16 octobre 2020 | International, Aérospatial

A&D Industry And The Chinese Conundrum: Get In Or Out?

Michael Bruno

Western airlines are begging for more government aid, the International Air Transport Association does not expect the industry to see positive cash flow before 2022, and credit agency analysts forecast depressed aerospace and defense business activity for up to another 1.5 years.

Meanwhile, data continues to portray China as the lone bright spot in the aviation world. By August, Chinese domestic flights had recovered to about 90% of 2019 levels. “China has been effectively controlling the spread of COVID-19, limiting cases to less than 100 a day. Combined with a large domestic market, the recovery in commercial aviation is expected to outpace the rest of the world,” Jefferies analysts Sheila Kahyaoglu and Greg Konrad noted in late September.

“Right now, really, the two areas of traffic that are close to normal are domestic China and the roughly 2,000 all-cargo aircraft out there today,” echoes AeroDynamic Advisory Managing Director Kevin Michaels. Otherwise, “it's a bloodbath, and we're all aware of that,” he told an Aviation Week SpeedNews conference in September.

For aerospace and defense (A&D) suppliers, the dichotomy sets up a critical decision: Should suppliers and servicers run toward China—or run away?

It is easy to understand why they are debating the question. Long before COVID-19 gutted commercial air traffic and kick-started what is expected to be the greatest makeover of aircraft manufacturing and the maintenance, repair and overhaul industries since the dawn of the jet age, there were already good reasons to debate being in China. Topping the list was the Trump administration's trade war with the world's second-largest economy. Ongoing questions lingered about intellectual property rights and the specter of inadvertently creating future competitors in Avic, Comac and other Chinese companies.

Proponents of reshoring industry to the U.S.—or “nearshoring” to Canada or Mexico—are certainly touting potential opportunity. “The logical thing is to fill longer-term and COVID-revealed supply chain gaps,” Reshoring Initiative President Harry Moser told an Aerospace and Defense Forum audience on Oct. 6.

Others agree that conditions are ripe for reshoring, not least because automation and advanced technologies that replace humans can offset North American costs. Also, A&D has been deemed a critical part of U.S. infrastructure. And Chinese unit labor costs have risen fivefold in recent decades. This summer, site-selection consultant Duff & Phelps identified A&D as a top candidate for moving to America (see chart).

But siting decisions are complex, and supply chain moves are even more so. Not only is commercial aviation looking strongest in China now and in the near future, but it could accelerate a long-expected toppling of the U.S. as the world's leading aviation market, possibly as soon as 2025. Increasingly, Beijing officials talk about relying on domestic supply instead of imports. Indeed, the “Sleeping Giant” could boast a future estimated aviation market value of more than $1 trillion, according to Yi Zhang, general manager of OCO Global China.

That catches suppliers' attention. Zhang spoke in June to a well-attended webinar hosted by Washington state economic development officials about aerospace opportunities in China, and that was a month before Boeing revealed it was even thinking about scrapping 787 production in Puget Sound, Washington.

Now China's opportunities beckon brighter with no snapback in Western air traffic.

Still, in his Sept. 24 report titled “Caveat Venditor,” or “seller beware,” Vertical Research Partners analyst Rob Stallard cautions Western A&D companies against rushing toward China. “We see the Chinese government leveraging its position of relative post-COVID strength in coming years, and no doubt aerospace will see some of the fallout,” Stallard says. “As the biggest show in town, we would expect to see more quid pro quo in China's relationship with what is still very much a Western aerospace industry. Price, supply chain and technology transfer could be on the table, as could politics.

“Aviation could conceivably suffer collateral damage as part of a broader trade war,” Stallard writes. “So while investors will probably see good news in a Chinese-led aero recovery, we would be looking for any strings attached.”

https://aviationweek.com/aerospace/manufacturing-supply-chain/ad-industry-chinese-conundrum-get-or-out

Sur le même sujet

  • 3 ways America can fix its vulnerability to cruise missiles

    30 octobre 2019 | International, Naval

    3 ways America can fix its vulnerability to cruise missiles

    By: Bradley Bowman and Andrew Gabel September's drone and cruise missile attack on a major Saudi energy facility highlights the challenges associated with cruise missile defense. Americans might be tempted to dismiss this attack merely as evidence of a Saudi vulnerability, with little relevance to the U.S. homeland. However, given that an American-built air defense system failed to stop the attack, this would be a mistake. As China and Russia continue to develop and deploy advanced cruise missiles to threaten the United States, urgent action is required. In recent years, the Pentagon has focused on protecting the homeland from ballistic missile attacks by building a ballistic missile defense system consisting of radars and interceptors. This system can provide some protection against a limited ballistic missile attack on the United States, but it is not designed to protect American cities from cruise missile attacks. Unlike ballistic missiles, which arc high into the atmosphere and beyond before striking their target, cruise missiles fly at low altitudes, where ground-based radars struggle to detect them. And to defeat a cruise missile, the Department of Defense must first be able to detect and track it. America's adversaries “currently hold our citizens and national interests at risk,” the commander of Northern Command, Gen. Terrence O'Shaughnessy, testified before the Senate in April. “The homeland is not a sanctuary. For that reason, improving our ability to detect and defeat cruise missile attacks is among my highest priorities.” It is not difficult to understand why. Seeing this long-standing vulnerability, America's great power adversaries have worked to improve their cruise missile capabilities. Today, for example, Russia possesses a submarine-launched cruise missile that Moscow could use to circumvent existing U.S. missile defenses and target key East Coast military bases and population centers. And the cruise missile capabilities of U.S. adversaries are only growing more formidable. In April testimony before the Senate, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy John Rood warned that potential adversaries are developing sophisticated “cruise missile systems with increased speed, range, accuracy and lethality.” For its part, Russia is developing hypersonic cruise missiles. Russian President Vladimir Putin claims one of these cruise missiles could fly as fast as nine times the speed of sound. The Kremlin is also pursuing nuclear-powered cruise missiles with virtually unlimited range. Not to be outdone, China is developing its own hypersonic cruise missiles, supplementing its existing cruise missile stocks. Against both Moscow and Beijing's cruise missile arsenals, America's current defenses are inadequate. So what's to be done? The first step is for the Department of Defense to quickly assign a lead in the Pentagon for homeland cruise missile defense, which would enable key decisions related to the homeland cruise missile defense architecture — including decisions related to sensors and shooters, as well as command and control, battle management, and communications. This would help expedite efforts to integrate ballistic missile defense and cruise missile defense. Second, Congress should support efforts to deploy without delay the space-based sensors necessary to detect, track and ultimately defeat advanced cruise missiles and other missile threats to our homeland. Third, the Department of Defense should proactively look to partner with its impressive array of allies and partners to field — both at home and abroad — advanced cruise missile defense capabilities without delay. Consider the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. These allies are already part of a long-standing intelligence sharing arrangement with the United States, known as the “Five Eyes agreement.” As Atlantic Council Senior Fellow William Greenwalt has suggested, systematically expanding this arrangement to institutionalize the shared development of military technology makes sense. Cruise missile defense might be one of several good places to start. Israel represents another obvious partner, as it possesses a proven track record on missile defense innovation, deep real-world experience, an admirable sense of urgency and a long history of cooperation with the U.S. on missile defense. Indeed, Israel and the U.S. have worked together for years to develop the Arrow and David's Sling missile defense systems. If we combine these international partnerships with the innovation prowess of the American private sector — as well as timely, predictable and sufficient funding from Congress — much can be done to address areas of shared vulnerability. That includes cruise missile defenses for both the American homeland and forward-deployed U.S. troops. The September attack on the Saudi energy facility may seem of little concern to most Americans, but that attack should serve as a warning regarding the unique challenges associated with cruise missile defense. If Iran could pull off such an attack, imagine what Moscow and Beijing may be able to do. If our great power adversaries believe a surprise cruise missile attack against the U.S. homeland or American positions abroad might succeed, it increases the chances that Beijing or Moscow would undertake such an attack. The Pentagon assessed in its Missile Defense Review earlier this year that advanced cruise missile threats to the homeland “are on the horizon.” The attack last month in Saudi Arabia suggests that horizon might be closer than Americans think. Bradley Bowman is the senior director for the Center on Military and Political Power with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, where Andrew Gabel is a research analyst. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2019/10/29/3-ways-america-can-fix-its-vulnerability-to-cruise-missiles/

  • Rheinmetall to produce first armored vehicles in Ukraine in 2024 -report | Reuters

    3 décembre 2023 | International, Terrestre

    Rheinmetall to produce first armored vehicles in Ukraine in 2024 -report | Reuters

    German arms manufacturer Rheinmetall AG wants to build its first armored vehicles in Ukraine next year, Chief Executive Armin Papperger was cited as saying by German magazine WirtschaftsWoche.

  • SAIC hires former Air Force CIO Knausenberger for tech innovation role

    17 septembre 2023 | International, Aérospatial, Sécurité

    SAIC hires former Air Force CIO Knausenberger for tech innovation role

    SAIC brought in $3.7 billion in defense-related revenue in 2022, according to Defense News "Top 100" analysis.

Toutes les nouvelles