NEWS ONLY: France-Germany-Spain Future Combat Air System (FCAS / SCAF / FSAC)

[DWG]

If the UK actually welcomed Germany and Spain into the program, that’d be a real slap in the face for Japan.

GCAP's a trilateral project, the UK can't unilaterally add partners.

 

[takacosta]

Spain’s Sánchez backs Germany in FCAS fighter jet dispute with France | Euractiv

France, Germany and Spain are partners in the €100 billion fighter jet programme, though Spain and its lead contractor Indra have so far stayed out of the Franco-German dispute

www.euractiv.com

Several media reports that Germany and Spain are considering asking Sweden or the UK to join as FCAS partners to replace France.

Does the UK really have the chops to run GCAP and FCAS in parallel?

 

[EmoBirb]

Spain’s Sánchez backs Germany in FCAS fighter jet dispute with France | Euractiv

France, Germany and Spain are partners in the €100 billion fighter jet programme, though Spain and its lead contractor Indra have so far stayed out of the Franco-German dispute

www.euractiv.com

Several media reports that Germany and Spain are considering asking Sweden or the UK to join as FCAS partners to replace France.

Sweden would be an outstanding potential partner

 

[Titus K]

The engine will be an issue without Safran ... maybe they could simply buy the GCAP engine ?

 

[FighterJock]

So what will happen to France in that case design their own fighter as they did with Rafale? I could see that as a possibility no matter the cost, that would leave Europe having no less than three 6th Generation fighters to compete against each other in terms of oversees sales.

 

[Hood]

“Frankly, if Germany wants to leave, let it leave. We know how to do this. France has the teams, the [technological] building blocks, the experience as an integrator… We’re not going to spend five more years bickering over every comma. Given the atmosphere today, imagine tomorrow. Better to cut cleanly now,” a French industry source close to the matter told us, speaking on condition of anonymity.

That's something I've said all along. With this amount of bickering and acrimony ever since the start of the project, is there any conceivable way that the partnership would hold up until 2040 and beyond?

In theory Dassault and Airbus are in a 20 year R&D relationship and potentially another 20 years of production beyond that. I can't see it lasting beyond 2026 let alone 2060.

Cutting Airbus a slice of the GCAP action would seem to be a bridge too far. Nobody would be happy with the slither of workshare left once the pie is redistributed and why should they get a prime slice of the action when the Japanese industry, BAE and Leonardo have been doing all the hard yards so far?

Saab and Airbus sounds cool, but as everyone says "France can't fund it alone", could Sweden stump up the kind of cash necessary to replace France?

 

[WatcherZero]

Yeah, I don't think its so much Germany looking to UK or Sweden for financing and orders, but to BAE/RR/SAAB as a technical partner to supplement Airbus and derisk them going it alone if Dassault wont back down on its demand of an 80% workshare on the fighter. For RR that's easy could go through MTU but in addition to Airbus UK providing some parts, BAE could provide integration consultancy advice as it did on the Turkish fighter program and another set of eyes checking the figures as could SAAB.
GCAP and FCAS dont have to be direct competitors as there is a bit of differentiation in their requirements. Britain/Japan/Italy want an long legged fighter/strike craft with a powerful targeting suite that will spend a lot of its time over the ocean. For Germany and Spain what you need is more of an interceptor with a secondary ground to air capability. Its kind of an F-15/F-16/F-18 situation.

 

[DWG]

For RR that's easy could go through MTU

I suspect they'd prefer to go through RR-Deutschland!

 

[H_K]

Cutting Airbus a slice of the GCAP action would seem to be a bridge too far. Nobody would be happy with the slither of workshare left once the pie is redistributed and why should they get a prime slice of the action when the Japanese industry, BAE and Leonardo have been doing all the hard yards so far?

Saab and Airbus sounds cool, but as everyone says "France can't fund it alone", could Sweden stump up the kind of cash necessary to replace France?

Exactly this. I’m really scratching my head and trying to understand what leverage Germany thinks it has.

They’re in a terrible negotiating position… seriously they think they can jump onto the GCAP bandwagon and demand full partner status and workshare? They’ll be lucky to get a domestic assembly line and some subcontracting work for Airbus DS, MTU etc. As for using Saab’s name as a negotiating tactic… given that Sweden has no program of record, that’s a weak play. And going it alone with Spain? Not credible at all given their technical gaps (which is precisely why they're desperate for help from BAE or Saab).

Compare to France’s best alternative… walk away from MGCS and EuroMALE, save billions of euros by killing those boondoggles to German industry which can then be allocated to Dassault’s NGF, eliminate all the FCAS inefficiencies, stop reinventing the wheel and roll out a new stealth platform with Rafale F5 avionics, save probably 50% in development cost and 5 years in development time. Maybe not ideal but much more credible than the alternative Germany has in mind…

 

[H_K]

if Dassault wont back down on its demand of an 80% workshare

Dassault and the DGA have both denied this so we should stop repeating this lie. It’s a straw man argument that‘s been leaked to the press in Germany as a negotiating tactic to make Dassault look greedy and a bad partner.

The reality is that Dassault has asked for final *decision rights* as the design lead on NGF, not workshare, which will still be allocated to each country per the original agreement.

 

[helmutkohl]

The engine will be an issue without Safran ... maybe they could simply buy the GCAP engine ?

I think its unlikely France would stop Safran from selling engines to non-French aircraft. for Safran, that's more money to be made.
Similar to how the F404 has now made its way into US, Turkish, and Korean planes.

 

[WatcherZero]

Dassault and the DGA have both denied this so we should stop repeating this lie. It’s a straw man argument that‘s been leaked to the press in Germany as a negotiating tactic to make Dassault look greedy and a bad partner.

The reality is that Dassault has asked for final *decision rights* as the design lead on NGF, not workshare, which will still be allocated to each country per the original agreement.

Spanish government have confirmed Dassault as demanding it as well and the French government hasn't denied it. So its only Dassault denying it.
Under the original agreement Dassault always were the design lead on it. However they have demanded the right to award a higher proportion than the work share agreement to themselves directly, claiming they would then pass the work on to subcontractors, however the subcontractors they want to award it to are French companies and so not meeting the national work share thresholds, so its pure greed.

 

[WatcherZero]

I suspect they'd prefer to go through RR-Deutschland!

RR-Deutschland do civil jet engines but I thought they were more likely to go through MTU Turbomeca Rolls-Royce which in addition to manufacturing the helicopter engines holds the RR share of Eurojet that makes the EJ200 engine. Though you are right that complicates things by having a Safran share, theres also MTU Friedrichshafen that does the Truck/Train/marine engines which is wholly RR owned and could handle production.

 

[Forest Green]

Germany Considers Split From France On Next Generation Fighter​

Germany Considers Split From France On Next Generation Fighter

Disagreements over Future Combat Air System workshare mean Germany is also looking at teaming up with the UK or Sweden on its future crewed fighter. Disagreements over Future Combat Air System workshare mean Germany is also looking at teaming up with the UK or Sweden on its future crewed fighter.

www.twz.com

 

[Cjc]

I agree, I don't really see the motivation for any of the GCAP countries (UK, Japan, Italy) to join another program unless it offers something significantly different, such as a smaller lighter aircraft, an advance trainer, a bomber, etc.

It offers money wich consdering the uk (and to a lesser extent Japan's) economic problems over the last few years would probably convince a lot of politicians.

I always thought the two programs were going to turn into one but Germany braking off and doing it alone would leave them with not a lot of leverage in negotiations.

 

[EmoBirb]

Saab and Airbus sounds cool, but as everyone says "France can't fund it alone", could Sweden stump up the kind of cash necessary to replace France?

Germany (in particular), Sweden and Spain (in addition to Belgium perhaps) would be more than able to get the necessary funds. Airbus, Saab and MTU at large are certainly capable enough together to do the heavy lifting with regards to research and development.

For France such a development would lead to plenty of uncertainty though.

 

[EmoBirb]

So what will happen to France in that case design their own fighter as they did with Rafale? I could see that as a possibility no matter the cost, that would leave Europe having no less than three 6th Generation fighters to compete against each other in terms of oversees sales.

France couldn't develop a jet on it's own that would warrant being considered a generational leap over the current crop of 5th generation jets. Dassault could probably pull off a 5th Gen fighter + CCA though. Which may be better for everyone involved, including France tbh.

 

[H_K]

France couldn't develop a jet on it's own that would warrant being considered a generational leap over the current crop of 5th generation jets.

Hmm why not? Do you mean that Dassault doesn't have the technical know-how (but Airbus DS, Airbus ES and Saab do)?

Or do you mean that France will be unable to fund the R&D on its own?

 

[Ainen]

France couldn't develop a jet on it's own that would warrant being considered a generational leap over the current crop of 5th generation jets.

Why?
Current crop was born around problem 2000(either well before or right after).

Making something substantially different doesn't take untold billions, it takes applying solutions from wider industry and adjusting to shifting landscape of war.

Especially since significant part of necessary capabilities comes in due course(as rafale development) anyway..
France being France is partially their normal behavior, but partially indeed they less and less need others.
Like rafale is on the brink of capturing remaining 114 indian orders, and if anyone can stop them - it isn't Eurofigher.

 

[EmoBirb]

Why?
Current crop was born around problem 2000(either well before or right after).

Making something substantially different doesn't take untold billions, it takes applying solutions from wider industry and adjusting to shifting landscape of war.

Especially since significant part of necessary capabilities comes in due course(as rafale development) anyway..m

Looking at NGAD and F/A-XX (run on a much larger budget by far more capable players in the aerospace business with decades of experience with design, development and manufacturing of low observable and advanced aircraft) it does in fact take untold billions. It does take untold billions to even conclude the R&D portion of a project of such scale. And then it takes time on top of that. And with something like GCAP and then a rival FCAS on top of that, time isn't something a French indigenous development would have in such a competitive environment.

I'm also sure China poured untold billions and years upon years into their multiple next generation efforts. Thing is though, the US and China are super powers, industrial nations of a much vaster scale, they have a much larger pool of qualified engineers, workers and researchers to pull from. The PRC and USA are military aviation top tier and both are able to run at least two next generation efforts. France, or any European nation alone, for that matter are and have none of that, which is why FCAS and GCAP started out as joint programs in the first place, to pool expertise, money and resources together to be able and compete with China and the United States.

Due to that, it's doubtful France could even dream of developing a true next generation fighter and the associated systems in order to rival US and Chinese designs, or even GCAP and the FCAS as laid out in it's current form.

 

[dark sidius]

Spain’s Sánchez backs Germany in FCAS fighter jet dispute with France | Euractiv

France, Germany and Spain are partners in the €100 billion fighter jet programme, though Spain and its lead contractor Indra have so far stayed out of the Franco-German dispute

www.euractiv.com

Several media reports that Germany and Spain are considering asking Sweden or the UK to join as FCAS partners to replace France.

This is what y say time ago FCAS is born dead, France is in a economic and politic crisis and partners start to lose patience. French president is unable to take big decision on anything so FCAS will go in new horizon. This is sad for the French Air Force who will lose credibility in the futur Rafale, is a plane of the end of eighties I dont see it facing the new 6 th gen fighters of China and Russia in a near futur.

 

[EmoBirb]

Hmm why not? Do you mean that Dassault doesn't have the technical know-how (but Airbus DS, Airbus ES and Saab do)?

Or do you mean that France will be unable to fund the R&D on its own?

Mostly funds. I think Dassault could do the necessary research and development to gain access to the technologies and technological maturity required for something that's a generational leap.

But...

That takes further funding and also eats several years of time.

Which is why I imply that they're in a tough spot if FCAS should blow up now. And also why I argue an advanced fifth generation fighter as a Rafale successor with advanced CCAs to complement it would be more cost and time effective solution for France and Dassault, albeit less prestigious. But a "5.5"th Gen with associated drones launching from their next carrier projects more power and lethality than doing so with modernized Rafales.

And this isn't me even being unfavorable towards France, it's also the approach I personally would favor for Germany. But Berlin seems to be determined to get FCAS, one way or another.

 

[EmoBirb]

This is what y say time ago FCAS is born dead, France is in a economic and politic crisis and partners start to lose patience. French president is unable to take big decision on anything so FCAS will go in new horizon. This is sad for the French Air Force who will lose credibility in the futur Rafale, is a plane of the end of eighties I dont see it facing the new 6 th gen fighters of China and Russia in a near futur.

PAK DP is on roughly the same timeline as FCAS, a 2040s aircraft. Another reason why I somewhat question the necessity for a genuine 6th generation fighter for continental Europe (while it makes sense for the UK and Japan, which have to face the PLAAF and PLAN in the Pacific).

 

[H_K]

Mostly funds. I think Dassault could do the necessary research and development to gain access to the technologies and technological maturity required for something that's a generational leap.

But...

That takes further funding and also eats several years of time.

Not a lot of historical evidence to support your point of view IMHO.

If you compare Rafale <-> Eurofighter, Rafale was developed in less time and at half the total R&D cost. There are significant efficiencies when you have clear design leadership, a single assembly line, an experienced supply chain, and can pick the "best athlete" suppliers as opposed to farming out work along national lines to inexperienced suppliers who have to reinvent the wheel (often with worse results).

So yes there's an additional financial burden to go it alone, but if anything Dassault will be able to go faster and more efficiently, which should offset some of the extra cost and might even (arguably) yield a better 6th gen aircraft.

 

[Ainen]

Looking at NGAD and F/A-XX (run on a much larger budget by far more capable players in the aerospace business with decades of experience with design, development and manufacturing of low observable and advanced aircraft) it does in fact take untold billions. It does take untold billions to even conclude the R&D portion of a project of such scale. And then it takes time on top of that.

At this point, the question is outright who's milking whom and for what.
Also, Dassault, aka Bloch, is continuously in aircraft design business since 1929. Depending on how one treat mergers, it's arguably the oldest extant fighter house in existence.

And with something like GCAP and then a rival FCAS on top of that, time isn't something a French indigenous development would have in such a competitive environment.

Everything here becomes moot, when we compare previous such competition - aka eurofighter(the commitee fighter), saab(the sensible, aka loser in any competitive setting), and rafale(the overambitious, should've continued with mirage). May even throw in J-10 and F-18E, as they're contemporaries from weapons market.

Rafale aint doing half bad in this lineup, with its entire production now dangerously close to reaching into 5xx aircraft, all contributing into one pocket.
And given how unironically poor french AF is - at this point it's even questionable, whom of the two now supports whom - France Rafale, or Rafale - France...

I'm also sure China poured untold billions and years upon years into their multiple next generation efforts. Thing is though, the US and China are super powers, industrial nations of a much vaster scale, they have a much larger pool of qualified engineers, workers and researchers to pull from.

Yet France had AESA on its fighter before China, and still flies daily on an engine half generation ahead of China(and perhaps several times better life etc), twenty years after it was fielded.
Industrial chain that produced Rafale is alive and well - better than French economy, in fact. Granted, they don't have a 5th gen - as their current aircraft just reached MLU, it was a bit early throwing everything down under and going for a new one.
Europe is somewhat dissapointing in last decades, but saying it can't execute is a massive mistake. Or, at least, France.

PAK DP is on roughly the same timeline as FCAS, a 2040s aircraft. Another reason why I somewhat question the necessity for a genuine 6th generation fighter for continental Europe (while it makes sense for the UK and Japan, which have to face the PLAAF and PLAN in the Pacific).

Whatever is the name of next thing in Russia, PAK DP is almost certain not to be next generation Russian effort (and frankly is likely dead).

 

[alberchico]

Not a lot of historical evidence to support your point of view IMHO.

If you compare Rafale <-> Eurofighter, Rafale was developed in less time and at half the total R&D cost. There are significant efficiencies when you have clear design leadership, a single assembly line, an experienced supply chain, and can pick the "best athlete" suppliers as opposed to farming out work along national lines to inexperienced suppliers who have to reinvent the wheel (often with worse results).

So yes there's an additional financial burden to go it alone, but if anything Dassault will be able to go faster and more efficiently, which should offset some of the extra cost and might even (arguably) yield a better 6th gen aircraft.

The Rafale benefited enormously from the development of the Mirage 2000 and 4000. This project is a far bigger leap to essentially a 6th generation fighter. Dassault would struggle with the development costs. I suppose that if they adopted the Turkish approach of a stealthy airframe with 4.5 generation avionics and sensors it might be a cost effective approach but not as cutting edge as what they are envisioning now.

 

[Ainen]

The Rafale benefited enormously from the development of the Mirage 2000 and 4000. This project is a far bigger leap to essentially a 6th generation fighter. Dassault would struggle with the development costs. I suppose that if they adopted the Turkish approach of a stealthy airframe with 4.5 generation avionics and sensors it might be a cost effective approach but not as cutting edge as what they are envisioning now.

We don't know whether turks will pull it off, but Kaan is in fact proper 5th gen with all key avionics features; check what they've shown over last two years.
Right example here is South Korea/KF-21, which did indeed go with a staged approach.

Also, it doesn't make a lot of sense. Rafale F5 in many ways is supposed to step beyond 5th gen baseline, both inside(avionics) and outside(CCA, which will also help with solutions for stealth). Rafale can't change architecture and certainly airframe - but this, together with engine perhaps, becomes a logical next step to take.

 

[dark sidius]

The Rafale benefited enormously from the development of the Mirage 2000 and 4000. This project is a far bigger leap to essentially a 6th generation fighter. Dassault would struggle with the development costs. I suppose that if they adopted the Turkish approach of a stealthy airframe with 4.5 generation avionics and sensors it might be a cost effective approach but not as cutting edge as what they are envisioning now.

The problem is not Dassault the problem now is money , France will have no money to go alone on a 6th gen fighter , the president is unable to make a program like this going well.

 

[EmoBirb]

When we arrived at the point where we're arguing that the M88 is technologically ahead of the likes of WS-19 and WS-15 we've truly reached levels of the likes of NonCredibleDefence...

 

[EmoBirb]

The problem is not Dassault the problem now is money , France will have no money to go alone on a 6th gen fighter , the president is unable to make a program like this going well.

Perhaps this will be the opportunity the Indians have been waiting for. A way for them to get "into the business". Ties to Dassault already exist, in a way after all.

 

[EmoBirb]

@Ainen I think you're massively overestimating the capabilities and funds of Dassault/France and massively underestimate the development of a genuine next generation fighter (something the very best and richest pull off in the 2030s, a joint program of second tier aviation players in the mid 2030s and something France expected at the earliest in 2040 with all the funds and resources of three large industrial nations pooled together).

Dassault isn't incompetent or incapable, but this may just be inherently out of their league without outside help, be it financial in nature or technical (something only US aviation giants could realistically supply).

As for PAK DP, it's the project projected the furthest into the future. And due to it's nature it's very unlikely to die, if anything it will be renamed, restructured, but the need for a MiG-31 successor persists either way.

 

[EmoBirb]

Not a lot of historical evidence to support your point of view IMHO.

If you compare Rafale <-> Eurofighter, Rafale was developed in less time and at half the total R&D cost. There are significant efficiencies when you have clear design leadership, a single assembly line, an experienced supply chain, and can pick the "best athlete" suppliers as opposed to farming out work along national lines to inexperienced suppliers who have to reinvent the wheel (often with worse results).

So yes there's an additional financial burden to go it alone, but if anything Dassault will be able to go faster and more efficiently, which should offset some of the extra cost and might even (arguably) yield a better 6th gen aircraft.

We already discussed for several pages why the Rafale cannot really be compared to a next generation fighter. So arguing on that basis is rather futile, the Rafale is an archaic and unsophisticated concept by comparison, as is every jet of it's generation. Aircraft like the Rafale, Eurofighter, F-16 etc. are not nearly as complex, system intensive, software heavy and sensor laden. The material science alone is a whole different ballpark. In essence, it's entirely possible for one to built a kit car in the backyard and drive around in it, but it's not comparable to the design, cost and engineering of an F1 car. This is more or less the gaping vastness that seperates such old aircraft from what is to come and currently only flies in form of demonstrators and perhaps select early prototypes.

 

[H_K]

The problem is not Dassault the problem now is money , France will have no money to go alone on a 6th gen fighter

France's defense equipment budget is about 40% of the 3 FCAS countries. If they can cut the waste by going it alone and reduce the R&D cost by half (as was the case with Rafale vs. Eurofighter), then the extra financial burden of a purely French NGF will only be 25% relative to what they were going to spend.

In exchange they will get 100% of the export income instead of 33%, so it could pay for itself fairly quickly.

Or in other words, if Spain could maintain the fiction that they could afford to fund 33% of FCAS with a GDP of only half of France's, then arguably France can afford to pay 100% of a French NGF (eliminating all the unnecessary waste), and still end up paying less as a % of GDP than what Spain is expected to contribute.

 

[Ainen]

@Ainen I think you're massively overestimating the capabilities and funds of Dassault/France and massively underestimate the development of a genuine next generation fighter (something the very best and richest pull off in the 2030s, a joint program of second tier aviation players in the mid 2030s and something France expected at the earliest in 2040 with all the funds and resources of three large industrial nations pooled together).

Assuming we're working on known principles for NGFA as established for NGAD (we have them somewhere deep in that thread).

Most - most important ones - are outright software based, accessible to more or less all advanced countries, as they come ported over from private software/services industry. Granted, coding in developed economies is damn expensive, but it isn't that bad.

Hardware ones come split into two parts - next generation equipment (sensors, antennas, processing). Here France has access to a robust industrial chain and world market, and continuously produce advanced products for MIC, dual use (like, space) and civilian markets.

Second - under doubt marker for now - is being flat(i.e. broadband stealth). We don't yet know for sure, whether it is a compromise or definitive visual feature of the generation. Whether the case, it's aerodynamic magic, which France is good at(1), and which is based, for a significant part, on X-31 research from 3 decades ago(2). Isn't exactly bleeding edge.

There was also engine, but it really appears to be dropped now....and Safran is one of those who can execute it anyway.

Just as importantly, we're right now really at an intersection point, where it's up to debate if current direction of fighter development is even right. What good are "air dominance platforms", that can neither establish air dominance(too expensive to risk), nor even prevent opponent from using airspace to his advantage (b/c 1000 dollar foam planes or printed quad copters with D2D antenna and alibaba optics don't care).

 

[TomcatViP]

Let´s not forget Time. Time is the most compromised variable when you cycle back to the starting point. I am sure that there is more politic in the polemic than an actual lack of daily progress technically, but still, a new airplane , with new requirements and time pass by, fast.
And do not forget that for France, there is no point having a said so 6th gen fighter with no Tanks, no ships, no air mobility etc...

The all point of a multi-nation cooperation is that you don´t sink all your budget line on one single item.

 

[Big_Zukini]

I think Germany taking a lead with new partners is a good idea. Better yet, fewer opinionated partners, more subcontractors.
So much time is wasted on petty politics and confusing the engineers.
And more variety is better.

 

[Reddington777]

This is what y say time ago FCAS is born dead

I thought I remembered someone saying that earlier in this thread and its alarming that this might end up being the case - or not as they envisioned.

Its incredibly fascinating that many many European countries seem to have come to the understanding of what having limited resources as a non super power means. GCAP seems to be moving along swimmmingly as everyone has a clearish idea of the workshare and the compromises that necessitates a partnership. France always seems to be the outlier. Im not sure how demanding "decision rights" in this context refers to though - decision rights on assigning work share? On on boarding contractors? With that unclear, it could mean anything from nowhere as bad as 80% workspace to something more unacceptable.

I'm sure France can still build a fighter they called FCAS though probably not going to be as capable as the originally envisioned version or whatever Tempest is. I think the KF-21 route is wise for France. Build something and get it out first, then iterate it into a 5.5 gen or a 6th gen fighter. Hell if they use the same digital engineering stuff Boeing supposedly used to push out an NGAD demonstrator, they could get something flying and iterate up in the air in time for 2040. There's also no way to guage the tradeoffs here between more streamlined leadership and less funds and manpower to conduct the R&D. Its entirely a toss up at this point.

 

[Reddington777]

being flat(i.e. broadband stealth)

Wouldnt being flatter (as compared to a "less flat" planform of the same height but smaller area and same properties otherwise) be worse against L band/ VHF/ UHF band radars?

 

[TorpedoJ]

This seems like a very odd discussion.
If Dassault go it alone, they will produce the most advanced fighter possible using France's funds and technology, tailored exactly to France's needs and timeframes (barring political shenanigans). If they are partnered through FCAS, they will have access to significantly more funds and slightly more technology, to produce a jet less directly designed for France's needs but more advanced.
Surely where both of those points lie on the useless 4th-6th gen scale is not relevant to the job at hand, which is for France's air force to stay competitive with Russia and China?

 

[TomcatViP]

Hell if they use the same digital engineering stuff Boeing supposedly used to push out an NGAD demonstrator, they could get something flying and iterate up in the air in time for 2040.

Well, they certainly do. Catia is at the base of Boeing Design teams. Catia is a software produced by Dassault-Systemes, a sister company of Dassault-Aviation
Obviously the trend goes in both directions, with Catia* releases historically integrating tools and applications originating from both side of the Pond.

See a piece on this aspect here

* as Solidworks, a similar software owned by Dassault