2 mars 2023 | International, Autre défense
Taiwan military to get $619 million U.S. arms boost as China keeps up pressure
The arms sales are likely to further sour already tense ties between Washington and Beijing.
10 juin 2020 | International, Naval, Sécurité
White House Orders New Icebreaker Strategy For Coast Guard
“I certainly hope the Pentagon is not going to come back after studying this again, saying there's no need," for more Arctic infrastructure, said Sen. Dan Sullivan. "The infrastructure is not fine. It doesn't exist. And we need it to exist.”
By PAUL MCLEARYon June 09, 2020 at 5:37 PM
WASHINGTON: The White House today ordered a major rethink of current plans for a new Coast Guard heavy icebreaker fleet, calling for the ability to launch drones, install intelligence-collection systems, and consider “defensive armament” to “defend against threats by near-peer competitors” and consider the “potential for nuclear-powered propulsion.”
The call to consider new designs for at least three ships already slated to be built over the next half-decade is a sure sign of growing concern in Washington over Russian and Chinese advances in putting more heavy, nuclear-powered ships in the water while the US remains stuck with just two 40 year-old operational breakers. The Coast Guard already has plans for three new, non-nuclear icebreakers to be built by 2026, with several medium icebreakers to follow in later years. It's not clear if the White House is asking for a complete redesign of those ships, but the memo clearly indicates a desire to expand their capabilities significantly.
The memo gives acting Homeland Security secretary Chad Wolf, in conjunction with the State and Defense departments, just 60 days to come up with a plan to run a study of how to build a new icebreaking fleet that consists of “at least” three heavy polar-class security cutters that are “operationally tested and fully deployable by Fiscal Year 2029.”
The ships should be able to perform “the full range of national and economic security missions (including the facilitation of resource exploration and exploitation and undersea cable laying and maintenance),” the memo states, a clear nod to worries that both China and Russia are rushing to secure natural resources long trapped under the polar ice caps.
The Pentagon and Navy are slated to take part in the snap 60-day assessment, which includes a demand for recommendations for least two new bases in the US, and at least two new international bases.
At least one of those bases would likely be in Alaska, meeting a years-long demand from Alaska Senator Dan Sullivan, who is waiting for the Pentagon to finish a study on a potential strategic port in his state later this summer.
Sullivan managed to get language in the 2020 defense authorization bill ordering the Pentagon to study new ports in Alaska, after years of the military saying there was no need.
“At long last, the federal government has woken up to the fact that the Arctic is a region of great strategic competition,” the senator said in an emailed statement. “Unfortunately, our adversaries are well ahead of the United States when it comes to Arctic infrastructure.” Noting his efforts to bring the Pentagon's attention to these issues, he added, “this presidential memo will add weight to these efforts and will send a signal to our adversaries and those who are laying claim to the Arctic that the United States will not cede ground in this strategic location.”
Pentagon officials have said privately that refurbishing existing ports in Alaska for military use would be expensive, and they're not fully convinced there is a need. Sullivan, aware of those arguments, added, “I certainly hope the Pentagon is not going to come back after studying this again, saying there's no need. The infrastructure is not fine. It doesn't exist. And we need it to exist.”
One congressional staffer who is familiar with with the issue said part of the problem Arctic advocates have encountered is that “there is no clear official within the Department of Defense that handles Arctic issues,” and despite some efforts on Capitol Hill to create a new deputy assistant secretary of defense for the Arctic, military leaders see the region as “not as high a priority as some other things — the Department of Defense seems to be one of the last federal agencies in the country to understand the strategic importance and relevance of the Arctic.”
While the Coast Guard already has an icebreaker plan in hand, this new White House push might scramble those if the executive branch demands significant changes to the class, the first of which is slated to begin construction in 2021.
As Washington ponders the possibility of building nuclear-powered icebreakers, two Russian companies are already at work building the world's most powerful nuclear breaker, the first step in an ambitious new Arctic strategy Moscow hopes will open lucrative new shipping routes in the Arctic. The country currently operates 40 icebreakers along the Northern Sea Route in the high north. Moscow has also unveiled plans to build dozens of non-nuclear new icebreakers in the coming years, including at least 13 heavy icebreakers, nine of which would be nuclear-powered, if plans laid out by Russian President Vladimir Putin hold.
For its part, China has already matched the US in the number of icebreakers it has in its fleet, though only one of the two was built domestically. Beijing has expressed a desire to float a nuclear-powered breaker at some point in the future, though plans remain unclear. The first ship, MV Xuelong, was built at a Ukrainian shipyard but has since been upgraded by Chinese shipyards.
https://breakingdefense.com/2020/06/white-house-orders-new-icebreaker-strategy-for-coast-guard
Sur le même sujet
-
-
19 août 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité
Market exposure in the Top 100: Defense, commercial aviation and much more
By: Doug Berenson and Chris Higgins This year's Defense News Top 100 list of global defense companies coincides with a steep economic downturn created by COVID-19. Although the defense sector has faced pandemic-related business disruptions, it remains a safe haven, with most defense-oriented firms reporting only modest impact on revenues and profits. Seeing how diversified players rely on their defense units is of particular interest at a time when the commercial aviation market has all but collapsed. While many defense firms are bracing for stagnation in defense-spending growth, other markets could experience an extended downturn. Avascent drew on the Top 100 list to examine the broader mix of market exposure among firms comprising the global defense industrial base. We segmented company revenues across more than two dozen defense and commercial end markets. This analysis provides insight into how companies with defense business leverage exposure to other markets, either as a complement or as a hedge to their defense activities. One can think of defense companies in three categories: Defense/government pure-plays: Companies that focus overwhelmingly on military markets generate about 23 percent of the defense-oriented revenue on this year's list. To the extent these companies have revenue outside defense, it comes from close adjacencies in intelligence, civil space or others. Indeed, the top ranks of the Defense News Top 100 list includes numerous firms for whom defense and government comprise 85 percent or more of total revenue. Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, BAE Systems, LIG Nex1, and Huntington Ingalls Industries and many others fall in this category. BAE Systems and L3Harris maintain significant positions in the commercial aviation supply chain, but these activities represent a small portion of their total revenues. The unique demands of military and government markets — complex acquisition processes, challenging sales channels, burdensome regulatory compliance — has led many leading defense players to maximize their position across the defense product range. These frustratingly unique features of government customers have deterred many commercial technology firms from pursuing this space, a fact that the U.S. Department of Defense is struggling to reverse. Firms in this category have optimized their financial management, business development and other processes to the particular demands of government customers. Within government markets, the different economics that characterize the sale of products and services has increasingly led to the separation between these two distinct segments. Many of the market leaders in U.S. government services, including Leidos, Booz Allen Hamilton, CACI International, SAIC and others, feature a near-exclusive focus on government customers. A range of firms providing such services continue to find business with both the government and commercial clients, to be sure, including Bechtel, Jacobs, Babcock International and KBR, to list just a few on this year's Top 100 list. But companies with a significant focus on mission-oriented requirements have increasingly focused solely on government customers. Commercial and defense sectors: Nearly 60 percent of the defense revenue tracked in the Top 100 list comes from firms that compete in sectors that cross the defense-commercial divide. These include shipbuilders and automotive manufacturers, but the vast majority of firms serving both defense and commercial customers are focused on commercial aerospace. A range of firms recognize the unique complementarity between military and commercial aerospace technology in their business mix. Airframe primes like Boeing and Airbus are chief among these, sitting atop vast aerospace supply chains. But many other household names have sought opportunity in commercial aviation, either as airframe primes (General Dynamics via Gulfstream, Textron via Cessna) or as suppliers of avionics, structures, and other content. Because it calculates 2019 revenue, this year's Defense News list does not count Raytheon Technologies, which was created with the merger of Raytheon Company and United Technologies Corp. in April 2020. The new “RTX” would have pro forma 2019 revenue of about $43.4 billion in defense and $33.7 billion in commercial markets; this excludes Otis (elevators) and Carrier (air conditioners), which were spun off concomitant with the Raytheon-UTC merger. Many firms with heavy commercial market exposure now face unprecedented economic headwinds. Between March 1 and Aug. 1, 2020, stock prices for firms spanning defense and commercial aerospace declined by 33 percent, as global air travel nearly ground to a halt amid the coronavirus pandemic. By contrast, an index representing defense/government pure-plays has dropped by just 5 percent over the same period. Conglomerates were in the middle, declining about 16 percent. The silver lining, however, may be the ability of some companies to draw on defense-related cash flows to sustain commercial aerospace investment in preparation for an eventual upturn. Industrial conglomerates: Finally, there are firms with a foot squarely in defense but which also pursue markets far afield, in terms of customer types and market economics. About 18 percent of the defense revenue tracked in the Top 100 list is earned by firms with interests that have almost no technical or customer link with defense. Large Asian conglomerates — including China North Industries Group Corporation Limited, also known as NORINCO; Japan's Mitsubishi Heavy Industries; and South Korea's Hanwha — top this category in total revenue. But several Western firms also follow this approach to varying degrees: Textron, Ball Corporation, Diehl Group and others combine widely disparate product lines in a holding company structure. With defense versus commercial valuations relatively high, there may be competing instincts in the boardrooms of these giants. On one hand, these companies may decide to reorient their portfolio more toward defense activities by exiting underperforming industrial businesses. On the other hand, firms could elect to use defense cashflows to support the broader corporation and position the company for an economic rebound. Trends to monitor While defense budgets could face downward pressure in much of the world, many U.S. contractors have good predictability through 2021 because of DoD outlays already in process. It is the wider commercial economy where the real uncertainty lies. This makes it hard to predict how many firms active in defense markets will fare over the next year, given the variety of other markets they serve. Over half the revenue earned by the Defense News Top 100 is generated from commercial sectors. Commercial aviation markets are likely to languish at pre-2019 levels through 2022 or later. The outlook for other commercial markets is more heterogeneous, but challenges exist across areas like shipbuilding, automotive, industrial equipment and energy. To the extent that countries pursue infrastructure-led stimulus, some of the more diversified companies may find pockets of sunshine amid the gloom. Doug Berenson is a managing director at Avascent, where Chris Higgins is a principal. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/08/17/market-exposure-in-the-top-100-defense-commercial-aviation-and-much-more/
-
16 septembre 2020 | International, Aérospatial
Ratier Figeac renforce son activité militaire
Collins Aerospace Systems a annoncé mardi avoir été sélectionné pour livrer des systèmes d'hélices NP2000 pour 30 Lockheed Martin C-130H supplémentaires de l'US Air National Guard (ANG) et de l'Air Force Reserve (AFR). La conception et la production des hélices seront assurées par Ratier-Figeac, filiale de Collins Aerospace. «Collins Aerospace est honoré de supporter l'US Air Force» a déclaré Jean-François Chanut, directeur général Propeller Systems chez Collins Aerospace, et président de Ratier Figeac. «Notre système innovant NP2000 intègre des technologies de pointe plus intelligentes, conçues pour améliorer les performances et la disponibilité des appareils tout en augmentant le confort et la sécurité de l'équipage. Nous continuons de travailler au côté de l'Air Force pour assurer les meilleures performances et taux de disponibilité de leur flotte C-130», ajoute-t-il. Air & Cosmos, le Journal de l'Aviation et L'Usine Nouvelle du 16 septembre