to reference the article - http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ab3c83d4-ad5d-11e0-bc4f-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz1SikzrxsW



Shrinking military budgets have long served as an incentive for European countries to look for cost-savings in equipment programmes. From joint projects to develop fighter jets and transport aircraft, to the more recent Franco-British proposals to share aircraft carriers, the trend has helped drive industrial partnership and outright consolidation in many spheres of the defence industry.

But one part of the industry in Europe has remained less affected by such initiatives. Manufacturers of the wheeled and tracked vehicles used by land forces have so far avoided much of the consolidation that has taken place in – for example – the defence aerospace sector. But as defence budgets are subjected to a further tightening, will these outliers on the Continent be able to hold out?


More

On this story
In depth Defence in the downturn
Defence cash deal to plug 'funding gap'
UTC develops ambitious supply strategy
Suppliers braced for aircraft orders boom
Defence industry Consolidation is best strategy for Bumar

The contrast with the aerospace sector is revealing. Europe now has only three manufacturers of fighter aircraft: Saab, Dassault and the Eurofighter consortium made up of the UK's BAE Systems, the Franco-German EADS and Italy's Finmeccanica. Eurofighter is an example of industrial partnership, but it is also an example of how several European countries can improve buying power by ordering the same aircraft, keeping acquisition costs down. This joint purchase process has also helped create the A400M, a military transport aircraft built by EADS but ordered by France, the UK, Germany and others.

But in the sphere of wheeled or tracked vehicles, there are fewer examples of consolidation or joint purchases between countries. Across Europe a host of different companies makes wheeled and tracked vehicles, with varying degrees of armoured protection, to help land armies carry troops and equipment. They include BAE Systems, Krauss Maffei and Rheinmetall of Germany, Iveco of Italy and Patria of Finland. France has the most with Nexter, Panhard, Thales, and Renault Trucks Défense all involved in the sector.

Not only has the industry in Europe not consolidated, it also has not seen much in the way of joint purchasing along the lines of the Eurofighter or A400M nations. The European Defence Agency, a European Union body that encourages joint procurement of armaments by EU members to keep costs down, has recently estimated that there were 16 different procurement programmes for armoured fighting vehicles.

The closest that Europe has come to multi-country partnership in developing new technology has been the eight-wheeled Boxer armoured fighting vehicle, which was jointly developed by Germany and the Netherlands. While Boxer has now been delivered to both armies, the project lost two earlier partners along the way as France and the UK pulled out.

Part of the reason for the continued large number of industry participants is the relatively cheap cost of land vehicles compared with ships or combat aircraft. A Eurofighter Typhoon fighter jet costs €140m ($200m, £123m) and France's Barracuda-class attack submarines cost about €1.4bn. But the Ocelot Foxhound armoured patrol cars recently ordered by the UK armed forces cost less than £500,000 each.

"None of the countries in Eurofighter or the A400M had the ability to finance those projects themselves alone, so they had to partner," says Christian Mons, chief executive of the French military vehicle group Panhard, and president of GICAT, the association of French land defence equipment manufacturers. "But up until now, most countries did have the means to finance the domestic development of land vehicle projects, so the pressure was not the same as in the naval, missile or aerospace sectors."

However, the recent downturn in developed economies has combined with a geopolitical shift that is specifically putting pressure on makers of military land vehicles.

John Louth, deputy head of the Defence, Industries and Society programme at the London-based Royal United Services Institute, says: "Previously, the land vehicle space has been reasonably lucrative because of the number of urgent operational requirement purchases by the UK and US, but that's diminishing now with the announcement of drawdowns and withdrawals from Iraq and Afghanistan."

These changing prospects for land vehicles have already been felt by the big defence companies. Last year, sales at BAE Systems' land systems division dropped 12 per cent to £5.9bn.

Some tentative moves have already been made in terms of industry consolidation over recent years: General Dynamics of the US bought both Austria's Steyr-Puch and Switzerland's Mowag, while the German groups Man and Rheinmetall announced they would merge their military vehicle businesses. But since then there has been little concrete in the way of consolidation.

"Something is definitely going to happen, but it's very difficult to say when," says Tuija Nurmi, a Finnish politician who co-wrote a report on the European land vehicles sector for the European Security and Defence Assembly.

In the absence of firm timescales, much attention is focusing on the countries deemed most likely to see possible consolidation, and here all eyes are on France. In March of this year, the state-owned Nexter, maker of the Leclerc battle tank used by the French army, announced that it was in discussions over possible co-operation with Thales, and Panhard said that it too was also open to co-operation with Thales.

Laurent Collet-Billon, the head of the French government's defence equipment procurement agency, has said that in addition to a possible Thales/Nexter combination, he could see a "rapprochement" between the two much smaller French groups in the sector: Panhard, and the Volvo-owned Renault Trucks Défense.

For its part, Renault Trucks Défense is gamely talking about the opportunities still to be had abroad rather than the shrinking home markets or its potentially vulnerable status as a smaller company.

"Europe is cutting the size of its militaries, but the rest of the world is boosting the spending," says Nicolas de la Rue du Can, contract director of Renault Trucks Défense. "So regardless of all this commentary, the issue of consolidation inside Europe is a secondary problem. The real problem is to get a share of the market outside Europe."

This push to new markets is indeed proceeding apace. Last October, Iveco signed an agreement to build light armoured trucks in Russia, which is also negotiating to buy 500 armoured vehicles from Panhard.

Another deal has resulted in Patria of Finland licensing designs to the Polish defence group Bumar. However, analysts still believe that squeezed budgets in home markets and sub-sized companies across Europe will combine to create more pressure than can be relieved through exports alone.

"There has been some internationalisation of supply chains, but nothing like what we've seen in other parts of the defence industry like aerospace," says Daniel Keohane, a defence industry expert at the Paris-based European Union Institute for Strategic Studies.

"Equipment is getting more expensive and budgets are going down and something has got to give," he added.

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2011. You may share using our article tools.

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/ab3c83d4-ad5d-11e0-bc4f-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1Sija5iFM

[IPA NG]

Ik vermoed dat jouw lijstje me schurkenstaten dan niet al te kort is..... 

Elk land behalve Luxemburg .

Nee maar dat land staat zeker op mijn lijst, dat wil ik wel argumenteren maar dan gaan we iets te ver offtopic.
In de tussentijd vind ik dat de NL overheid geen wapens moet kopen van hun (staats)bedrijven. En andere landen zouden dat ook niet moeten doen.

[KapiteinRob]

Nu wil ik Israel absoluut niet tot de schurkenstaten rekenen...

Ik wel.

Ik vermoed dat jouw lijstje me schurkenstaten dan niet al te kort is..... 

[IPA NG]

Nu wil ik Israel absoluut niet tot de schurkenstaten rekenen...

Ik wel.

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

Tsja dat WW2 schuldgevoel drukt zwaar. Zo zwaar zelfs dar ze samenwerken met enge schurkenstaten puur omdat ze bij wet Joods zijn (brrr).

Nu wil ik Israel absoluut niet tot de schurkenstaten rekenen... maar deze voorgenomen samenwerking vond/vind ik minimaal opmerkelijk te noemen.

[IPA NG]

Tsja dat WW2 schuldgevoel drukt zwaar. Zo zwaar zelfs dar ze samenwerken met enge schurkenstaten puur omdat ze bij wet Joods zijn (brrr).

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

27.06.2011, 18:23Schriftgröße: AAA

Waffe für den Eurofighter

Deutsche wollen mit Israelis Bomben bauen.



http://www.ftd.de/unternehmen/industrie/:waffe-fuer-den-eurofighter-deutsche-wollen-mit-israelis-bomben-bauen/60070231.html

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

'Get Your Houses in Order'

Can France Force Rival Firms To Cooperate on UAV?

By PIERRE TRAN
Published: 26 June 2011

PARIS - France is pushing off decisions on a medium-term UAV purchase as Dassault and EADS wrangle over what role - if any - the latter might play in an Anglo-French program that represents the sole major design effort on the horizon for European aircraft makers.


The British and French chiefs of staff will take 12 to 18 months to draw up common requirements for a medium-altitude long-endurance (MALE) air system, one of the goals of last November's cross-Channel defense cooperation treaty, French Defense Minister Gérard Longuet told journalists June 21 at the Paris Air Show.

Pressed for more information on France's plans to acquire interim and medium-term UAVs, Longuet carefully avoided clear and simple answers.

That studied evasiveness reflected the bitter conflict between Dassault and EADS.

At the air show, a few movable fences and a stretch of tarmac separated the full-scale mockup of EADS' Talarion UAV from Dassault's similar Telemos model. But the family-owned French company, which wants to build the U.K.-French MALE UAV with BAE Systems, is raising far stouter barriers to a co-leading role for EADS.

The stakes are higher than mere sales revenue; with no plans for successors to the Eurofighter or the Rafale, the UAV work is the only apparent program that can help the big players hang onto their military aircraft design teams.

Longuet, an industry minister in the 1990s, said the state is playing various roles - shareholder, client/ operator and strategist - and said Paris wants to see Dassault and EADS working together "instead of sitting like bookends" at opposite ends of the shelf. He suggested the Anglo-French UAV program could "start off" as a bilateral program and open up to other partners.

"He's playing for time," said François Lureau, head of consultancy EuroFLconsulting and former chief of the Direction Générale de l'Armement (DGA). "The message was: Get your two houses in order."

'End the Wars'


Longuet spoke the day after President Nicolas Sarkozy delivered a dramatic speech at a hangar at the air show.

Declaring that the country's companies must work together to end the "Franco-French internal wars," the French president warned that if the firms did not voluntarily settle their differences, they would be instructed to do so.

Sarkozy did not name companies, but industry executives said his remarks were clearly aimed at chief executives of Dassault Aviation, EADS, Safran and Thales, sitting in the front row as he spoke.

One defense source said Sarkozy was specifically frustrated with Safran and Thales, which have been unable to agree on a proposed asset swap that Paris believes will strengthen both companies.

But because of the dispute between Dassault and EADS over the MALE UAV, Sarkozy was widely seen as pressing those two companies, the source said.

The French president cannot merely order the companies to cooperate, although he has big levers to move them. The French state owns large minority stakes in EADS, Safran and Thales, and an indirect stake in Dassault, which is 46 percent owned by EADS. The government can exert pressure through the board seats it occupies and through its leverage as a big customer.

"You can't ignore a client and large shareholder," Lureau said.

Yet Dassault, as a family-controlled business, is seen as strongly independent.

And Dassault executives appeared unmoved by Sarkozy's speech and Longuet's "bookends" remarks. As the air show continued, the Dassult view remained that EADS could act as a MALE equipment supplier, but BAE and Dassault would drive the program's locomotive.

Eric Trappier, international director for Dassault, said the Anglo-French project presented a chance to boost the company's military side.

"What we are interested in [with] UAVs is technology," Trappier said. "It is the capability to have design and development in our company. It is engineering in terms of military capability, integration of weapons, flight testing, which is really dedicated for military applications.

"We will compete [with BAE Systems] for existing aircraft, but at the same time, we prepare the future together, knowing that in Europe, we don't have finance to develop by ourselves this type of new vehicle," he said. "If we don't find the right partner, well, we could disappear from this field against the Israelis or the Americans. So we have a common interest, and this is business."

EADS CEO Louis Gallois has pushed hard for a leading role in the MALE program, saying Germany should have a role to avoid splitting European forces in this strategic sector.

If EADS is shut out, its executives have said, they will seek partners in Italy, Spain and Turkey and develop a competing MALE based on the Talarion.

Such a plan is likely EADS's "best working strategy," said Nick Witney, senior research fellow for the European Council for Foreign Relations, a pan-European think tank. "I think BAE and Dassault are pushing very hard to make it extremely U.K.-French."

Witney noted that Europe no longer has the appetite for complex defense cooperation such as with the A400M airlifter.

"Things have profoundly changed in the past couple of years since the financial crisis," he said. "Industrial policy carries less weight compared to keeping structures simple and going for relatively cheap options."

Moreover, the "clumsy, ineffective hand-holding" needed for multinational defense cooperation is out of favor, he said. "It hasn't worked."

The Anglo-French treaty, and the MALE project it will spawn, epitomize that simple bilateral approach, he said.

Lureau noted that a program with five countries - Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Spain - would be complicated to run.

"I wouldn't be surprised to see two MALE UAV programs in Europe," said Lureau, who estimated the true cost of a new UAV would likely be 2 billion to 3 billion euros ($2.8 billion to $4.3 billion), rather than the 1 billion estimated by Dassault.

Yet Gallois indicated he thinks running two UAV programs in Europe makes no economic sense and would repeat the sapping competition between the Eurofighter Typhoon - of which EADS is a shareholder - and the Dassault Rafale.

EADS isn't the only European giant put out by the Anglo-French UAV project. At the air show, Italy's Alenia Aeronautica announced it would seek partners to develop a 9-ton UAV.

"We had been working with BAE Systems on a MALE, but that ended when the U.K. and France signed their accord," said Giuseppe Giordo, CEO of the Finmeccanica unit.

Now Alenia is considering development of a new MALE UAV that would carry a payload of more than 500 kilograms and use the same diesel propulsion as its smaller Sky Y prototype UAV.

"The Italian government wants to go ahead with the UAV and is looking for new partners, which may be European or non-European," Giordo said. He also held out the prospect of teaming with EADS on Talarion, but said much would depend on the technological and industrial return.

Near-Term UAV?


The joint UAV studies put off a procurement decision until after next May's French presidential elections, sweeping one potentially thorny issue from Sarkozy's path to re-election.

But the delay may also help BAE-Dassault nail down its advantage in the MALE UAV program. A defense official said the joint studies are a way of pushing BAE and Dassault to deliver their proposed Telemos UAV ahead of the five-year schedule. An early shipment could eliminate the need for the interim UAV long sought by the French Air Force.

The interim UAV would improve upon the service's EADS Harfangs, which are flying surveillance missions over Afghanistan.

EADS has proposed an upgraded Harfang as the interim solution, keeping hope alive for its Talarion. Dassault has pitched a Heron TP air vehicle from Israel Aerospace Industries.

And the General Atomics Reaper has been a strong candidate - but deeply opposed by French politicians, including member of parliament Jean-Claude Viollet, especially after Washington chose Boeing over Airbus for the U.S Air Force's air tanker.

Longuet has said a short-term buy would be decided by the end of the first half of the year as the government wants to avoid a capability gap.

But an industry executive said a French procurement is unlikely before six months.

"We are not expecting a decision on the interim UAV soon," the executive said.

On an interim UAV procurement, French Air Chief Gen. Jean-Paul Palomeros noted the service's investment in training and skills in flying the Harfang in Afghanistan, where the UAV recently cleared the 7,700-meter Hindu Kush mountain range to provide ISR capabilities.

Lureau said the next big project, besides the MALE UAV, is the unmanned combat aerial vehicle, dubbed a long-term project by the Lancaster House treaty.

Stefan Zoller, CEO of Cassidian, EADS' defense and security subsidiary, said he thinks an operational UCAV will not fly any time soon after 2025, with the U.S. Air Force pushing back a service date.

Tom Kington contributed to this report from Paris.

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=6929677&c=FEA&s=CVS

[Ace1]

Ja een realiteit wat je hier aankaart. Misschien is BAE Systems ook wel een mooi voorbeeld van die meer verweven Amerikaanse en Europese defensieindustrieen met haar Amerikaanse tak BAE Systems Inc., welke o.a. de M-2/3 Bradley levert. Interessant daar wel te zien hoe de Amerikaanse overheid zijn orders plaatst vervolgens. Een aantal grote orders lijken bijv. aan de neus van BAE voorbij te gaan en bij Amerikaanse bedrijven te worden geplaatst.

De verwevenheid is er. En dat is ook niet altijd te vermijden of onwenselijk. Maar ik denk dat het voor de EU belangrijk is om er wel voor te zorgen dat strategische R&D en productiefaciliteiten Europees blijven. We op dat vlak geen grote strategische afhankelijkheid ontstaat van de VS. In feiten hetzelfde (gaan) doen als de Amerikanen. Die de komende jaren alleen maar meer op hun eigen industrie zullen focussen verwacht ik, gezien de economische malaise daar en het krimpende defensiebudget..oh ja, did I mention the next elections?!

Ik vind in dat kader de ontwikkeling en uitvoering van een eigen Europees GPS systeem een positief signaal. Iets waar de Amerikanen stevig tegen gelobbyd hadden, want vonden dat onnodig gezien beschikbaarheid van hun eigen systeem. Hetzelfde geldt voor de ontwikkeling van de NH90 en A400M. Ook dat kaarten Amerikaanse presidenten aan bij Europese regeringsleiders omdat zij die overbodige duplicatie vonden.

Nog mooi voorbeeld is Finmeccanica die zitten zowel in Europa en de VS. Finmeccanica is het moederbedrijf van Alenia Aeronautica, Agusta-Westland, Oto Melara  en Selex Galileo

http://www.finmeccanica.it/Corporate/EN/index.sdo

http://www.finmeccanicausa.com/

[Elzenga]

Ja een realiteit wat je hier aankaart. Misschien is BAE Systems ook wel een mooi voorbeeld van die meer verweven Amerikaanse en Europese defensieindustrieen met haar Amerikaanse tak BAE Systems Inc., welke o.a. de M-2/3 Bradley levert. Interessant daar wel te zien hoe de Amerikaanse overheid zijn orders plaatst vervolgens. Een aantal grote orders lijken bijv. aan de neus van BAE voorbij te gaan en bij Amerikaanse bedrijven te worden geplaatst.

De verwevenheid is er. En dat is ook niet altijd te vermijden of onwenselijk. Maar ik denk dat het voor de EU belangrijk is om er wel voor te zorgen dat strategische R&D en productiefaciliteiten Europees blijven. We op dat vlak geen grote strategische afhankelijkheid ontstaat van de VS. In feiten hetzelfde (gaan) doen als de Amerikanen. Die de komende jaren alleen maar meer op hun eigen industrie zullen focussen verwacht ik, gezien de economische malaise daar en het krimpende defensiebudget..oh ja, did I mention the next elections?!

Ik vind in dat kader de ontwikkeling en uitvoering van een eigen Europees GPS systeem een positief signaal. Iets waar de Amerikanen stevig tegen gelobbyd hadden, want vonden dat onnodig gezien beschikbaarheid van hun eigen systeem. Hetzelfde geldt voor de ontwikkeling van de NH90 en A400M. Ook dat kaarten Amerikaanse presidenten aan bij Europese regeringsleiders omdat zij die overbodige duplicatie vonden.

[Elzenga]

Tja het probleem is dat veel wapensystemen zo 20-30 jaar meegaan...en er is recent nog het nodige gekocht of dat gebeurd binnenkort.

Jup, waarbij ook weer het nodige aan elkaar is gekoppeld, en zo nu en dan daardoor een zekere 'vendor-lock-in' optreed. Overstappen is daardoor zeker bij meer gecompliceerde systemen niet altijd even makkelijk.

en landen niet gelijk lopen wat betreft vervangingsmomenten...tja nog vele horden te nemen...

[Elzenga]

Tja het probleem is dat veel wapensystemen zo 20-30 jaar meegaan...en er is recent nog het nodige gekocht of dat gebeurd binnenkort.

[Ace1]

Mocht heel Europa binnen 5 of 6 jaar op dezelfde ideeen komen als Elzenga en allemaal dezelfde  standaardisatie  hebben gekozen dan kan Elzenga een kratje Jupiler van mij krijgen mocht het na die periode niet haalbaar gebleken te zijn vanwege duistere politieke reden dan krijg ik een kratje Jupiler van Elzenga

Je stelt wel eisen, 5 of 6 jaar, nooit haalbaar. Zelfs om binnen die periode in Nederland te 'stadaardiseren' is al een uitdaging. Dat zou ook de wens niet moeten zijn, dat kan de Europese defensieindustrie helemaal niet aan. Maar stappen in de goede richting zetten lijkt me zeker haalbaar. En een land als Nederland kan daar een rol in spelen. Want een Europese defensie industrie is wel gewoon kei hard nodig!

Ik ben in dat geval  wel sportief 12 jaar moet toch wel haalbaar zijn?

[Elzenga]

Mocht heel Europa binnen 5 of 6 jaar op dezelfde ideeen komen als Elzenga en allemaal voor dezelfde  standaardisatie  hebben gekozen dan kan Elzenga een kratje Jupiler van mij krijgen mocht het na die periode niet haalbaar gebleken te zijn vanwege duistere politieke reden dan krijg ik een kratje Jupiler van Elzenga

Daar gaat nog wel een generatie overheen...ik stelde het 20 jaar geleden al voor...en zie waar we zijn...dussss....maar "mr.Noodzaak" klopt steeds luider op de Europese deur...dus wie weet...over weer 20 jaar.