November 1, 2019 | International, Naval
By: Tom Kington
ROME – Italy's Fincantieri and France's Naval Group announced the name of their new naval joint venture will be ‘Naviris' on Wednesday, the day after Fincantieri lashed out at reports that its takeover of French ship yard Chantiers de l'Atlantique faces EU anti-trust opposition.
The new name for the JV was announced after a quarterly steering committee meeting of the 50-50 alliance, which was launched in June and is set to be incorporated by year's end.
The two state-controlled shipbuilding firms aim to use the joint venture to build and market naval vessels, as well share supply chains, research and testing. As part of the deal, France is using an Italian design for its new logistics vessel, while the two yards will work together on upgrading the Horizon frigates jointly built by Italy and France and operated by both countries. There are also plans for the JV to work on a new European Patrol Corvette.
The two yards have promoted the JV as a way to create synergies in Europe's fractured naval industry to allow it to compete globally, and it came on the heels of Fincantieri's takeover of France's Chantiers de l'Atlantique shipyard — a deal which will allow the two yards to share work on cruise ships.
This month the drive for more synergy appeared be bearing fruit when Fincantieri said that it would be building forward sections for the new French logistics ships.
The four vessels, part of the FLOTLOG (Flotte logistique) program, which are based on the Italian Vulcano design, are being built by a temporary consortium between Chantiers de l'Atlantique and Naval Group.
Fincantieri said it would build the sections at its Castellammare di Stabia shipyard in southern Italy, with deliveries to Chantiers de l'Atlantique, which it controls, scheduled between 2021 and 2027. The only potential hitch to the cross-border cooperation is the European Union, which is studying the Fincantieri takeover of Chantiers de l'Atlantique for anti-trust violations, and has yet to give a green light.
On Tuesday Fincantieri attacked press reports suggesting the anti-trust probe had been extended, claiming it “strongly disapproves of such rumors, which have also negatively affected its share price today.”
In a statement, Fincantieri said that if the rumors were true, it would “firmly” disapprove of such a decision by the EU. The company challenged reports that the deal would cut the number of cruise ship builders in Europe to two, claiming the real number would be three.
Correction: This story was updated on Nov. 1 to correct the name of the new joint venture.
April 27, 2023 | International, Aerospace
Safran Electronics & Defense has also won a contract from Leonardo to develop and supply the high-performance EuroflirTM 610 electro-optical?system, for the Eurodrone.
January 22, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security
By: Susanna V. Blume and Molly Parrish It's no secret that the military services fight hard to protect their shares of the defense budget. Just last week, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Michael Gilday made his case for a greater share of the defense budget. Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy quickly answered, making the same claim on behalf of his service. What if the Department of Defense were able to use these rivalries as a force for good? The secretary of defense should pit the services against each other in a healthy competition for solutions to real operational challenges. The reward? More funding in their budgets to implement the best solutions. It is by now old news that the 2018 National Defense Strategy solidified a shift in priorities from long-term counterinsurgency and stabilization operations in the Middle East to strategic competition with China and Russia. This shift represents a significant change in what the country will require of the joint force in the future. As a result, to fully embrace this shift in priorities, it follows that the services must accept additional risk in some areas in order to invest in the capabilities required to sustain U.S. military advantage over aspiring great powers. In other words, in order to implement the NDS, the DoD must shift resources. But shifting resource around with the defense budget is really hard. For the most part, defense budgets are built from the bottom up, with each program having strong institutional champions, regardless of how relevant that program is to the current strategy. In this environment, it's difficult to take money away from something to give it to something else. The result is budgets that largely reflect the status quo. While the DoD should of course avoid capricious and destabilizing swings in funding for defense programs, there are times when deliberate, strategy-driven shifts in resources are necessary. To make it a little easier to move money around the DoD in these cases, we recommend in our latest report that the secretary of defense harness interservice rivalry as a force for good. The secretary should give the services specific operational challenges to solve at the outset of the budget cycle, and reward the service or services with the best solutions at the end of the cycle with the funds to implement them. The DoD competition would start at the beginning of the budget cycle, with the operational challenge given alongside the usual strategic, planning and fiscal guidance. Over the course of the budget cycle, the services would each work to come up with solutions to the operational challenges posed by the secretary. During program review, the services would present their solutions to defense leadership. The service or services with the best solution to the secretary's challenges would then receive the funds to implement them. To fund this competition, the secretary would have to hold back some resources at the start of the process, effectively giving less to each of the services to begin with. This decision will be extremely unpopular with the services, but it will also ensure that the secretary has easily accessible funding available to him or her at the end of program review with which to ensure that the services are implementing his or her top priorities. The idea of spurring innovation through competition is not new. The DoD already uses competitions to drive innovative solutions to a wide variety of technical challenges. Take the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency's Launch Challenge, which aims to improve resiliency in space by tasking participants to “launch payloads to orbit on extremely short notice.” DARPA will give the team who is able to complete both launches a prize of $10 million to continue their work. In addition, this past September, the DoD's Joint Artificial intelligence Center, along with the National Security Innovation Network, hosted a Hackathon at the University of Michigan. Participants came from both academia and the commercial industry to find artificial intelligence-enabled solutions. The hackers were given a specific problem and then tasked with finding a solution. The winners of the Hackathon are rewarded with — surprise — money! The services like money just as much as the average citizen, and the Department of Defense needs to take this concept and use these persistent and unavoidable interservice rivalries as a force for good. A healthy competition between the services, incentivized by funding, could be the next step toward implementing and addressing the challenges inherent in implementing the National Defense Strategy. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/01/21/interservice-rivalries-a-force-for-good/
September 14, 2024 | International, C4ISR
That work is increasingly important for the U.S., which is racing against China to shape the next iteration of wireless telecommunications.