Automotive Manufacturing in Georgia

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Automotive Manufacturing in Georgia Automotive Manufacturing in Georgia Community & Economic Development Georgia Power January, 2002 Table of Contents Overview................................................................................................................1 Automotive Assembly In The Southeast..............................................................2 Production .............................................................................................................3 Auto-Related Manufacturers With Over 100 Workers..........................................5 Work Force ............................................................................................................5 EMPLOYMENT......................................................................................................................6 WAGES..................................................................................................................................9 UNIONIZATION .................................................................................................................10 TRAINING...........................................................................................................................11 Market Potential..................................................................................................12 International Links..............................................................................................16 Appendix: Southeastern Auto Assembly and Component Manufacturers Employing 50 or More ………………………………………………………..…19 Overview Since the 1909 opening of Ford Motor Company’s Hapeville plant, the automotive industry has been an important part of Georgia’s economy. Family-owned Blue Bird began operations in 1927 with facilities in LaFayette and Fort Valley and in 1947, General Motors opened its Doraville plant. Today, the automotive and related industries employ over 41,000 Georgians. The motor vehicle and motor vehicle equipment industries alone contribute over $2.6 billion to the state’s gross product. Moreover, the industry is having a profound impact on the economy of the Southeast overall. Since 1990, four major assembly plants have opened across the region. The Honda plant in Lincoln, Alabama saw its first vehicle roll off the assembly line in December of 2001. An additional facility, Nissan in Jackson, Mississippi is slated to open in the summer of 2003. In Hinesville, Georgia, eMotion Mobility is making plans for the 2004 opening of its electric vehicle production line. Over 231,000 workers in 1,323 facilities across the region produce motor vehicles and motor vehicle components. Several foreign-owned automobile manufacturers have chosen to take advantage of Georgia’s many business-friendly attributes and transport capabilities by selecting the state for U.S. headquarters operations. Porche, Saab, Lotus and Daewoo are among those locating in Georgia. An abundant, trainable workforce, a vast supply of affordable land for expansion, and proximity to major transportation hubs originally brought the world’s premier automotive manufacturers south. These same assets draw producers today. In June of 2001, Business Facilities Magazine ranked Georgia as the second best location in the United States for the growing automotive industry based on related employment growth. The slow deterioration of the region’s textile industry has freed up an eager, production-oriented work force. While never a huge presence in the South, organized labor influence has steadily declined over the past 20 years, resulting in a largely independent work force. The region’s robust population growth, mainly due to in- migration, constantly replenishes the supply of potential workers. Competitively priced land, construction costs and operating costs continue to make the South one of the country’s most fiscally attractive places to locate. Atlanta’s world-class airport, extensive rail and highway systems and bustling international ports of Brunswick and Savannah connect the region to consumers all over North America and the world. Being closely connected to world economies is paramount in the automobile industry’s increasingly competitive and global market. Now, as the South’s population and economic growth outpace that of other areas, producers find themselves favorably located in the U.S. market place as well. Georgia is centrally positioned in the middle of the country’s largest motor vehicle market with year 2000 sales of over 6.5 million cars and trucks. 1 Growing industry globalization and consolidation force automotive industry participants to seek a competitive edge. Often location makes all the difference. Proximity to customers, end-use markets, skilled labor, and international transportation capabilities have become more important than ever. The following discussion of current production, the region’s work force, market potential and transportation alternatives illustrates why Georgia continues to be one of the top locations for automotive industry expansion. Automotive Assembly in the Southeast Georgetown, KY Louisville, KY Dublin, VA Norfolk, VA Bowling Green, KY Madison, TN Spartanburg, SC Cleveland, NC Smyrna, TN LaFayette, GA Spring Hill, TN Blue Bird Mount Holly, NC Doraville, GA Hapeville, GA Lincoln, AL Vance, AL Shreveport, LA Blue Bird Jackson, MS Fort Valley, GA Opening in 2003 2 Production Although total motor vehicle production has Percentage Share of Motor Vehicle Industry leveled off in recent years, the southeastern Production in 2000 states of Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, and Tennessee continue to garner a substantial Southeastern States percentage of overall U.S. production. In 2000 these 6% Georgia states combined to represent 10 percent or 1.26 4% million of the 12.6 million cars and light trucks produced. Production in the Southeast shows no signs of slowing. In the next few years, production from Honda’s Lincoln, Alabama facility, opened in 2001, Other and Nissan’s Jackson, Mississippi plant, coming on Producing line in 2003, will bolster the region’s numbers even States 90% more. Mercedes in Vance, Alabama has expanded twice since opening in 1997 and plans to further increase production to 160,000 vehicles annually by 2004. Nissan in Smyrna, Tennessee will add Source: Automotive News, Market Data Book 2001 2,000 jobs so the plant can produce the popular Maxima in addition to its current models. eMotion Mobility’s new electric vehicle assembly plant in Hinesville Georgia, near Savannah, will begin operation some time in 2004. In terms of vehicle units produced, Georgia ranked second in the region and ninth in the nation in 2000. Top Ten Auto and Light Truck Producing States, 2000 3,500,000 3,001,919 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,864,039 1,500,000 1,248,087 1,135,028 1,000,000 724,449 591,327 552,583 545,143 Vehicle Units Produced 500,000 364,840 344,076 - M Ohi Kentucky Misso Il Indiana T Ge Ne Calif li e ich no nn orgia w o ig u is e J o an r ssee er rn i sey ia Source: Automotive News, Market Data Book 2001 3 Anchoring these significant numbers for Georgia are four major assembly plants employing over 8,400 workers. Georgia’s Automotive Assembly Plants Company Locations Types of Vehicles General Motors North Metro Atlanta -- Chevrolet Venture Doraville Pontiac Montana Oldsmobile Silhouette Ford South Metro Atlanta -- Fort Taurus Hapeville Mercury Sable Blue Bird Corp. Fort Valley School Buses Lafayette Recreational Vehicles Together these assemblers help Georgia and the Southeast maintain a stronghold for the production of motor vehicles while creating a substantial local market for the region’s automotive component manufacturers. Large and small operations are taking advantage of the South’s growing component market. Georgia alone has over 150 larger (companies employing 50 or more) components manufacturers. Since the announced opening of the Honda plant in Lincoln, Alabama, in the northeastern part of the state, a number of component manufacturers have located in Georgia. In all, five Georgia companies supply parts to the Lincoln plant. These suppliers have invested $188 million and created 2,100 jobs according to Georgia’s Department of Industry, Trade and Tourism.1 In the Southeast, auto component manufacturers with 50 or more employees number over 600. A complete listing can be found in the Appendix. A map locating Georgia auto-related companies with 100 or more employees is found on the following page. During 2001, several automotive industry companies came to Georgia. The addition of these operations has helped increase the state’s industry presence and provide additional materials support for companies already residing in Georgia and surrounding states. Georgia’s New and Announced Automotive Companies Estimated # of Company Location Product Employees eMotion Mobility Hinesville Electric Cars 150 employees F&P Georgia Mfg. Rome Automotive suspension 400 employees systems Neaton Auto Products Rome Steering wheels 75 employees Pirelli Tire Rome Tires 305 employees Suzuki Motor Corp. Rome All terrain vehicles 150 employees Trocellen Augusta Specialty foam 50 products 1 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, “Bremen Auto Parts Plant to Grow”, David Markiewicz, November 3, 2001 4 Auto-Related Manufacturers with Over 100 Workers Source: 2001 Georgia Manufacturing Directory © Georgia Power Community & Economic Development, 2001 Work Force 5 The South’s strong work force draws automotive manufacturers to the region. Nissan Senior Vice President of North American Manufacturing, Emil Hassan, said his company decided
Recommended publications
  • DETROIT BUSINESS MAIN 05-07-07 a 1 CDB.Qxd
    DETROIT BUSINESS MAIN 05-07-07 A 1 CDB 5/4/2007 6:49 PM Page 1 ® http://www.crainsdetroit.com Vol. 23, No. 19 MAY 7 – 13, 2007 $2 a copy; $59 a year ©Entire contents copyright 2007 by Crain Communications Inc. All rights reserved THIS JUST IN ASC files for Ch. 11, Biz-tax plans under scrutiny makes deal to sell units Southgate-based ASC Inc., Both big and small details of the founded by the late Heinz Automakers could get credit for laid-off workers plans are under scrutiny. For ex- Prechter in 1965, has en- ample, the Michigan Townships Asso- tered Chapter 11 bankrupt- BY AMY LANE questions fac- ments in two central proposals to ciation criticized the Senate plan cy protection as part of a CAPITOL CORRESPONDENT THE DETAILS ing lawmakers replace Michigan’s single-busi- for the revenue local governments as they move to ness tax. would lose from the personal-prop- plan to sell itself. It filed the LANSING — Michigan au- More on the petition Wednesday in U.S. negotiate dif- Passed last week were a Senate erty tax, saying the measure would tomakers and other companies plans, Page 44. Bankruptcy Court in Detroit. ferences be- Republican plan that would in- “cripple essential local services could get a new tax credit for ASC, which specialized tween compet- clude an approximate $600 million that families depend on.” wages they pay to laid-off workers, in making sunroofs and ing business-tax plans passed by tax cut and about $87 million in And while the House Democrat- while some of Michigan’s profes- low-volume specialty cars, each chamber of the Legislature.
    [Show full text]
  • Aerospace, Defense, and Government Services Mergers & Acquisitions
    Aerospace, Defense, and Government Services Mergers & Acquisitions (January 1993 - April 2020) Huntington BAE Spirit Booz Allen L3Harris Precision Rolls- Airbus Boeing CACI Perspecta General Dynamics GE Honeywell Leidos SAIC Leonardo Technologies Lockheed Martin Ingalls Northrop Grumman Castparts Safran Textron Thales Raytheon Technologies Systems Aerosystems Hamilton Industries Royce Airborne tactical DHPC Technologies L3Harris airport Kopter Group PFW Aerospace to Aviolinx Raytheon Unisys Federal Airport security Hydroid radio business to Hutchinson airborne tactical security businesses Vector Launch Otis & Carrier businesses BAE Systems Dynetics businesses to Leidos Controls & Data Premiair Aviation radios business Fiber Materials Maintenance to Shareholders Linndustries Services to Valsef United Raytheon MTM Robotics Next Century Leidos Health to Distributed Energy GERAC test lab and Technologies Inventory Locator Service to Shielding Specialities Jet Aviation Vienna PK AirFinance to ettain group Night Vision business Solutions business to TRC Base2 Solutions engineering to Sopemea 2 Alestis Aerospace to CAMP Systems International Hamble aerostructure to Elbit Systems Stormscope product eAircraft to Belcan 2 GDI Simulation to MBDA Deep3 Software Apollo and Athene Collins Psibernetix ElectroMechanical Aciturri Aeronautica business to Aernnova IMX Medical line to TransDigm J&L Fiber Services to 0 Knight Point Aerospace TruTrak Flight Systems ElectroMechanical Systems to Safran 0 Pristmatic Solutions Next Generation 911 to Management
    [Show full text]
  • SIPRI Yearbook 2001: Armaments, Disarmament and International
    Appendix 4D. The 100 largest arms-producing companies, 1999 REINHILDE WEIDACHER, ANNE BRANDT-HANSEN and the SIPRI ARMS INDUSTRY NETWORK* I. The SIPRI ‘top 100’ in 1999 and major events in 2000 After half a decade of rapid concentration in the context of shrinking markets, the Western arms industry has entered a new phase of reorganization in which a smaller number of large companies face a constant if not growing level of demand for new military equipment. A period of intensive mergers and acquisitions (M&A) began in the early 1990s. Among large aerospace companies, concentration culminated in 1997–98 in the USA and in 1999–2000 in Western Europe. The high rate of concentration in 1999 is reflected in the significant increase in the combined value of arms sales of the 100 largest arms-producing companies in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and developing countries (except China)— by more than 11 per cent in nominal terms, from $141 billion in 1998 to $157 billion in 1999 (table 4D.2).1 Mergers and acquisitions accounted for the overwhelming share of this increase. The US Government responded to the high rate of concentration achieved by 1999 with an arms industrial policy which had as one of its major aims to preserve a suffi- cient level of competition in order to improve ‘affordability’ for the Department of Defense (DOD) and promote ‘innovation’ in military technology. In July 2000 the DOD adopted a new competition policy ‘requiring that DOD consider the effects of its acquisitions and technology strategy and budget plans on future competition’.2 To facilitate continued competition the DOD also favours a ‘competitive transatlantic industrial model—with industrial linkages among multiple firms on both sides of the Atlantic and technology sharing subject to security safeguards’.3 M&A in the US arms industry continued in 2000.
    [Show full text]
  • SHOP PROFILE ORDER OPTIONS D’S Paint & Body for UNENGAGED Shop, Peoria, Ill
    14 THE VOICE OF THE COLLISION REPAIR INDUSTRY talk shop anytime VOLUME 52 | NUMBER 9 SEPTEMBER 2013 TRENDING NACE 2014 MOVES TO DETROIT I-CAR, CIC AND NACE WILL COMPRISE INDUSTRY WEEK 2014, JULY 28-AUG. 2 TECHNOLOGY OPERATIONS FINDING THE KEY TO CYCLE TIME DATA IS NECESSARY, BUT HOW THAT DATA IS USED IS MOST IMPORTANT COMMUNITY HARTFORD INSURANCE APPEALS RULING EV, HEV REPAIR CAN BE DANGEROUS FIGHTS AGAINST INCREASED DAMAGES IF PROPER PRECAUTIONS ARE NOT TAKEN PRODUCT SPOTLIGHT + New CSF Catalog includes 150+ radiator, condensor models INSIDE ONLINE OPERATIONS TRENDING PARTSTRADER CUTS SHOP PROFILE ORDER OPTIONS D’s Paint & Body FOR UNENGAGED Shop, Peoria, Ill. SUPPLIERS ONLY ONE THING LASTS LONGER THAN OUR COATINGS. OUR COMMITMENT TO YOU. As the world leader in coatings our long-term commitment to our customers is reflected in the numbers. 2,000,000+ COLOR FORMULA GLOBAL DATABASE 28,000+ CUSTOMERS USING PPG WATERBORNE 13,000 TECHNICIANS TRAINED IN 2012 9,000+ SHOPS USING MVP BUSINESS TEACHINGS 1,200+ U.S. AND CANADIAN DISTRIBUTORS 111 YEARS OF INNOVATION IN REFINISH COATINGS 1 COMPANY DELIVERS ALL OF THIS Bottom line? As long as there are vehicles to paint PPG will be there to help you paint them. Follow us online: www.ppgrefinish.com ©2013 PPG Industries All rights reserved. The PPG logo and Bringing innovation to the surface are trademarks of PPG Industries Ohio, Inc. abrn.com SEPTEMBER | 2013 THE VOICE OF ⓪❾ 24950 Country Club Blvd., Suite 200 North Olmsted, OH 4407440700 ❺❷ Phone: (440) 243-8100 À ABRN.COM Fax: ((440)440) 891-267891-26755
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix D - Securities Held by Funds October 18, 2017 Annual Report of Activities Pursuant to Act 44 of 2010 October 18, 2017
    Report of Activities Pursuant to Act 44 of 2010 Appendix D - Securities Held by Funds October 18, 2017 Annual Report of Activities Pursuant to Act 44 of 2010 October 18, 2017 Appendix D: Securities Held by Funds The Four Funds hold thousands of publicly and privately traded securities. Act 44 directs the Four Funds to publish “a list of all publicly traded securities held by the public fund.” For consistency in presenting the data, a list of all holdings of the Four Funds is obtained from Pennsylvania Treasury Department. The list includes privately held securities. Some privately held securities lacked certain data fields to facilitate removal from the list. To avoid incomplete removal of privately held securities or erroneous removal of publicly traded securities from the list, the Four Funds have chosen to report all publicly and privately traded securities. The list below presents the securities held by the Four Funds as of June 30, 2017. 1345 AVENUE OF THE A 1 A3 144A AAREAL BANK AG ABRY MEZZANINE PARTNERS LP 1721 N FRONT STREET HOLDINGS AARON'S INC ABRY PARTNERS V LP 1-800-FLOWERS.COM INC AASET 2017-1 TRUST 1A C 144A ABRY PARTNERS VI L P 198 INVERNESS DRIVE WEST ABACUS PROPERTY GROUP ABRY PARTNERS VII L P 1MDB GLOBAL INVESTMENTS L ABAXIS INC ABRY PARTNERS VIII LP REGS ABB CONCISE 6/16 TL ABRY SENIOR EQUITY II LP 1ST SOURCE CORP ABB LTD ABS CAPITAL PARTNERS II LP 200 INVERNESS DRIVE WEST ABBOTT LABORATORIES ABS CAPITAL PARTNERS IV LP 21ST CENTURY FOX AMERICA INC ABBOTT LABORATORIES ABS CAPITAL PARTNERS V LP 21ST CENTURY ONCOLOGY 4/15
    [Show full text]
  • Foreign Investment in Indiana
    Indiana Economic Development Corporation FOREIGN INVESTMENT IN INDIANA 1,027 TOTAL COMPANIES EACH UNIQUE FLAG IN A COUNTY REPRESENTS ONE OR MORE COMPANIES OF THE FOLLOWING ORIGIN 12 Australia 12 Austria 3 Belgium 13 Brazil 78 Canada 21 China 6 Denmark 6 Finland 52 France 127 Germany 4 Hong Kong 8 India 42 Ireland 8 Israel 36 Italy 315 Japan 1 Liechtenstein 25 Luxembourg 1 Malaysia 14 Mexico 29 Netherlands 5 New Zealand 5 Norway 1 Poland 3 Portugal 1 Qatar 1 Russia 4 Saudi Arabia 3 Singapore 2 South Africa 10 South Korea 15 Spain 31 Sweden 39 Switzerland 5 Taiwan 1 Thailand 1 Turkey 1 United Arab Emirates 95 United Kingdom INCLUDING JOINT VENTURES 1 Australia/Spain 1 Austria/Germany 1 Denmark/USA 1 Finland/Ireland INDIANA IN RELATION TO THE U.S. 2 France/Germany SEATTLE 2 Germany/Japan 1 CHICAGO NEW YORK Japan/Luxembourg INDIANAPOLIS ST. 1 LOS ANGELES Japan/Switzerland ATLANTA 5 DALLAS Japan/USA 1 Spain/USA 1 NORTH CAPITOL AVENUE, INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA 46204 | 800.463.8081 | TEL 317.232.8800 | FAX 317.232.4146 | iedc.in.gov REV 6.20 Indiana Economic Development Corporation FOREIGN INVESTMENT IN INDIANA AUSTRALIA SWITZERLAND Sims Metal Management East Chicago Schneider Electric USA, Inc. Mishawaka Mulzer Crushed Stone Leavenworth GECOM Corp. Greensburg Leclanche Anderson Nipro Pharma Packaging Westport Pratt Paper, LLC Gary Air Liquide America LP Mount Vernon Americas Nestle USA Beverage Division Anderson Mulzer Crushed Stone Mauckport Hitachi Powdered Metals, Greensburg C&R Racing Indianapolis Hahn Systems New Haven Mulzer Crushed Stone Newburgh (USA) Inc. NTN Bearing Corporation of UBS Financial Services Anderson Cardno Indianapolis America Whitestown LafargeHolcim East Chicago Air Liquide America LP Pittsboro Seabrook Technology Group Pendleton Honda Manufacturing of Indiana Greensburg Delivra Indianapolis Geodis Logistics Plainfield Medtronic Plainfield LLC Kuri Tec Mfg.
    [Show full text]
  • FORWARD Annual Report and Accounts 2001 >EQUIPPED >Being Prepared Is Everything
    Smiths Group plc Annual report and accounts 2001 >FORWARD Annual report and accounts 2001 >EQUIPPED >Being prepared is everything. At Smiths we focus on the future. What will our customers want tomorrow? How can we exploit technology to provide enhanced solutions for their most demanding applications? How can we extend our capabilities to give them the service they need? We are constantly searching for ways to add value for our customers. This is how we generate profitable organic growth. >DISCOVERY >Discovery is about being always one step ahead. It is about meeting needs in ways that others haven’t yet thought of. It is about developing products that provide innovative solutions for the toughest applications. Through total commitment to research and development, Smiths seeks sustainable competitive advantage. >TEAMWORK >At Smiths we believe in teamwork. We work closely with our suppliers and customers to build productive partnerships and long-term relationships. Within the company, too, teamwork is essential. Not just working together day by day, but focusing everyone's efforts on maximum efficiency, productivity, flexibility and responsiveness. Through teamwork we seek to be a leader. >REACH >In a world where efficiency is paramount, customers want to deal with fewer, better suppliers. At Smiths we have the necessary size and diversity. We are global. Our products are wide-ranging. We have the reach to be our customers’ preferred supplier. 01 03 01 As a first-tier supplier working directly 03 We are a leading supplier of products used with prime manufacturers, we are during critical and intensive care procedures, delivering systems for front-line defence and for continuing care during recovery.
    [Show full text]
  • 40% and 45% Weight Savings Analysis: Technical Cost Modeling for Vehicle Lightweighting
    INL/EXT-14-33863 Vehicle Lightweighting: 40% and 45% Weight Savings Analysis: Technical Cost Modeling for Vehicle Lightweighting Anthony Mascarin, IBIS Associates, Inc. Ted Hannibal, IBIS Associates, Inc. Anand Raghunathan, Energetics Incorporated Ziga Ivanic, Energetics Incorporated Jim Francfort, Idaho National Laboratory April 2015 The INL is a U.S. Department of Energy National Laboratory operated by Battelle Energy Alliance DISCLAIMER This information was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the U.S. Government. Neither the U.S. Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness, of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. References herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trade mark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the U.S. Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the U.S. Government or any agency thereof. INL/EXT-14-33863 Vehicle Lightweighting: 40% and 45% Weight Savings Analysis: Technical Cost Modeling for Vehicle Lightweighting Anthony Mascarin, IBIS Associates, Inc. Ted Hannibal, IBIS Associates, Inc. Anand Raghunathan, Energetics Incorporated Ziga Ivanic, Energetics Incorporated Jim Francfort, Idaho National Laboratory April 2015 Idaho National Laboratory Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415 http://avt.inl.gov Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy Under DOE Idaho Operations Office Contract DE-AC07-05ID14517 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Steven F. Udvar-Hazy, Chairman & CEO • ILFC Colin Stuart, Vice
    SPEEDNEWS 20TH ANNUAL AVIATION INDUSTRY SUPPLIERS CONFERENCE Steven F. Udvar-Hazy, Chairman & CEO • ILFC Mr. Hazy, in 1973, founded Interlease Group, Inc., which today is known as International Lease Finance Corporation (ILFC), with a portfolio valued at more than $40b, consisting of more than 800 jet aircraft. ILFC is the largest customer of Airbus and Boeing. ILFC went public in 1983 with $220 million in assets and $8 million in profit. In 1990, ILFC was acquired by American Intl. Group, and since the acquisition, ILFC has generated a cumulative profit of $8.3b for AIG. In 1966, while an undergraduate student at UCLA, he formed Airlines Systems Research Consultants, a firm specializing in airline routes, fleet and planning analysis. His first clients included Aer Lingus, Mexicana and Air New Zealand. He later graduated from UCLA in 1968 with a BS in Economics and a minor in Intl. Relations. Mr. Hazy also serves on the Board of Directors of Skywest, Inc., and is on the Board of several foundations, educational institutions and corporations, and is the major donor for the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum. He also has pilot type ratings in Gulfstreams, Learjets, Citations and presently is captain on the GV. Colin Stuart, Vice President-Marketing • Airbus Colin Stuart was appointed to his current position, VP-Marketing, in May 1996. His responsibilities include managing both the development and implementation of customer/product marketing activities and related marketing support services for the complete range of Airbus commercial products. He studied under the British Aerospace undergraduate apprenticeship scheme before obtaining a degree in aeronautical engineering from Bath University in 1966.
    [Show full text]
  • The Defence Industry in the 21St Century
    The Defence Industry in the 21st Century “With nine countries (and their collective industrial prowess) involved in its development, the F-35 repre- sents a new model of inter- national cooperation, ensuring affordable U.S. and coalition partner security well into the 21st century” – Sources: Photograph by US Department of Defense, Quote by Lockheed Martin Corporation Thinking Global … or thinking American? “With nine countries (and their collective industrial prowess) involved in its development, the F-35 represents a new model of international cooperation, ensuring affordable U.S. and coalition partner security well into the 21st century” – Sources: Photograph by US Department of Defense, Quote by Lockheed Martin Corporation Welcome The purpose of this paper is to provoke a debate. To stimulate further the dialogue we enjoy with our clients around the world. As the world’s largest professional services firm, PricewaterhouseCoopers works with clients in every segment of the defence industry – from the Americas to the whole of Europe; from the Middle East and Africa to Asia and the Pacific Rim. On many occasions, our discussions focus on the technical issues in which we are pre-eminently well-qualified to advise. Here, however, we seek to debate the issues that affect your industry. To review the factors that shaped today’s environment, to assess the implications for contractors and to look at the factors that might shape the future. Our views are set out in the following pages. We have debated some of these issues with some of our clients already but the time is right for a broader discus- sion.
    [Show full text]
  • Europeantransatlanticarmscoope
    ISB?: 960-8124-26-3 © 2003 Defence Analysis Institute 17, Valtetsiou Street 10680 Athens, Greece Tel.: (210) 3632902 Fax: (210) 3632634 web-site: www.iaa.gr e-mail: [email protected] Preface Introduction The European Defence Industrial Base and ESDP RESTRUCTURING OF THE EUROPEAN DEFENCE INDUSTRY THE INDUSTRY-LED RESTRUCTURING PROCESS. 1997-1999: the European defence industry under pressure 13 Firms seek economies of scale and enlargement of the market State/industry consensus on the need for industrial consolidation From international cooperation to transnational integration 18 The first cooperative programmes, common subsidiaries and joint ventures Privatisation Concentration Groups with diversified activities Appraisal by sector of activities 27 Defence aerospace and electronics: a strategy of segment consolidation The land and naval armaments sectors: an industrial scene divided along national lines Trends in European defence industrial direct employment 37 Overview Situation by country THE OPERATING ENVIRONMENT 41 The permanence of the Europe/United States imbalance 43 Unfavourable conditions... …in the face of the American strategy of expansion in Europe First initiatives aimed at creating a favourable environment for European defence industries 48 Creation of ad hoc structures by the principal armaments producing countries (Germany, United Kingdom, France, Italy, Spain and Sweden) First steps towards an institutional strategy for the EU in the field of armaments ALL-UNION INITIATIVES, ENHANCED COOPERATION AND CONVERGENCE OBJECTIVES
    [Show full text]
  • Copyrighted Material
    1 Flight Control Systems 1.1 Introduction Flight controls have advanced considerably throughout the years. In the earliest biplanes flown by the pioneers flight control was achieved by warping wings and control surfaces by means of wires attached to the flying controls in the cockpit. Figure 1.1 clearly shows the multiplicity of rigging and control wires on an early monoplane. Such a means of exercising control was clearly rudimentary and usually barely adequate for the task in hand. The use of articulated flight control surfaces followed soon after but the use of wires and pulleys to connect the flight control surfaces to the pilot’s controls persisted for many years until advances in aircraft performance rendered the technique inadequate for all but the simplest aircraft. COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL Figure 1.1 Morane Saulnier Monoplane refuelling before the 1913 Aerial Derby (Courtesy of the Royal Aero Club) Aircraft Systems: Mechanical, electrical, and avionics subsystems integration. 3rd Edition Ian Moir and Allan Seabridge © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd 2 Flight Control Systems When top speeds advanced into the transonic region the need for more complex and more sophisticated methods became obvious. They were needed first for high-speed fighter aircraft and then with larger aircraft when jet propulsion became more widespread. The higher speeds resulted in higher loads on the flight control surfaces which made the aircraft very difficult to fly physically. The Spitfire experienced high control forces and a control reversal which was not initially understood. To overcome the higher loadings, powered surfaces began to be used with hydraulically powered actuators boosting the efforts of the pilot to reduce the physical effort required.
    [Show full text]