29 juin 2021 | International, Aérospatial
China Planning High Speed Helicopter to Compete Against Boeing-Sikorsky's Defiant-X
4 avril 2023 | International, Aérospatial
BAE Systems has received $491 million in contracts from Lockheed Martin to produce Block 4?electronic warfare?systems for future Lot 17 F-35 Lightning II jets.
24 mars 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité
By: Jill Aitoro WASHINGTON — Defense companies with substantial exposure to commercial markets are taking dramatic measures to limit overhead and preserve cash, with one chief executive calling the new coronavirus pandemic “worse than anything we've seen.” Among the companies that announced cost-cutting measures tied to losses or potential losses from the COVID-10 crisis, CAE pointed to temporary layoffs — starting first with almost 500 unionized employees, but with more inevitably to follow, CEO Marc Parent said during a webcast hosted by RBC Capital Markets. Parent and his executive team are taking salary cuts of 50 percent, with vice presidents taking cuts of 30 percent, managers and directors 20 percent, and all others 10 percent. The company is also taking capital expenditures as well as research and development investment to the bare minimum. “We're not Pollyanna here,” Parent said during the webcast. “We're assuming a tough period, and we're taking immediate steps to preserve cash.” In terms of business disruption, “this is worse than anything we've seen,” including 9/11, he added. GE Aviation, which already announced a hiring freeze, the cancellation of salaried merit increases and a reduction of nonessential spending, will cut about 10 percent of its U.S. workforce. CEO David Joyce will give up half of his salary starting April 1. The division also pointed to temporary lack of work impacting about 50 percent of its U.S. maintenance, repair and overhaul employees for 90 days. Meanwhile, Airbus is looking to investor incentives to gain some cash, canceling one planned dividend payment and another proposed 2019 dividend payment of 1.80 euros (U.S. $1.90) per share to save the company 1.4 billion euros ($1.5 billion). It's also lining up 15 billion euros in new credit to provide more cash to weather the crisis. All three companies are big players in commercial aviation. Airbus ranked No. 9 on the Defense News Top 100 list of defense companies, but with only 17 percent of its 2018 revenue coming from the defense and security business. GE ranked No. 29, with 13 percent of business coming from defense, and CAE ranked No. 70, with 40 percent coming from defense. The defense portions of the businesses are also feeling the impact, though less substantial because of the structure of contracts that often extend to multiple years. For CAE, programs fall under long-term contracts, versus “per sip” agreements more typical of commercial customers where revenue is driven by utilization. The company's CEO, Parent, also pointed to a $4 billion backlog in defense. Still, base access restrictions and the natural limitations on movement of people has made both training and order fulfillment more difficult for the defense business. “And the general preoccupation of the crisis has impact on the speed of procurement processes,” Parent said. “We don't see obvious structural impact, but we can anticipate short-term friction.” Publicly traded companies with mixed commercial-defense business have also seen deeper losses to stock price, generally speaking, compared to more pure-play defense companies. While Lockheed and Northrop Grumman stock prices have dropped about 34 percent and 24 percent in the last month, respectively, CAE and GE have dropped 66 percent and 48 percent, respectively. Boeing, with 66 percent of revenue coming from commercial and other nondefense markets, has seen a whopping 67 percent drop during that period. Raytheon, despite being almost entirely focused on defense, saw a bigger drop than most pure-play companies of about 47 percent during the last month, likely due to the increased exposure to commercial that will come with its United Technologies merger. But stock price can be a rather deceiving picture of impact on industry, particularly long term, warned Byron Callan of Capital Alpha Partners. “A lot of these stocks are part of the S&P 500, where price movements have no relation to underlying fundamentals,” he said. “On the flip side, you could see rotation out of defense and into [those companies] that people think will recover. In other words, folks may be hiding out in defense stocks, but reallocate to markets that they figure are bound to recover eventually” — such as travel and leisure. Looking at defense companies, “Raytheon has been the worst performing stock because they got tied into commercial aerospace through the merger," Callan said, “but going forward that may be the most interesting [stock] of all because there will be a degree of balance.” In other words, what's true now on Wall Street could change considerably months from now. The same could be said about the long-term position of these companies, regardless of how grave the circumstances are today. “The world will return to normal. All crises will come to an end,” Parent said, pointing to the advantage of supporting a highly regulated industry. “We have staying power and stamina to weather the storm, but we're not taking anything for granted. ... We want to be ready when we come out of this.” https://www.defensenews.com/coronavirus/2020/03/23/worse-than-911-defense-firms-cut-overhead-to-the-bone/
11 février 2021 | International, C4ISR
By: Nate Ashton Defense priorities are shifting toward emerging technologies at an unprecedented pace, but still not fast enough to keep America ahead of potential adversaries. We need to hit the accelerator by drastically increasing the tech savviness of defense leaders. The defense establishment is better at this than it used to be. We've seen a rapid expansion of new authorities and programs to drive tech innovation since Pentagon leaders started talking about the “third offset” in 2014. The 2021 National Defense Authorization Act continues that trend, establishing a national cyber director position, elevating the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center, and calling for open-systems architecture and API usage in some key programs. But we will not keep our current military superiority through these kinds of incremental changes alone. We need a radical shift in how the Department of Defense does business. Any organizational transformation starts with the right leadership. This is doubly true in government, where the bureaucracy is built to maintain the status quo and avoid risk to guarantee continuity of operations and effective stewardship of taxpayer dollars. But understanding where risk and opportunity lies — in areas from cybersecurity to agile procurement — is now much more important than knowing how to manage a major, multibillion-dollar weapons system procurement. The Biden administration and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin should start by filling key acquisitions and management roles with leaders who have experience in the tech or venture sector, or have a record of disruptive innovation within the DoD itself. These people must bring both an understanding of the current tech landscape and a willingness to back the innovators under them. Without a clear, top-down mandate to disrupt the status quo, nothing will change. The new administration should also make it a priority to heed the advice of defense and technology advisory boards. Oftentimes leaders who have spent their careers in tech, venture, and private research and development may be unsuited for full-time government positions, yet bring invaluable perspective and expertise. The Biden administration should continue and accelerate the work already being done to implement the Defense Innovation Board's recommendations for training and software acquisition and the Cyberspace Solarium Commission's recommendations for security. More than identifying useful, new technologies, defense leaders must transform culture and skills at all levels of the DoD to operationalize tech innovation. The hardest part of driving change in a big organization is not recognizing the end goal nor setting policies to get there, but rather operationalizing it at all levels across the millions of active-duty, civilian and contractor personnel doing the day-to-day work. This will take massive investments in training the existing workforce, strengthening the pathways between defense and the national tech and venture ecosystems, and changing processes to enable and incentivize new ways of doing business. The DoD needs to make aggressive investments in the near term. In the near term, defense leaders should: Train all DoD personnel on emerging technology. The need for these types of knowledge across the DoD simply can't be met by existing resources, which is why Dcode has worked with the Defense Acquisition University, AFWERX and others to equip defense leaders to innovate like a startup, evaluate tech like an investor and understand the emerging tech landscape. Provide advanced training and specialization on commercial tech procurement and software procurement for contracting and information security personnel. Today's purchases are best-value decisions that require true subject matter expertise to scope problem sets, assess the best solutions and bring those solutions in. In contracting, the practice of rating bids based on meeting rigid requirements and competing on price alone simply does not work. In security, moving from compliance-based to risk-based approaches will require a massive influx of technical talent and training. Expand, promote and incentivize industry exchange programs both ways: pulling in private sector talent, and sending the DoD's talent on loan to the tech and venture industry. Fund and empower tech innovation hubs. Some of the biggest successes in recent years have come from newer innovation hubs and centers of excellence that are proliferating across agencies and programs. Efforts like these should be encouraged to both replicate best practices from existing hubs that have seen success, seeded with funding to try new things, and matured into programs of record as their business model proves out. One need only look at the significant measurable outcomes that the Defense Innovation Unit and AFWERX have driven in recent years, with a relatively minimal amount of resources, to see that they are only just beginning to scratch the surface. Driving internal disruption at scale will take an exponential increase in the number of people and amount of funding. The future of defense innovation is bright, and the community of passionate leaders inside and outside of the government working to move things forward is incredibly inspiring. I'm hopeful the Biden administration and new Congress will see 2021 as the year to make ambitious investments for the future. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2021/02/10/urgently-needed-tech-savvy-defense-leaders/