Subscribe by E-mail

Archives

Technorati

Technorati search
  Privacy & Cookies

» Blogs that link here

March 2012 Archives

United Technology - less the Rocketdyne technology part

| | Comments () | TrackBacks (0)
Three messages come out of the move by United Technologies - parent company of Sikorsky, Pratt & Whitney and Hamilton Sundstrand - to rejig its plans for actually paying the $16.5 billion it's soon going to have to lay down to close its acquisition of Goodrich.

One: we're not in 2007 anymore. Back in those heady pre-crisis days, raising a quarter of the price in new equity and the rest in debt would have been normal enough to do a deal that created a commanding position in a fast-growth industry like civil aerospace. Many such deals were done, of course, and when the crisis hit it didn't seem so wise to have taken on the debt, but that's the value of hindsight.

So, it's no surprise that UTC has surrendered to market unease - and fears that its credit rating would take a hit - with a new plan to raise no equity now and take much less debt by parting with some cash, raising some more by divesting a few "non-core" businesses, and issuing some bonds, convertible to equity at maturity. In retrospect, it is a surprise that the original equity-and-debt plan was settled on at all.

Two: $16.5 billion is a lot of money. This deal is perhaps the biggest aerospace industry takeover ever, and it represents a gamble by UTC. Post-deal, aerospace and propulsion revenue will be around half UTC's total (it also owns Otis lifts and Carrier air conditioning, and is a big play in fire and security systems). As things stand, civil aerospace looks like an industry with solid long-term growth prospects, but a sluggish global economy is also a reasonable prospect, so the risk is all on the downside if it turns out (as so often it does) that extrapolating current trends leaves a wide gap between expectations and reality.

UTC has long been heavily diversified company, and while diversification isn't every investor's favourite flavour, UTC does hold what looks to be a basket of winners. Scale and success don't necessarily go together, and the history of mega-acquisitions is littered with failures; company cultures often clash badly, and synergies have a habit of proving elusive. There's lots of work ahead to make this deal a success, and it's entirely possible that UTC and its investors will look back and think they overpaid for Goodrich.

Recall that before news of the UTC offer for Goodrich broke last September, Goodrich shares were trading for $85-90, giving it a market capitalisation of nearly $11.5 billion. On news of the  talks, shared surged to $105, a market cap of some $13.5 billion. UTC is paying $3 billion on top of that.

Three: Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne hasn't made much noise recently, but it' an interesting company. UTC plans to sell what it sees as a non-core and slow-growth unit it as part of a bid to raise $3 billion toward the Goodrich purchase, but it's worth at least wondering if some valuable expertise is being let go.

True, Rocketdyne has been something of a corporate orphan for decades - spun off by North American Aviation, sucked up into Rockwell, sold off to Boeing and again in the mid-2000s to UTC. And, the end of the Space Shuttle programme's demand for Rockwell main engines and the absence of any serious US space programme to replace it leaves the rocket engines specialist without a strong market to play its strength to.

But there's more to Rocketdyne than big rockets. The company sells high technology to such growth industries as solar power generation, and cleverly describes itself as a "power, propulsion and optimization" company skilled at delivering highly-engineered solutions in extremely demanding environments. With no big US space programme to feed its natural order book there may be no big aerospace companies lining up to buy Rocketdyne. But it does sunds like a company you'd like to have, especially if you already own it.



Aviation - it's a question of survival

| | Comments () | TrackBacks (0)
While aviation people spend a lot of time and energy worrying about how to squeeze fuel burn a bit or if the wings can be bit more carbon fibre, the ultimate customers - passengers - seem to have very different concerns.

Indeed, Gadget Duck's pitch for the $18.95 Knee Defender suggests that passengers don't give a hoot about economy - what concerns them is mere survival.

According to Gadget Duck, by disabling the reclining mechanism on the seat in front of yours, Knee Defender "helps you defend the space you need when confronted by a faceless, determined seat recliner who doesn't care how long your legs are or about anything else that might be 'back there'...

"If the airlines will not protect people from being battered, crunched, and immobilized - very real problems according to healthcare professionals, medical studies, government agencies, and even some airlines - then people need options to protect themselves."

And, according to Gadget Duck, the stylish device violates no US aviation law, as long as it's not used during taxi, takeoff or landing.

This column, it must be said, neither endorses nor discounts Gadget Duck's claims for Knee Defender's effectiveness - but do note, dear readers, that Gadget Duck does not appear to sell any devices to defend against being punched in the face by an irate passenger in the seat ahead.

Airbus: 'launch aid no great bargain'

| | Comments () | TrackBacks (0)

The never-ending and why-did-it-ever-get-started transatlantic World Trade Organisation legal battle between Airbus and Boeing over government subsidies is certainly among the best lawyers' pension schemes yet devised in the 21st Century, and well-enough detailed here on flightglobal.com as to demand no further illumination (until such time as something really happens, which could be a very long time if ever).

Remarkably, though, the saga took another spin deeper into Jarndyce v Jarndyce territory yesterday when Hans Peter Ring, chief financial officer of Airbus parent EADS, fielded a question about so-called "launch aid" loans to Airbus by European governments. These loans, which Boeing alleges undermines its own competitive position by pumping cheap money into Airbus's development of new airliners, are repayable and, according to a WTO ruling in the case, quite legal.

According to Ring, they are also more expensive than Airbus could borrow in the normal commercial lending market. Airbus takes them, though, because they spread the risk better, he added. We shouldn't discount the value of spreading risk better, but if Ring is right then it's really difficult to see just what it is Boeing is making such a fuss about.

So, how long can it be before the United States, Boeing, the European Union, Airbus and their ranks of lawyers reach the point, like their fictional counterparts contesting Jarndyce v Jarndyce, that they genuinely cannot recall what it is they are fighting about bar the latest procedural matter in the case?

Still, it is not just trade laywers who should thank Airbus and Boeing. Any aerospace industry observers who have not had the pleasure of reading, or re-reading, Bleak House should take this case as excuse to revel in a classic which reminds us all how trivial such things as legal battles between rich people really are.

But as insightful as Charles Dickens was, don't take Bleak House as a guide to how Airbus v Boeing might turn out. Jarndyce v Jarndyce came to a sudden and unexpected conclusion, with no apparent winner but sparking off great celebration all around. Airbus v Boeing is unlikely to end, let alone warrant celebration. If there is any winner, it will surely be some outside party like China or Brazil.


A380 wing cracks don't spell more financial trouble for costly programme

| | Comments () | TrackBacks (0)

Airbus has hit a rough patch this year with revelations that cracks are developing in the wings on its A380 superjumbos, a problem first identified on three Qantas and Singapore Airlines aircraft back in January. But while the problem has attracted much media attention and is being taken seriously by Airbus engineers, the accountants are non-plussed.

Yesterday in Paris, EADS chief financial officer Hans Peter Ring didn't let the issue detract much from his presentation of 2011 results that show the Franco-German aerospace giant and its dominant Airbus division racking up satisfactory - if not impressive - revenue and profits growth. Asked about the latest troubles to dog a programme that has historically been a severe drag on EADS's earnings, Ring was clearly pleased to be able to report that fixing the wing cracks will fall within the normal warranty cost provision already made for the A380.

So, expect no charges against 2012 operations, which Ring and chief executive Louis Gallois promise will result in further profitability growth. Last year, EADS revenue gained 7% to €49.1 billion and earnings before interest and taxes rose 38% to nearly €1.7 billion, taking the profit margin higher by nearly a percentage point to 3.45%. Airbus commercial sales grew 10% to €31.2 billion ($41.1 billion) and divisional EBIT gained 87% to €543 million on the back of a tenth consecutive year of increased production - to 534 deliveries - and a record net order intake for 1,419 aircraft.

Resolving the A380 cracks problem will involve detailed visual inspection of wing-rib feet and an interim repair that relieves stresses believed to have been introduced by the original assembly process. A more permanent repair may involve replacing the wing-rib feet - each wing rib has 30-40 of these L-shaped brackets that connect them to the wing skin - with beefier parts of a different alloy, as well as altering the assembly process.

The problem needs addressing but is not grounding aircraft; nearly 70 have been delivered and for many it will be adequate to delay inspection until routine maintenance comes due.

The Airport of the Future

| | Comments () | TrackBacks (0)
The airports of the future might bear little resemblance with those of today...or so seem to think the winners of the recent '2011 Fentress Global Challenge'. This international contest, launched by airport design firm Fentress Architects and open to architecture and engineering students, aimed to present an unconventional and unconstrained vision of the airport in decades to come.

The results of the contest are certainly impressive: from aircraft that look like flying cars to a modern concept of an airship docking facility.

Airportfuture2.jpgCredit:Martin Sztyk І Fentress Architects

Airportfuture6.jpgCredit: Alexander Nevarez І Fentress Architects

The top prize, though, went to a futuristic and environmentally sustainable vision of London's proposed Thames Estuary island-airport, complete with vertical take-off pads for the aircraft of tomorrow.

Airport delta future.jpgCredit: Oliver Andrew І Fentress Architects

LDNDeltaAirport1.jpgCredit: Oliver Andrew І Fentress Architects

Diverse as all these proposals are, a common theme stands out: space and compactness. Aware of the increasing difficulty of expanding on existing airport facilities, it is likely that the aviation and aerospace industry will need to come up with innovative solutions to increase capacity while reducing the environmental impression. Despite the fact that these projects might have a touch of fantasy, some of these innovative ideas could soon become reality.

Visit our Future Aviation Concepts Gallery to see more

VIDEO: Malaysia Airlines Airbus A380 unveiled

| | Comments () | TrackBacks (0)



Malaysia Airlines has unveiled the design and specifications of its first Airbus A380-800 aircraft.

The aircraft, to be delivered in the middle of June, will have a new livery on its exterior, said the airline.

The aircraft will have 494 seats in a three-class configuration - eight in first class, 66 in business and 420 in economy. The business class seats, together with 70 economy seats, will be on the aircraft's upper deck.

Full story on the Malaysia Airlines A380 unveiling...