Teledyne FLIR to Supply Canadian Government More Than 800 Drones Worth CAD$95 Million for Ukraine

Sur le même sujet

• 

  21 décembre 2020 | International, Aérospatial

  Lockheed Martin to Acquire Aerojet Rocketdyne for $4.4 Billion

  By Will Wade and Max Zimmerman Lockheed Martin Corp. agreed to acquire the defense industry supplier Aerojet Rocketdyne Holdings Inc. in a deal valued at $4.4 billion. As part of the transaction, Aerojet declared a $5 per share special dividend, to be paid on March 24, to holders of record as of March 10. The payment of that special dividend will adjust the $56 per share consideration to be paid by Lockheed Martin, according to a statement Sunday. The shares surged in pre-market New York trading on Monday. At $51, Lockheed will be buying Aerojet at a 21% premium from the closing price on Friday. Chief Executive Officer Jim Taiclet, who stepped into the top job this year, has said he was keen to expand the world's largest defense contractor through acquisitions. With Aerojet, he's picking up a key U.S. supplier of propulsion systems for missiles, rockets and other space and defense applications. “Acquiring Aerojet Rocketdyne will preserve and strengthen an essential component of the domestic defense industrial base,” Taiclet said in the statement. Lockheed has been scouting for deals. In January, the company said it was flush with cash and open to deals as rival Raytheon Co. prepared to combine with United Technologies Corp. to create an aerospace-and-defense powerhouse. Lockheed has been seeking opportunities to “bring in the technologies faster into the company that we think are going to be crucial for the future,” Taiclet said during its October earnings call. “So we plan to be active, but we also plan to be very, very prudent.” The Aerojet transaction is expected to close in the second half of 2021 after getting regulatory approvals and a nod from Aerojet's shareholders. Aerojet advanced to $54.44 Monday before markets opened in New York. That's up 29% from Friday's close, which gave the El Segundo, California-based company a market value of $3.25 billion. Lockheed was little changed from its Friday close, which valued the buyer at about $100 billion. At the end of last week, Aerojet's stock was trading at 25 times expected earnings, compared with 16 times for Lockheed. Aerojet's shares have fallen 7.9% this year and Lockheed dropped 8.6%, both underperforming the S&P 500 Index, which climbed 15%. Lockheed's space division is its third-largest business, contributing 18% of its 2019 revenue. The company competes with Elon Musk's SpaceX for U.S. government rocket launches through the United Launch Alliance, its joint venture with Boeing Co. Lockheed was advised by Goldman Sachs, Ardea Partners and Hogan Lovells, while Citigroup and Evercore, as well as Jenner & Block and Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher represented Aerojet. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-12-21/lockheed-martin-to-buy-defense-supplier-aerojet-for-4-4-billion

• 

  17 janvier 2024 | International,

  NATO Chiefs of Defence meet with NATO’s Deputy Secretary General

  Today, 17 January 2024, NATO’s highest Military Authority, the Military Committee, meets in Chiefs of Defence format at NATO Headquarters in Brussels. The focus of the meeting is on strengthening NATO’s deterrence and defence by maximising the executability of the new defence plans.

• 

  13 juin 2018 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR

  As European defense evolves, here’s how industry is responding

  WASHINGTON — As priorities in Europe evolve, particularly with the threat of Russia growing more profound, industry partners are left to adapt. Defense News spoke to Kim Ernzen, vice president of land warfare systems in Raytheon Missile Systems, to find out the company's approach to meeting customer expectations. EU and NATO cooperation on defense is evolving. As they work out roles, is it challenging for industry? From an international or global footprint, we are looking to continue to expand in international marketspaces. As we look particularly to EU and NATO starting to cooperate more, the EU brings some capabilities to the table. Obviously NATO is typically backed more from the U.S. [But] it's how we merge the capabilities together so the fighting forces have what they need when they go into harm's way. From a U.S. defense industry perspective, we like to make sure we protect the latest and greatest. When we look to international, we work through the normal releasability channels to make sure we can release our products. I think there is going to be increased opportunity, because the threats are continuing to evolve. From a pure RMS perspective, we're well positioned to support [combatting] those threats. We continue to work closely not only with the U.S.-based customer, but through them, the international partners to look at the capabilities they may need. Missile defense remains a huge priority in Europe, but how have hybrid warfare tactics, particularly from Russia, influences defense strategies and as a result the investments? As we as a nation look at how to pivot from urban warfare of the last two decades to what many would consider more traditional warfare, but with added complexities of things like cyberattacks, EW. So now you go into overmatch capability, a long-range standoff capability. Army is focused on how to get long-range precision fires that supports the [combatant commands] in the international footprints, being able to protect the European front against advancing Russia threats. And it's got to have that standup capability, they also have to be able to see further. From a company perspective, we're involved in the PRSM [program] — the new Long Range Precision Fire competition between us and Lockheed Martin. And we're also working to enhance the sighting capability on the vehicle, so they can see farther and identity threats sooner. We see a lot of exercises in Europe. Does industry have enough of a seat at the table? We don't necessarily engage one-on-one with the exercising activities that go on; we'll get feedback through customer communities. This is something we talk with our customers about continually: the more we can be engaged, the more we can bring to bear, whether company investments, a spin on the product; the more we can partner with the customer community, sooner, the better it is for them and us as well. We just haven't necessarily always done that. We've seen a great deal of emphasis on increased defense spending of our European allies. Have you seen a bump up? Or if not, where do you see them focusing in on in terms of spending? We have seen a modest increase, particularly across the munitions fronts. Everyone [is looking] in the cupboard drawer, wanting to make sure they have the right stockpiles should they need to go into any engagement with the enemy. We're also continuing to see internationally more system integrated solutions. Not just coming forward with a product, but how a system would work and operate so they can be more nimble in the battlefield. That's a transition we're seeing. The FMS system can be painful to work through. Have their been improvements? We need to look at [whether we] can start converting more programs to direct commercial sales, depending on where we're at in a lifecycle of a product, and what it is we're trying to protect or throttle. FMS is a slow an laborious process. It hinders industry from capitalizing on market opportunities. The more we can change the paradigm and partner with the government side to do more [direct sales], the more they will benefit long term because they get the volume to drive down prices, and allow us to recoup funds to invests in future technology. But there are challenges, because each branches has organizations that support foreign military sales. There's a balance. As more and more countries seek indigenous capacities as well as a return on defense investments domestically, has the nature of partnership changed? Part of partnering with some of these countries involves offset requirements. Often as we start to partner with indigenous capable industries, it used to be ok to [offer up] basic machining. But there is more pull for being able to put high levels of noble work into these countries. Some are more advanced in capabilities, and as we look to partner, how to do we strike that balance, leveraging some technology they may bring to bear, with what we're trying to keep domestically and protected? It's an interesting paradigm. And a tipping point with how U.S. industry deals with going international. https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/eurosatory/2018/06/12/as-european-defense-evolves-heres-how-industry-is-responding/