DOCSLIB.ORG

(CSDS) News and Analysis Issue 1338

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
(CSDS) News and Analysis Issue 1338 Issue 1338 26 October 2018 // USAF CSDS News and Analysis Issue 1338 // Feature Report “Russian Compliance with the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty: Background and Issues for Congress”. By Amy F. Woolf. Published by Congressional Research Service; Updated Oct. 5, 2018 https://fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/R43832.pdf The United States and Soviet Union signed the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty in December 1987. Negotiations on this treaty were the result of a “dual-track” decision taken by NATO in 1979. At that time, in response to concerns about the Soviet Union’s deployment of new intermediate-range nuclear missiles, NATO agreed both to accept deployment of new U.S. intermediate-range ballistic and cruise missiles and to support U.S. efforts to negotiate with the Soviet Union to limit these missiles. In the INF Treaty, the United States and Soviet Union agreed that they would ban all land-based ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges between 500 and 5,500 kilometers. The ban would apply to missiles with nuclear or conventional warheads, but would not apply to sea-based or air-delivered missiles. … The Trump Administration conducted an extensive review of the INF Treaty during 2017 to assess the potential security implications of Russia’s violation and to determine how the United States would respond going forward. On December 8, 2017—the 30th anniversary of the date when the treaty was signed—the Administration announced that the United States would implement an integrated response that included diplomatic, military, and economic measures. Congress is likely to continue to conduct oversight hearings on this issue, and to receive briefings on the status of Russia’s cruise missile program. It may also consider legislation authorizing U.S. military responses and supporting alternative diplomatic approaches. This report will be updated as needed. Issue No. 1320 22 June 2018 twitter.com/USAF_CSDS | au.af.mil/au/csds // 2 // USAF CSDS News and Analysis Issue 1338 // TABLE OF CONTENTS NUCLEAR WEAPONS One Nuclear Treaty Is Dead. Is New START Next? (Defense News) Signed in 2010 between the U.S. and Russia, the New START treaty limits the deployed forces of both nations to 1,550 nuclear warheads over 700 delivery systems, including intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched ballistic missiles, and bombers. Belgium Reportedly Picks F-35 for Future Fighter Jet (Defense News) … Belgium for decades has had an agreement with NATO that requires its planes to be capable of carrying U.S. nuclear weapons into a hypothetical atomic war. China’s H-20 Stealth Bomber: Everything We Know about It (The National Interest) If the H-20 does have the range and passable stealth characteristics attributed to it, then it could alter the strategic calculus between the United States and China by exposing U.S. bases and fleets across the Pacific to surprise air attacks. US COUNTER-WMD U.S. Army Awards $9M Autonomous Unmanned Systems Contract to Robotic Research (Homeland Preparedness News) The military has a specific interest in upping these unmanned technologies for use in subterranean environments and counter-weapons of mass destruction operations. U.S. Military Units in Okinawa Conduct Joint, Bilateral CBRN Training (Stripes Okinawa) The two day CBRN training exercise built upon previously joint/bilateral field training exercises designed to increase combat readiness and interoperability of U.S. forces and the Japan Self Defense Forces. US ARMS CONTROL Russia Wants Explanation of Trump Withdrawal from Arms Treaty (VOA) Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters Russia has not violated the treaty and if the United States goes on to develop new missiles then Russia would be forced to respond in kind. How to Avoid a Cyberattack Turning into a Nuclear War? Keep Talking. (Defense One) One danger that merits special attention is the possibility of a North Korean cyberattack escalating out of control – one that that sparks an American counterstrike using conventional weapons so intense that Pyongyang responds with an attempted nuclear missile attack on the United States. COMMENTARY Death of Nuclear Treaty with Russia Could Start Arms Race with China (The Hill) China is building a new generation of ground-based missiles squarely aimed at U.S. and allied bases and naval vessels in the Asia-Pacific that Washington has no ability to match, because of the treaty. What the IAEA Doesn’t Know — Or Want to Know — about Iran’s Nuclear Program (The Hill) This wasn’t the first time the IAEA failed to investigate possible Iranian violations discovered by Israeli intelligence. Why America Shouldn’t Threaten Preemptive War (The National Interest) Continually pushing for dominance in the backyards of the world's nuclear powers is madness. Continuity Is Not Consensus: The Future Nuclear Posture Review (Center for Strategic & International Studies) Leaked a month before its actual release, the 2018 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) initially unleashed a frenetic and somewhat nasty debate, especially on Twitter among nuclear policy geeks, wonks, advocates, and gadflies. twitter.com/USAF_CSDS | au.af.mil/au/csds // 3 // USAF CSDS News and Analysis Issue 1338 // NUCLEAR WEAPONS Defense News (Washington, D.C.) One Nuclear Treaty Is Dead. Is New START Next? By Aaron Mehta Oct. 23, 2018 WASHINGTON — As the Trump administration moves closer towards exiting the Intermediate- Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, experts are left to wonder whether another nuclear treaty may be in the administration’s crosshairs. Signed in 2010 between the U.S. and Russia, the New START treaty limits the deployed forces of both nations to 1,550 nuclear warheads over 700 delivery systems, including intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched ballistic missiles, and bombers. Asked about New START’s future while in Moscow, John Bolton. President Donald Trump’s national security adviser, said the government is “currently considering” its position on the agreement, but then added that the administration “does not have a position that we’re prepared to negotiate.” This isn’t the first time the administration has raised fears about the future of New START. In February 2017, Trump called the agreement “a one-sided deal” and a "bad deal.” However, nothing came from those comments, and a month later, Lt. Gen. Jack Weinstein, then the service’s deputy chief of staff for strategic deterrence and nuclear integration, said the agreement was of “huge value” to the U.S., adding that it has “been good for us.” Advocates for the treaty say New START benefits both directly by limiting the number of weapons deployed, and in indirect ways through information gathered. Frank Miller, who served as senior director for defense policy and arms control for President George W. Bush’s National Security Council, said during a Monday Atlantic Council event that the treaty provides 18 on-site inspections of Russian weapons a year, “valuable” information for America’s military. "The Russians need to see consequences from noncompliance on INF, I fundamentally agree with that,” Miller said. But “if the Russians don’t see us as reliable partners in arms control agreements and think they are likely to be surprised by us, as they were by some degree from the withdraw of the ABM treaty and by the abrupt nature of the withdraw from INF, they may begin to hedge and they may be more inclined, rather than less inclined, to prepare themselves for a [nuclear] breakout.” Speaking at the same Atlantic Council event, Richard Burt, who served as chief negotiator in the original START talks between the U.S. and Russia, said the INF decision is “very bad news for anybody who is a supporter of extending New START.” “That decision doesn’t have to be formally taken until 2021, so a lot will depend on the outcome of the 2020 elections. I would say that if you do see Donald Trump re-elected and his national security adviser remains John Bolton, I think it’s a better than even chance that New START is not extended," he said. Notably, Bolton highlighted in his comments that the treaty doesn’t expire until 2021, so “we have plenty of time,” perhaps a hint that the administration does not plan to leave the agreement prematurely. twitter.com/USAF_CSDS | au.af.mil/au/csds // 4 // USAF CSDS News and Analysis Issue 1338 // But James Acton of the Carnegie Nuclear Policy Program sees few ties between the INF move and the future of New START — not that he’s optimistic about the latter. “New START is in deep trouble, but not because of this,” he said. “Russia, I think, would agree to extending New START even if the US withdraws from INF. The problem is that it’s increasingly clear that this administration doesn’t want to extend New START.” For the defense industry, the death knell of the INF agreement doesn’t move the needle much, said analyst Byron Callan, of Capital Alpha Partners. But New START could be “another matter,” he said. “New START’s demise could support a larger strategic weapons force, so it’s possible that programs such as Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent [Boeing vs Northrop] and LRSO [Lockheed Martin vs Raytheon] competition are upsized, and there would be more work on nuclear weapons in the Department of Energy,” Callan wrote in a note to investors. “Hypersonic weapon delivery platforms and missile defense could also play well in this environment, particularly with the possible loss of inspection/verification provisions of New START.” Action does wonder if domestic reaction to the INF withdrawal could change how the administration tackles New START, depending on potential blowback. But Callan notes that trying to project the political realities of 2021 is tough, given the U.S. is still two elections away.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Rafale Fighter Jet the Dassault Rafale Jet Is a Multirole Fighter Jet Designed and Built by Dassault Aviation, a French Aircraft Manufacturer
    Rafale Fighter Jet The Dassault Rafale Jet is a multirole fighter jet designed and built by Dassault Aviation, a French aircraft manufacturer. The name Rafale means ‘gust of wind’ or ‘burst of fire’ in a military sense. This article will give details about the Rafale fighter jet within the context of the IAS Exam. Origins of the Rafale Fighter Jet Towards the closing decades of the Cold War in the 1970s, the French military was looking to replace their current fleets of aircraft. To mitigate development coasts ad earn a hefty profit, France signed deals with the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy to produce a multirole fighter jet, the Eurofighter Typhoon. However, multiple disagreements over intellectual property rights, workshare and difference in requirements led France to back out of the deal and pursue its own aircraft development programme. The French government released a tender where they invited major defence contractors to demonstrate their technology. The tender was awarded to Dassault in July 1986 as a part of an eight-year-flight-test programme, laying the groundwork of the Rafale fighter jet project. The Rafale is unique in the sense that it is the only aircraft of its time to be solely built by France, that involved major French defence contractors, such as Dassault and Thales. Acquisition by the Indian Airforce In order to boost its air superiority parameters, the Indian Force placed orders for Rafale jets in April 2011, following a technology demonstration during that year. Following multiple rounds of negotiations between the French and the Indian governments, an agreement was reached on 23 September 2016 between Indian Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar and his French counterpart Jean-Yves Le Drian.
    [Show full text]
  • The Economic Case for Investing in Europe’S Defence Industry
    Error! No text of specified style in document. The Economic Case for Investing in Europe’s Defence Industry September 2013 - 1 - Europe Economics is registered in England No. 3477100. Registered offices at Chancery House, 53-64 Chancery Lane, London WC2A 1QU. Whilst every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information/material contained in this report, Europe Economics assumes no responsibility for and gives no guarantees, undertakings or warranties concerning the accuracy, completeness or up to date nature of the information/analysis provided in the report and does not accept any liability whatsoever arising from any errors or omissions © Europe Economics. Contents 1 Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Broad macroeconomic impacts of defence investment ...................................................................... 1 1.2 Unpacking the mechanisms by which defence spending affects the broader economy .............. 5 2 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................... 8 3 Macroeconomic Impacts................................................................................................................................... 10 3.1 GDP..............................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Rising to Iran's Challenge
    RISING TO IRAN’S CHALLENGE GCC Military Capability and U.S. Security Cooperation Michael Knights Policy Focus 127 | June 2013 THE WASHINGTON INSTITUTE FOR NEAR EAST POLICY RISING TO IRAN’S CHALLENGE GCC Military Capability and U.S. Security Cooperation Michael Knights Policy Focus 127 | June 2013 All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. © 2013 by The Washington Institute for Near East Policy Published in 2013 in the United States of America by The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, 1828 L Street NW, Suite 1050, Washington, DC 20036. Cover photo: UAE, Italian, Bahraini, and U.S. armed forces sight in on a mock target while performing a Visit, Board, Search, and Seizure demonstration at the Port of Zayed area in Abu Dhabi, UAE, as part of Exercise Leading Edge 13, January 2013. Leading Edge 13 military-to-military engagements are intended to sharpen capabilities among nations in an effort to foster relationships and build regional security. (USMC photo/MSgt. Salvatore Cardella) CONTENTS The Author v Acknowledgments vii Executive Summary ix 1 | Introduction 1 2 | SWOT Analysis of the Gulf Militaries 7 3 | Key Missions for GCC Allies 23 4 | Implications for U.S. Security Cooperation 37 THE AUTHOR MICHAEL KNIGHTS is a Lafer fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, specializing in the military and security affairs of Iraq, Iran, Libya, Yemen, and the Gulf states.
    [Show full text]
  • Essais En Vol Peter Collins
    Essai en vol : le Rafale de Dassault, le combattant par excellence par Peter Collins La plupart des forces aériennes alliées disposent aujourd’hui de flottes d’avions de combat dits de 4e génération, définis par divers attributs tels que les commandes de vol électriques, l’instabilité naturelle du vol, une agilité extrême, des capacités réseau-centrées, la multiplicité des systèmes d’armes et le caractère multirôle. Plusieurs types d’avions occidentaux répondent à cette définition – le Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, le Dassault Rafale, l’Eurofighter Typhoon et le Saab Gripen NG. Le Boeing F-15E et le Lockheed Martin F-16, de conception plus ancienne, ont toutefois bénéficié d’une modernisation qui leur confèrent des capacités multirôle à peu près similaires en termes de mission. Sur ces différents avions, seuls le Super Hornet et le Rafale M peuvent être mis en œuvre à partir d’un porte-avions. Avec l’arrivée à maturité des capacités qu’offrent ces avions de 4e génération, en termes de systèmes d’armes, de capteurs et de capacités réseau-centrées, les perspectives de commandes à l’export pour ces appareils éprouvés en opération deviennent beaucoup plus réalistes. Un accès exclusif Pour le compte de Flight International, je suis devenu le premier pilote d’essai britannique à évaluer le Rafale, au standard F3, qui s’applique à la fois aux unités de l’armée de l’Air française, et aux flottilles d’attaque de la Marine. Légende photo : Les Rafale de l’armée de l’Air française ont déjà été mis en œuvre en Afghanistan.
    [Show full text]
  • FCAS Overview
    The Future Combat System: An Overview A Second Line of Defense Overview on the Standup and Evolution 8/1/21 of the FCAS In this report, we have brought together our FCAS articles from both Second Line of Defense and Defense.info published since its standup in 2018 and covered through the Bundestag Budget Committee’s Green Light on funding for the program in June 2021. Report Authors: Robbin Laird, Murielle Delaporte and Pierre Tran The Future Combat System: An Overview The Future Combat System: An Overview A SECOND LINE OF DEFENSE OVERVIEW ON THE STANDUP AND EVOLUTION OF THE FCAS Preface ................................................................................................................................................... 3 The Future Combat Air System: The View from Paris ........................................................................... 4 France Leads FCAS Effort ................................................................................................................................. 4 The F-4 Upgrade .............................................................................................................................................. 4 A Team Approach to Air Combat Superiority .................................................................................................. 6 Companies and FCAS ...................................................................................................................................... 6 F-4 Technology as a FCAS Building Block ......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of the Air Forces and Air Defence Units of Poland’S Armed Forces
    The future of the Air Forces and air defence units of Poland’s Armed Forces ISBN 978-83-61663-05-8 The future of the Air Forces and air defence units of Poland’s Armed Forces Pulaski for Defence of Poland Warsaw 2016 Authors: Rafał Ciastoń, Col. (Ret.) Jerzy Gruszczyński, Rafał Lipka, Col. (Ret.) dr hab. Adam Radomyski, Tomasz Smura Edition: Tomasz Smura, Rafał Lipka Consultations: Col. (Ret.) Krystian Zięć Proofreading: Reuben F. Johnson Desktop Publishing: Kamil Wiśniewski The future of the Air Forces and air defence units of Poland’s Armed Forces Copyright © Casimir Pulaski Foundation ISBN 978-83-61663-05-8 Publisher: Casimir Pulaski Foundation ul. Oleandrów 6, 00-629 Warsaw, Poland www.pulaski.pl Table of content Introduction 7 Chapter I 8 1. Security Environment of the Republic of Poland 8 Challenges faced by the Air Defence 2. Threat scenarios and missions 13 System of Poland’s Armed Forces of Air Force and Air Defense Rafał Ciastoń, Rafał Lipka, 2.1 An Armed attack on the territory of Poland and 13 Col. (Ret.) dr hab. Adam Radomyski, Tomasz Smura collective defense measures within the Article 5 context 2.2 Low-intensity conflict, including actions 26 below the threshold of war 2.3 Airspace infringement and the Renegade 30 procedure 2.4 Protection of critical 35 infrastructure and airspace while facing the threat of aviation terrorism 2.5 Out-of-area operations 43 alongside Poland’s allies Chapter II 47 1. Main challenges for the 47 development of air force capabilities in the 21st century What are the development options 2.
    [Show full text]
  • INDIA'scontemporary Security Challenges
    Contemporary Security INDIA’S Challenges Edited by Michael Kugelman INDIa’s Contemporary SECURITY CHALLENGES Essays by: Bethany Danyluk Michael Kugelman Dinshaw Mistry Arun Prakash P.V. Ramana Siddharth Srivastava Nandini Sundar Andrew C. Winner Edited by: Michael Kugelman ©2011 Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington, D.C. www.wilsoncenter.org Available from : Asia Program Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars One Woodrow Wilson Plaza 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20004-3027 www.wilsoncenter.org ISBN 1-933549-79-3 The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, es- tablished by Congress in 1968 and headquartered in Washington, D.C., is a living national memorial to President Wilson. The Center’s mis- sion is to commemorate the ideals and concerns of Woodrow Wilson by providing a link between the worlds of ideas and policy, while fostering research, study, discussion, and collaboration among a broad spectrum of individuals concerned with policy and scholarship in national and international affairs. Supported by public and private funds, the Center is a nonpartisan institution engaged in the study of national and world affairs. It establishes and maintains a neutral forum for free, open, and informed dialogue. Conclusions or opinions expressed in Center publi- cations and programs are those of the authors and speakers and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Center staff, fellows, trustees, advi- sory groups, or any individuals or organizations that provide financial support to the Center. The Center is the publisher of The Wilson Quarterly and home of Woodrow Wilson Center Press, dialogue radio and television, and the monthly news-letter “Centerpoint.” For more information about the Center’s activities and publications, please visit us on the web at www.wilsoncenter.org.
    [Show full text]
  • Rafale Deal: Modi in the Dock Fy-Away Condition)
    manufacture 108 Rafale fghters in India. (18 fghters were to be bought in a Rafale Deal: Modi in the Dock fy-away condition). Te Rafale deal has ripped open the veil that covered the corruption and crony However, when Prime Minister Modi went to Paris in April 2015, the initial capitalism within the Modi government. Not only that, the unfolding of the contract for 126 aircraf was abandoned and a new contract signed with Dassault events which led to the scrapping of the earlier contract for 126 Rafale fghter for delivery of 36 Rafale aircraf in a fy-away condition. Along with that, to planes and the replacement of that with an order for 36 planes in a fy-away meet the 50 per cent ofset clause, Anil Ambani’s Reliance Defence was chosen condition has revealed the direct role of the Prime Minister in this latest defence as the main partner for contracts worth nearly Rs. 20,000 crore. scandal. Te reason for scrapping the original contract, which had gone through a AFP Report quotes Hollande: Te recent statements made to lengthy process of bidding and evaluation by the Indian Air Force, has never “The name of Reliance group had the media by the former French been satisfactorily explained. Tat India required 126 fghter planes was not in appeared as part of a ‘new formula’ President, Francois Hollande, have dispute as the Indian air force was seriously short of the required number of 42 in negotiations over the Rafale deal, exposed the lies and the cover-up squadrons. decided by the Modi government” attempt of the Modi government.
    [Show full text]
  • Brazil's Fighter Choice Will Not Be an Easy
    jdw.janes.com s JDW s 31 March 2010 s 23 ANALYSIS had teamed with Embraer and promoted the Mirage 2000BR. The programme was cancelled Brazil’s fighter choice by the Lula administration in February 2005 and the funds were reportedly allocated to social development projects. The FAB was instructed to find an interim will not be an easy one solution to replace its ageing Mirages. Upgraded second hand options were offered by Israel, South Africa, Russia and the Netherlands, but France’s Brazil’s president has said that political, economic offer of a dozen Mirage 2000s armed with new generation air-to-air munitions for EUR100 mil- and social factors will be a major consideration in lion (USD135 million) was the winner. If we include the transfer of the Foch aircraft the selection of the FX-2 next-generation fighter carrier to the Brazilian Navy in 2000, it is clear from this point on that France was looking to aircraft. Iñigo Guevara reports strengthen its defence relationship with Brazil in anticipation of future contracts. A French defence official told this author in 2007: “We wouldn’t he selection of a new generation fighter was taken up in 1974 and it formed the have sold our [aircraft] carrier to just anyone.” fighter to satisfy a Brazilian Air Force backbone of Brazil’s fighter assets, complement- The Brazilian MoD published its new (FAB) requirement has become one ing the Mirages. National Defence Strategy in December 2008, of the most delayed and controversial From this point on, the FAB’s combat assets which was followed by the most ambitious programmes of the decade.
    [Show full text]
  • Présentation Powerpoint
    Version: July, 2019 ® NATIONAL STOCK PLY SPEED RATING MAIN AIRCRAFT POSITION SIZE TECHNOLOGY PART NUMBER MAIN MARKET NUMBER RATING (MPH) A-10 MLG 36X11 BIAS 008-742-4 2620-01-129-7607 22 174 Military A-10 MLG 36X11 BIAS 008-742-4 2620-01-129-7607 22 250 Military A-37, U-1, O-2, HH-60H, SH- NLG / MLG / 6.00-6 BIAS 001-317-0 2620-00-060-7013 8 120 Military 60 TLG A-4, F-4, V-22 NLG 18X5.7-8 BIAS 008-649-1 2620-00-946-1108 14 200 Military Aérospatiale Alouette III SA NLG / MLG 355X150-4 BIAS 065-543-0 2620-14-514-6183 4 160 Military 316, SA 319 AH-64 MLG 8.50-10 BIAS 001-350-2 2620-01-168-0164 10 120 Military AV-8B MLG 26X7.75R13 X - NYLON M16101 2620-01-252-2753 10 230 Military AV-8B NLG 26X8.75R11 X - NYLON M16601 2620-99-783-3900 16 230 Military B-1B NLG 35X11.5-16 BIAS 008-842-0 2620-01-208-2894 22 256 Military B-1B MLG B46X16.0-23.5 BIAS 008-887-1 2620-01-207-5302 30 276 Military B-52 MLG 56X16 BIAS 008-794-1 2620-00-575-8886 38 225 Military B-52 MLG 56X16 BIAS 008-794-1 2620-00-575-8886 38 239 Military B-52 WTG 32X8.8 BIAS 041-712-0 2620-00-900-1191 16 160 Military C-130 NLG 12.50-16 BIAS 008-369-0 2620-00-834-6673 12 139 Military C-130 NLG 12.50-16 BIAS 008-369-0 2620-00-834-6673 12 150 Military C-130 MLG 20.00-20 BIAS 008-413-2 2620-00-142-5161 26 174 Military C-130 MLG 20.00-20 BIAS 008-413-2 2620-00-142-5161 26 174 Military C-17 MLG 50X21.0-20 BIAS 004-877-1 2620-01-494-0888 30 225 Military C-17 MLG 50X21.0-20 BIAS 004-877-1 2620-01-494-0888 30 225 Military C-17 NLG 40X16.0-14 BIAS 008-846-0 2620-01-409-1814 26 225 Military C-17
    [Show full text]
  • Lucht-En Ruimtevaartindustrie
    LUCHT-EN RUIMTEVAARTINDUSTRIE IN FRANKRIJK FLANDERS INVESTMENT & TRADE MARKTSTUDIE Lucht- en ruimtevaartindustrie in Frankrijk Oktober 2016 Flanders Investment & Trade Bordeaux 12, Cours Xavier Arnozan F-33000 BORDEAUX T: +33 (0)5 56 44 70 01 [email protected] www.flandersinvestmentandtrade.com FIT, Ambassade… Straat + nr Postcode + Stad (Land) Emailadres kantoor (verplicht) 2 Inhoudstabel Inhoudstabel ............................................................................................................................................ 3 Inleiding ................................................................................................................................................... 5 Franse markt ............................................................................................................................................ 6 1. Omvang ............................................................................................................................................ 6 2. Geografische spreiding van de bedrijven ......................................................................................... 7 3. Competenties................................................................................................................................... 8 4. Belangrijke Franse opdrachtgevers en toeleveranciers ................................................................... 9 Vooruitzichten – Groei van het luchtverkeer ........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Fighters Far and Wide
    Left, the Dassault Rafale, a French- built fighter. Below, the Eurofighter Typhoon at an air show. World air forces are on pace to buy more than 3,000 fighters over the next decade. By Marina Malenic Dassault photo he world’s military air arms, intent on preserving and strength- ening their fighter forces, have touched off what could prove to Tbe a decade-long global aircraft sales Fighters Far upsurge. Wealthy and developing nations alike are turning their attention to fighter re- capitalization. Their efforts might well send thousands of new and advanced and Wide units into global fighter forces. At stake: scores of billions of dollars in sales. Experts maintain that the newest US fighter, Lockheed Martin’s F-35, is poised to dominate sales in the latter years of this “growth decade” of roughly 2010-19. However, the initial years will see fierce competition among many manufacturers. Fueling the demand are pressures created by deferrals of modernization and the desire for emerging technolo- gies. It is a combination felt by many nations—from Britain to India, from Japan to Israel, not to mention the United States. What will this boom look like? Opinions vary, but reputable industry watchers Forecast International and the Teal Group consultancy of Fair- fax, Va., reported that sales may rise as much as 35 percent, and be worth a whopping $164 billion, during the period 2008-17. In their analyses, FI and the Teal Group projected sales of between 2,909 and 3,345 fighters. The average per-fighter cost works out to about $52 million.
    [Show full text]