Back to news

March 16, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

How COVID-19 Could Change The A&D Supply Chain

How COVID-19 Could Change The A&D Supply Chain

Michael Bruno

The COVID-19 outbreak is the biggest punch to the gut commercial aviation has taken since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. And coming on the heels of the Boeing 737 MAX crisis, Airbus and Boeing widebody production rate cuts, U.S. trade wars and the flight-shaming movement in Europe, the coronavirus emergency is challenging the aerospace manufacturing sector and its global supply chain.

Is the historic upcycle of commercial aircraft orders over? Will orders be canceled and deferred? Will business aviation go out of favor? Only time will tell, but it has been interesting to hear what aerospace and defense (A&D) executives are worrying about.

First, lost revenue from disrupted operations in China is not among their worries. Practically no one in A&D manufacturing has revised their 2020 financial forecasts—provided in January or February—because of COVID-19 alone.

“To date, we have no reported cases of our employees having contracted the virus, and the direct impact to our trading activities has been minimal,” Senior Plc CEO David Squires said March 2.

Likewise, GE CEO Larry Culp did not change the company's financial outlook because COVID-19 was already cited in a forecast given last month. “In our view, in all likelihood it is going to be temporary, but it doesn't mean it is going to disappear tomorrow,” Culp said at a March 4 shareholder briefing.

To be sure, some OEMs and suppliers with Chinese operations had to shut down in recent weeks due to COVID-19. But those factories are back up, and the impact to revenue was limited. For instance, only 20 of Triumph Group's roughly 5,000 active suppliers are located in China or South Korea. All 20 remain operational, and no supply chain interruptions have occurred.

On the supply side, the glancing blow could have a lot to do with the fact that not much in Western aerospace is sourced in China. According to U.S. Commerce Department data, the U.S. imports just $1.1 billion annually in aircraft, spacecraft and related parts. What is more, that figure has been dropping since 2016—before the U.S.-China trade war—and was expected to fall off a cliff for 2019 and 2020 regardless of the “Phase One” trade deal truce.

China always was a twofold market for U.S. aerospace: Sell parts and services to existing Western-supplied fleets there, and partner for local production of nonproprietary parts and systems for emerging Chinese fleets. But China is ramping up efforts to get its own fleet into operation and is pairing with Russian suppliers more often. Any growth in overall aerospace trade likely would have to come from a jump in Chinese orders of Airbus or Boeing airliners, which was not widely expected in the wake of the Jan. 16 trade truce and is not anticipated now after the recent plummet in Chinese air traffic.

Although collapsing demand worldwide for air travel could have a devastating effect on A&D manufacturing and supply, executives do not consider it likely. COVID-19 quickly turned into a short, sharp shock to the system, but industry leaders see the same underlying macro conditions driving long-term growth. Chief among them: expanding middle classes worldwide that spend more discretionary funds traveling by air for leisure.

During the 2020 Aviation Summit in Washington, new Collins Aerospace President Stephen Timm was asked if the airliner-customer landscape could look a lot different in coming years due to the scare. “Frankly, we're going to see differences,” Timm said. “This will be a blip—a serious blip that we have to deal with today—but compared with the macro aerospace industry, we're in a really good place.”

Where do industry insiders see change coming to the supply chain? For one thing, COVID-19 could help deepen resistance to business travel, said some attending Aviation Week's Annual Aerospace Raw Materials and Manufacturers Supply Chain Conference on March 9-12. That would exacerbate the ongoing drop in demand for widebodies.

Still, the biggest change could come in accelerating a budding shift in A&D supply from globalization to regionalization. Executives and consultants at both the Wharton Aerospace Conference on Feb. 29 and Aviation Week's supply chain event discussed how COVID-19 cements a belief that just-in-time global supply chains are too risky and not worth the lower cost anymore.

Instead, they look to capitalize on aerospace manufacturing hubs in Asia, Europe-North Africa and North America to supply themselves. The trend could start with aerostructures for future single-aisle airliners, especially as composite materials are increasingly incorporated. “From a colocation strategy,” says one supplier executive, “you will see it in the next-gen airplanes.”

https://aviationweek.com/aerospace/manufacturing-supply-chain/how-covid-19-could-change-ad-supply-chain

On the same subject

  • US Special Operations Command chooses L3Harris' Sky Warden for Armed Overwatch effort

    August 2, 2022 | International, Aerospace

    US Special Operations Command chooses L3Harris' Sky Warden for Armed Overwatch effort

    AFSOC hopes its Armed Overwatch plane will be able to pressure violent extremist groups in austere places like Africa, where the airspace is largely permissive.

  • Despite some opposition, US on course to deliver F-35s to Turkey on June 21

    June 14, 2018 | International, Aerospace

    Despite some opposition, US on course to deliver F-35s to Turkey on June 21

    WASHINGTON — The U.S. government is proceeding with plans to deliver the first F-35 to Turkey, with the country set to accept its first jet on June 21 despite opposition from some in Congress. A Lockheed Martin spokesman confirmed to Defense News that it's still gearing up for a rollout ceremony at its production facilities in Fort Worth next week. “The F-35 program traditionally hosts a ceremony to recognize every U.S. and international customer's first aircraft. The rollout ceremony for Turkey's first F-35 aircraft is scheduled for June 21,” the spokesman said in a written statement to Defense News. “The aircraft will then ferry to Luke Air Force Base, Arizona, where Turkish pilots will join the F-35A training pool.” The Senate is set to vote this week on the annual defense policy bill, which includes language that would prohibit the U.S. government from “transfer of title” to Turkey until the time that the Defense Department submits a report to Congress on removal of Turkey from the F-35 program. But even if that language succeeds in the Senate, the defense policy bill will proceed to conference, where a group of armed services committee members will hammer out differences between the House and Senate versions to emerge with a single, final piece of legislation. That process could take months. Congress's opposition to allowing Turkey to purchase the F-35 hovers around two points: the country's detainment of American pastor Andrew Brunson and a deal to purchase the Russian S-400 air defense system. But for now, it appears that the Defense Department has no plans to keep Turkey from getting its first F-35 or to put restrictions on its use at Luke AFB. Thomas Goffus, the Defense Department's deputy assistant secretary of defense for Europe and NATO, acknowledged during an Atlantic Council event Wednesday that Turkey's acquistion of the S-400 could present the U.S. military and NATO alliance with added technical risks. But he would not go as far to spell out what actions the Defense Department is considering or could consider later down the road — perhaps a sign that the Pentagon is waiting to see how this legislation shakes out. “We have a process to evaluate the risks to Western technology that that [procurement] would present. Our preference is that they do not acquire the S-400,” Goffus said. “Given that, they are a sovereign nation, and they are trying to take care of their defense needs,” he added. “What restrictions are placed on them and what Congress will eventually pass, I can't even speculate on it on this point.” By the time Congress passes legislation that could curb Anakara's F-35 ownership, the country will likely have already started building up its first squadron at Luke AFB. There, Turkish pilots and maintainers will train alongside U.S. ones, moving from academic courseware to live flights. NATO and U.S. Defense Department officials have warned Turkey that if it continues down the path of purchasing the S-400, it will not be able to plug it in with NATO technologies like the F-35. SASC, in its policy bill, echoed those concerns, saying that Turkey's purchase of Russian hardware would “degrade the general security of the NATO alliance [...] and degrade interoperability of the alliance.” After a meeting in Washington with U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo earlier this month, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu expressed confidence that the United States would not only deliver the first F-35 to Turkey as planned, but that it would ultimately decide to continue F-35 sales to Turkey. “Turkey rejects threatening language from the U.S. on the issue, it is not constructive,” Çavuşoğlu said on June 4, according to a report from the Turkish newsgroup Anadolu Agency. Turkey plans to buy 100 F-35As. As a partner of the program, its domestic defense industry helps build the Joint Strike Fighter. Most notably, Turkish Aerospace Industries' serves as a manufacturer of the aircraft's center fuselage. It has also been chosen as a sustainment hub for the international F-35 community. https://www.defensenews.com/smr/nato-priorities/2018/06/13/despite-some-opposition-us-on-course-to-deliver-f-35s-to-turkey-on-june-21/

  • Upgrading US Navy ships is difficult and expensive. Change is coming

    June 22, 2018 | International, Naval

    Upgrading US Navy ships is difficult and expensive. Change is coming

    By: David B. Larter WASHINGTON ― The U.S. Navy is looking at extending the life of its surface ships by as much as 13 years, meaning some ships might be 53 years old when they leave the fleet. Here's the main problem: keeping their combat systems relevant. The Navy's front-line combatants ― cruisers and destroyers ― are incredibly expensive to upgrade, in part because one must cut open the ship and remove fixtures that were intended to be permanent when they were installed. When the Navy put Baseline 9 on the cruiser Normandy a few years ago, which included all new consoles, displays and computer servers in addition to the software, it ran the service $188 million. Now, the capability and function of the new Baseline 9 suite on Normandy is staggering. The cost of doing that to all the legacy cruisers and destroyers in the fleet would be equally staggering: it would cost billions. So why is that? Why are the most advanced ships on the planet so difficult to keep relevant? And if the pace of change is picking up, how can the Navy stay relevant in the future without breaking the national piggy bank? Capt. Mark Vandroff, the current commanding officer of the Carderock Division of the Naval Surface Warfare Center and former Arleigh Burke-class destroyer program manager, understands this issue better than most. At this week's American Society of Naval Engineers symposium, Vandroff described why its so darn hard to upgrade the old ships and how future designs will do better. Here's what Vandroff had to say: “Flexibility is a requirement that historically we haven't valued, and we haven't valued it for very good reasons: It wasn't important. “When you think of a ship that was designed in the ‘70s and built in the ‘80s, we didn't realize how fast and how much technology was going to change. We could have said: ‘You know what? I'm going to have everything bolted.' Bolt down the consoles in [the combat information center], bolt in the [vertical launch system] launchers ― all of it bolted so that we could more easily pop out and remove and switch out. “The problem was we didn't value that back then. We were told to value survivability and density because we were trying to pack maximum capability into the space that we have. That's why you have what you have with the DDG-51 today. And they are hard to modernize because we valued survivability and packing the maximum capability into the minimum space. And we achieved that because that was the requirement at the time. “I would argue that now as we look at requirements for future ships, flexibility is a priority. You are going to have to balance it. What if I have to bolt stuff down? Well, either we are going to give up some of my survivability standards or I'm going to take up more space to have the equivalent standards with an different kind of mounting system, for example. And that is going to generate a new set of requirements ― it's going to drive design in different directions than it went before. “I suppose you could accuse the ship designers in the 1980s of failure to foresee the future, but that's all of us. And the point is they did what they were told to do. Flexibility is what we want now, and I think you will see it drive design from this point forward because it is now something we are forced to value.” https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2018/06/21/upgrading-us-navy-ships-is-difficult-and-expensive-change-is-coming/

All news