14 août 2018 | International, Naval

US Navy’s focus on rapid acquisition is opening up opportunities for Europe

By:

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Navy intends to get much bigger, and that has meant new openings for European companies in the U.S. defense market.

The Navy's new over-the-horizon missile destined for the littoral combat ship and the future frigate was recently awarded to the Norwegian firm Kongsberg, in partnership with U.S. company Raytheon, for its Naval Strike Missile.

The future frigate program itself has awarded contracts to Spain's Navantia and Italy's Fincantieri for design work before the Navy selects a design later this year, meaning the service's next surface combatant may be a European design. And for the Navy's future training helicopter, both Franco-Dutch company Airbus and Italian firm Leonardo are top competitors for that program.

Analysts say the Navy's recent surge in interest has been spurred by a confluence of circumstances that could mean even more opportunities for foreign companies looking to break into the U.S. market.

Increased defense budgets are one reason the European companies have been seeing more business from the Navy and other American military branches. But a shift in the way the Defense Department tries to fill capabilities gaps has made the space more competitive for overseas firms, said Dan Gouré, a defense analyst with the Lexington Institute think tank.

As the Navy and other services have shifted toward great power competition, it has found a number of capabilities that were not hugely important in a unipolar world have again become requirements with the reemergence of Russia and the rise of China as security threats. One such area is the small surface combatant, or FFG(X) program, which would be needed to escort supply convoys and work as a survivable sensor node in a larger surface combatant network.

“With the frigate, for example, we hadn't built one of those in 40 years, but the Europeans have been building them for decades,” Gouré noted. “And if we needed a diesel-electric sub, they'd of course be the first in line.”

This emphasis on speed of acquisition has also helped because the Navy and the rest of the Department of Defense are reluctant to get tied down by a yearslong, inevitably over-budget development process unless necessary, Gouré said.

“The trend has been toward [other transaction authority] contracts, and that has made the European companies credible competitors,” he said.

Another factor is that the Navy has been more willing to make trades on capabilities, said Bryan Clark, an analyst with the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.

“I think what's new is that the Navy is openly seeking foreign proposals for some of these major new programs,” Clark said. “Foreign companies have always been able to submit proposals in response to RFPs, but usually they don't offer the high-end capability the U.S. is usually seeking.

“The big change is that the Navy is willing to get a less-sophisticated capability in to get a design that is more mature.”

In the case of the Navy's trainer helicopter competition, past success with European companies inside the DoD could be a driving factor in Airbus' and Leonardo's competitive bids.

Airbus' North American division has been successful with the U.S. Army's Lakota program, built by Airbus Helicopters in Columbus, Mississippi, which is where the company would build its H135 helicopter if selected for the program. The Army has been happy with Lakota, so much so that it has been pushing to buy more of the airframes despite legal battles over the contracts.

But the success of Airbus Helicopters with the Army is possible for much the same reason that, for example, Australian-owned Austal USA has been successful building both the trimaran version of the littoral combat ship and the expeditionary fast transport: a major manufacturing infrastructure investment in the United States.

And that kind of cash outlay for a program can scare away European competitors. Getting around “Buy American” provisions would literally take an act of Congress. Despite having already developed, tested and fielded the capability the Navy wants, Kongsberg had to team with American defense giant Raytheon to sell its missile to the DoD.

The “Buy American” provisions laid down and regularly upheld by Congress for defense procurement does have protectionist overtones, but there is a national security argument as well. In the event of a major, protracted conflict with Russia or China, it wouldn't be advantageous to have major suppliers located an ocean away or in occupied territory.

And maintaining the industrial base has long been a concern of the U.S. Navy because of the limited the number of trained workers with experience who are building ships and nuclear reactors.

Navy officials have testified that the shrinking industrial base, including the shipbuilders and the litany of subcontractors and vendors, is a significant concern. In 2015, then-head of the Navy's research, development and acquisition office Sean Stackley testified before Congress that some of the shipyards were just a contract away from going under.

“We have eight shipyards currently building U.S. Navy ships. And of those eight shipyards, about half of them are a single contract away from being what I would call ‘not viable,' ” Stackley told the Senate Armed Services Committee. “In other words, the workload drops below the point at which the shipyard can sustain the investment that it needs to be competitive and the loss of skilled labor that comes with the breakage of a contract.”

https://www.defensenews.com/top-100/2018/08/09/us-navys-focus-on-rapid-acquisition-is-opening-up-opportunities-for-europe/

Sur le même sujet

  • Produire local, passage obligé des entreprises partant à l'international

    29 novembre 2019 | International, Autre défense

    Produire local, passage obligé des entreprises partant à l'international

    Grandes et petites entreprises doivent se plier aux exigences croissantes des États de produire sur place une partie de leurs gros contrats. Y compris Dassault Aviation pour vendre son Rafale en Inde. Enquête. Difficile d'y échapper. Les exigences de compensations industrielles, ou offsets, occupent une place croissante dans la négociation des grands contrats. Elles sont presque autant l'apanage de pays émergents, qui cherchent à accélérer la montée en gamme de leur industrie domestique, que de pays développés. Dans le seul secteur de la défense, le montant global des offsets a progressé de 25 % entre 2012 et 2016, pour représenter près de 2,5 % des dépenses militaires. Pour décrocher le contrat de 36 avions Rafale en Inde, Dassault a dû s'engager à réinvestir 50 % de sa valeur dans le pays, sous forme de fabrication locale et d'approvisionnement auprès de sous-traitants indiens. Il a ouvert un site pour produire ses avions d'affaires Falcon et le Rafale avec l'indien Reliance. DCNS a consenti à transférer une partie de sa production et de ses compétences en Australie, dans le cadre du "contrat du siècle" de 12 sous-marins. Politique du "make in India" en Inde, "Buy american act" aux États-Unis, droits de douane exorbitants sur les importations de véhicules pour forcer les constructeurs à réaliser l'assemblage sur place... Au-delà de la défense et de l'aéronautique, le parapétrolier, le ferroviaire et la filière nucléaire font aussi face à des contraintes similaires, plus ou moins structurées. "La plupart des nouveaux contrats en Afrique prennent en compte la volonté de transférer des équipes et de produire localement ", remarque Pedro Novo, le directeur de l'international de Bpifrance. Accompagner les PME et les ETI "Les compensations industrielles étaient auparavant supportées par les seuls intégrateurs. Mais à mesure qu'elles augmentent et que les grands groupes externalisent davantage, elles descendent de plus en plus dans la supply chain", pointe Philippe Advani, un ancien d'Airbus, qui préside le comité sur les offsets des conseillers du commerce extérieur. Avec le groupement des industries françaises aéronautiques et spatiales (Gifas), il a publié en juillet un guide pour aider ETI et PME à naviguer dans les contraintes de transfert de savoir-faire ou de production – souvent complexes – fixées par les gouvernements. Pour les sous-traitants, l'opération n'est pas sans risque. En Inde, le spécialiste de l'ingénierie aéronautique Ametra, qui emploie 700 salariés, a sauté le pas l'an passé en créant une coentreprise avec un partenaire indien à Hyderabad, dans le sud du pays. "Cela demande du cash, et un pillage de propriété intellectuelle peut être plus dramatique pour une petite entreprise", reconnaît Philippe Advani. "Devenir indien en Inde, par exemple, implique d'accélérer la structuration de sa société, de revoir la logistique et la gestion des flux de données, d'impliquer le conseil d'administration. Il faut un accompagnement pour mettre ces contraintes à la portée des PME", énumère Pedro Novo, qui a lancé il y a un an le fonds Build-up International afin de co-investir dans des filiales à l'étranger d'ETI françaises et étudie une vingtaine de dossiers. Certains ont fait de ces contraintes un nouvel axe de leur stratégie. Depuis deux ans, le fabricant de c'ble marnais Axon'Cable surveille les obligations de compensations industrielles des grands contrats militaires pour implanter ses nouvelles usines. "Il est plus facile de vendre à nos grands clients car ils ne trouvent pas leurs fournisseurs habituels et nous en profitons pour démarcher des industriels locaux", pointe son président, Joseph Puzo, qui a ouvert en 2016 une filiale au Brésil et prépare un bureau en Australie pour 2020. L'ETI, qui possède déjà une usine low cost en Inde, a créé en début d'année une deuxième coentreprise, Dhruv, avec un partenaire local, afin d'obtenir le statut d'"offset indien partner", qui permet de répondre aux demandes de compensation industrielle. Produire localement ne supprime pas pour autant tous les échanges. Seul l'assemblage final est réalisé à proximité du client. Les composants les plus sensibles restent exportés depuis la France. Le meilleur moyen de protéger ses innovations. Latécoère suit Thales et Dassault en Inde S'implanter en Inde ne faisait pas partie des plans initiaux de Latécoère. "Je savais que l'Inde était un pays compliqué et bureaucratique. Nous serions certainement allés dans un autre pays d'Asie s'il n'y avait pas eu les contreparties du contrat Rafale", reconnaît volontiers Yannick Assouad, la PDG de l'équipementier aéronautique. Son usine de c'blage de Belagavi, dans l'État du Karnataka, a démarré sa production en septembre. Pour vendre ses 36 avions de combat, Dassault a dû s'engager à des compensations industrielles, dont l'ouverture d'un site à Nagpur, dans l'État du Maharashtra, pour produire des pièces pour le Rafale et le Falcon. En 2017, Latécoère a décroché auprès de Dassault la fourniture de harnais électriques pour le Falcon 2000 en s'engageant à suivre l'avionneur en Inde. "Se localiser dans un pays d'offset n'était pas suffisant pour remporter le contrat car il faut avant tout être compétitif. Mais c'était la cerise sur le g'teau", reconnaît Yannick Assouad. Dans la foulée, sa nouvelle usine indienne a permis à l'ETI de décrocher un deuxième contrat auprès de Thales, lui aussi tenu à des offsets, pour son système de divertissement à bord. De quoi atteindre plus vite que prévu le seuil de rentabilité de l'usine de 300 salariés. En attendant que Dassault implante sa chaîne d'assemblage du Falcon en Inde, Latécoère exporte toute sa production indienne vers la France et les États-Unis pour Thales et se fournit en France. "Nous allons progressivement démarcher des clients locaux et essayer d'évaluer la supply chain", précise la PDG. https://www.usinenouvelle.com/editorial/produire-local-passage-oblige-des-entreprises-partant-a-l-international.N907464

  • Airbus US pivots business strategy away from selling big platforms to the Pentagon

    16 juillet 2020 | International, C4ISR, Sécurité

    Airbus US pivots business strategy away from selling big platforms to the Pentagon

    By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — After decades of trying to break into the U.S. military aircraft market, Airbus is shifting course with a new strategy that prioritizes selling off-the-shelf sensors, data, space and intelligence capabilities that have been customized for U.S. government buyers. During a Wednesday discussion with reporters about the new direction for the business, Chris Emerson, the new chief executive of the Airbus U.S. Space and Defense division and formerly the president of Airbus Helicopters, said he wanted to move the company's focus in the United States away from the major fixed-wing platforms that are the company's bread and butter in Europe. Instead, he hopes to expand the company's presence in the growing space and intelligence markets, particularly with low-cost satellites like those made by its joint venture One Web, geospatial intelligence and imaging, and space-based sensors. “We know the Air Force needs an A400M, but I can spend 10 years trying to convince the Air Force and all the politicians that they should buy an A400M. And ultimately they will buy C-130s,” Emerson said. “So let me focus this energy, this great leadership team, on achieving something that is tangible today that the customer really needs. Yes, it's not traditional for Airbus, but it will bring the value and we'll have a better foundation if one day my successor says, ‘You know, I want to be a big platform competitor.' At least we'd have built up trust and proven that we could really meet the requirements that are demanded of it.” Although Airbus is a juggernaut in the international military and commercial aerospace market, it has always struggled to find its place among the U.S. defense prime contractors as major aircraft manufacturers. It famously lost the KC-X contract to Boeing in 2011 after a bloody and prolonged battle. Since then, the company's biggest procurement victory has been continued sales of its UH-72A Lakota helicopter to the Army. “I remember I spent eight years thinking we could bring real value on air-to-air refueling for the Air Force. But I spent eight years, and I'm frustrated because I look at it and we didn't succeed,” Emerson said. “I've asked the team, ‘Let's find a roadmap where we can actually make a mark with the customers.' And that means, I'm not going to go look at competing with Boeing and the Lockheeds and Northrop, but I'm going to look at other areas.” The U.S. customer is increasingly making investments into technologies that can augment or accelerate decision-making, he said. “That's where we start to look everything beyond an air breathing platform. We started to look at the data, the intelligence, that they need,” he said. “It could be intelligence that is geospatial-related, either Earth observation, or electro-optical, or synthetic aperture radar, or a blend that we're pulling in multi-source information.” Airbus already develops those types of capabilities in its commercial air and space businesses, and could quickly adapt them to U.S. demands, he said. When there are opportunities to offer Airbus aircraft to the U.S. military, the strategy will be to partner with American primes, Emerson said. For instance, last year Airbus and Lockheed signed a memorandum of understanding to market aerial refueling services to the U.S. Air Force using the Airbus A330 Multi Role Tanker Transport. Asked on Wednesday whether the two companies planned to compete for tanker leasing opportunities currently being considered by the Air Force, Emerson said Lockheed takes the lead on interactions with the U.S. military on aerial refueling. He added that UH-72s will continue to be manufactured alongside Airbus's commercial H125 helicopter in Columbus, Miss., but modifications, support and contracting will be performed by the Airbus U.S. Space and Defense. In addition to naming Emerson as head of the company's U.S. defense and space business, Airbus also appointed a five-person board of directors — which includes former National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency director Letitia Long and William Shelton, a retired Air Force four-star and former head of Air Force Space Command — aimed at deepening ties with the U.S. military, space and intelligence agencies. It also named a seven-person team of advisers made up of former national security officials. https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2020/07/15/airbus-us-pivots-business-strategy-away-from-selling-big-platforms-to-the-pentagon/

  • Leidos wins $7.9 billion US Army information technology contract

    20 septembre 2023 | International, Terrestre

    Leidos wins $7.9 billion US Army information technology contract

    The Department of Defense received three bids for the Common Hardware Systems 6th Generation contract, records show.

Toutes les nouvelles