Pierre-Roch Pascal, and let us go straight to the key highlights. We had a strong start to the year with a very solid momentum across both civil, aerospace, and defense. Revenue was up 17% year-on-year, nearly 14% organically, reaching EUR 7.3 billion. Growth was, once again, driven by a robust demand for aftermarket across the board. In particular, on civil engines, sales of spare parts were up by 25%, exceeding our expectations, and sales of services increased by close to 18%. On the strategic front, we have made good progress toward the acquisition of Collins Aerospace actuation and flight control activities, with the obtaining of the European Commission approval, subject to ongoing analysis on the divestment of North American electromechanical actuation business and Woodward's suitability as a purchaser. The close of the consultation period by the CMA in the U.K. on this divestment. Decisions are still pending.
Our current performance and the strong momentum we are seeing in our markets give us high confidence in meeting our full-year targets, while keeping potential tariff impact out of the equation. Let us turn to slide four, highlighting strong momentum across our civil and defense and space activities. CFM got additional orders from Malaysian Airlines as well as All Nippon Airways. We are pleased to welcome MTU Dallas as our sixth LEAP Premier MRO partner, further expanding the LEAP open MRO market, a key point of our strategy that we presented during our last Capital Market Day. Our helicopter engines offering is meeting success with the selection of our Arrano 1A engine on the Airbus H140 and our Arriel 2W engine on the new Robinson R88 helicopter. In defense and space, we achieved a significant milestone with the successful first commercial flight of Ariane 6.
The Finnish Defense Forces selected our Geonyx advanced inertial navigation system, and we secured a contract with Bell Textron to support the U.S. Future Long-Range Assault Aircraft with testing solutions and antennas. Our new mobility engineers have been selected by Ascendance in France for their VTOL aircraft. This illustrates the strong dynamism of our global activities. On slide five, let me now say a word on tariff. It reflects the latest known situation, which remains very fluid. As you know, the global aviation sector has long operated in a tariff-free regime for the benefit of all parties on both sides of the Atlantic. Implementation of tariff will result in additional costs for the industry and for the final customers.
To mitigate any economic impact, we are leveraging available regulatory mechanisms, such as duty drawback, USMCA exemption, use of free trade zones, of bonded warehouses, along with other strategies such as modifying logistical flows. With all those actions, which are already largely underway, we expect to reduce significantly our gross exposure. We are now engaging into commercial discussion with our customers, OEM and airlines, and from there, we expect to reduce further the impact. Our teams are fully dedicated to executing these operational actions. Also, some actions will take time to materialize. At this stage, given the level of uncertainty, it is too early to quantify the impact. As a result, our 2025 outlook excludes any potential impact from tariff. In addition, while the broader environment is uncertain, we are closely monitoring secondary effects on consumer confidence and air traffic data.
Today's demand remains strong, and we are operating from a position of strength given the robust backlog. I will now let Pascal provide further comments on our Q1 figures.
Thank you, Olivier. Good morning, everyone. Let's start with an update on FX on slide seven. The macro uncertainty mentioned by Olivier has resulted in the depreciation of the dollar against the euro since early April. The euro/dollar is now trading around 1.13, 1.14, which compares to an average of 1.05 in Q1 2025. Our hedge portfolio is composed of options, some of which may be deactivated if a knockout barrier is reached. Our trading floor is working to reduce any immediate risk of deactivation. By the way, the latest fluctuation did not lead to any deactivation. In any case, we have secured a hedge rate of 1.12 this year. Notwithstanding any risk of deactivation, as of March 2025, our hedge book stands at EUR 54.1 billion, mostly unchanged from the end of December. Turning to page eight, Q1 2025 revenue reached EUR 7.26 billion, up 16.7% year-over-year.
We delivered EUR 1 billion of additional revenues compared to Q1 last year, with strong organic growth of nearly 14%. Services led the way with nearly 20% organic growth, more than twice the OE rate. Currency had a supportive impact of 2.3%, reflecting a more favorable euro/dollar spot rate of 1.05 compared to 1.09 a year ago. This translates into a positive impact on sales of nearly EUR 140 million. Scope contributed a modest 0.5%, notably from the acquisition of Preligens on Air Liquide Oxygen System in 2024. Let me now provide a few details per activity. Propulsion revenue reached EUR 3.7 billion, up 16.4% organically year-over-year. LEAP OE deliveries were down 13% year-over-year, with 319 engines delivered. However, the favorable customer mix did more than offset the volume impact.
Civil aircraft engines aftermarket continued to benefit from a high level of demand, with spare parts up 25.1%, boosted by demand for both CFM56 and High Thrust engines , which is a combination of price and volume, and specifically on High Thrust engines , heavier work scope. Services were up 17.6%, mainly driven by the LEAP contracts. Strong demand in spare parts is reflected in the revised assumption of our full-year guidance. Military aftermarket activity has been robust, with strong growth on spares and services, notably on the M88 engine. Helicopter turbine services increased as well, supported by both volume and pricing. Equipment and defense, its revenue grew by EUR 2.8 billion, up 11% year-over-year. We saw strong growth in OE deliveries, especially from nacelles, and continued strength in avionics on FADEC and actuators.
On defense and space, we had good momentum with robust growth in satellite communication systems, LAN systems like Optronics, missiles propulsion, guidance systems, and aerospace inertial navigation. Services activity was up, supported by spares and landing gear, wheels and brakes, and nacelles. Aircraft interiors performed well as well, with revenue reaching close to EUR 800 million, up 14%, and now, and for the first time, exceeding its Q1 2019 level of sales by 8%. This was driven by nearly tripling business class seat deliveries, highlighting improved industrial performance and continued momentum in the business class seats market. Services also grew mainly on cabin spares, with strong demand, especially from airlines in the Middle East and Asia. Let me now walk you through our latest actions regarding debt management and share repurchases. First, on the OCEANE 2028 early redemption.
We executed a soft call on April 1 on the EUR 730 million worth of 2028 OCEANEs. More than 93% of these convertible bonds were converted into existing shares that had been previously repurchased. The remaining bonds were reimbursed at par for a total cash out of EUR 49 million. The early redemption improved our net cash position by EUR 673 million. Moving to the share repurchase program for consolation. Between January and April, 1.5 million shares were repurchased for consolation purpose, under our EUR 350 million first-range program. In addition, 0.2 million shares originally acquired to meet conversion needs on Safran convertible bonds were reallocated for consolation. This amounts for a total of 1.7 million shares for consolation to date.
As a reminder, Safran will propose to its shareholder vote a dividend per share of EUR 2.9 for fiscal year 2024 to be paid early June. Olivier, back to you.
Thank you, Pascal. As already mentioned earlier in the call, our current performance and the strong momentum we are seeing in both civil, aerospace, and defense sectors give us high confidence in meeting our full-year targets, excluding any potential tariff impact. The only adjustment refers to spare part revenue growth, now expected in the low teens compared to our previous high single-digit plus forecast. Thank you. We will now answer your question.
Thank you. If you would like to ask a question, you'll need to press star, one, and one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. To withdraw your question, please press star, one, and one again. Please stand by while we compile the Q&A roster. Thank you. We will now take our first question. This is from the line of Ben Heelan from Bank of America. Please go ahead.
Yeah, morning, guys. I hope you both are well. First question for me is on tariffs. We've seen estimates from a number of the global peers now. Can you talk a little bit about what your exposure is and where the exposure is divisionally? Thank you.
Hello, Ben. As you know, the situation is very unsettled, and the tariff situation can change and evolve very quickly. As an evidence of it, yesterday night, China has decided to exempt from tax any deliveries of engines, nacelles, landing gears, or parts to China. You see the assumptions are changing every week, sometimes every day. This is why we are reluctant to communicate on the quantification of the impact because this is totally relying on changing assumptions. There is a 90-day pause, as you know. We do not know yet what is going to be the outcome of the negotiation between the EU and the U.S. administration. We know that it is not going to stay like it is today. We could expect, and we should expect, a retaliation from Europe.
This is why, basically, we are cautious and do not want to communicate on the quantification because that would be like chasing a moving ball. We do not want to enter into that game. What we are focusing on are the real mitigation actions. Our teams are focused on mitigating, basically, our exposure. As we said, we are optimizing logistical flows. Anytime we have a flow of parts or whatever that are going to step by the U.S. without any modification or with a very slight modification, transformation, typically, we can change the flow and go directly from country A to country B without stepping by the U.S. if it is not necessary. Why should we do that? Optimizing the logistical flows, relying on USMCA anytime it is applicable.
We basically, our team have worked a lot to maximize the coverage of our parts in Mexico, which are covered by USMCA. We have been working hard on certificate of origins and so on, and we have optimized and maximized the coverage of our parts manufactured in Mexico. We are going to leverage also on duty drawback anytime it is applicable. We are implementing free trade zones and bonded warehouse anytime it is practicable. Of course, we are going to activate any favorable clause in our contracts that we can activate with our customers. We are very confident that through all those physical actions, if you wish, we can, let's say, significantly reduce our gross exposure. There will remain a net exposure. This net exposure is very simple. We have engaged with customers, OEM, and airlines. We won't be shy.
We will apply a tariff surcharge to the airlines and to our customers. There is no mystery. At the end of the day, this tariff situation is creating inflation a bit. We are going to impose tariff surcharge to our customers. We won't be shy.
I'd love a quick follow-on from that. Is it fair then to say, given the USMCA compliance that I think you have across equipment and interiors, that most of the net impact that you mentioned there is going to lie within propulsion? Is that a fair comment?
Propulsion could be a meaningful part of our remaining exposure. Here, we are on the same boat as our partner, GE. In our, let's say, partnership, we share the cost of transportation, including tariff, of the modules that are delivered to the assembly lines, both sides of the Atlantic. We are aligned on our strategy going forward and our engagement with our customers, OEM and airline customers. Yes, we are confident to be able to pass through most of our net exposure.
Okay. Very clear. Final quick one from me. Can you comment on the supply chain and how the supply chain has reacted to the tariffs? Obviously, we've seen the news around Calmette and the potential claiming of force majeure. What is the situation in the supply chain? Is stuff still moving generally in terms of supply chain? What sort of support are you in there kind of offering to some of your suppliers? Thank you.
Yeah, Ben, thank you for that question. As you know, the supply chain has been heavily fragilized post-COVID. Basically, the supply chain has progressively recovered. We were getting to a situation where we were close to normalization end of last year. Now what's happening is, you're right, we see some signals and ringing here and there from suppliers telling us that basically they have inflationary costs because of the tariff. Therefore, basically, there are some of them telling us that basically they would like us to absorb the extra cost, and even some of them threatening to stop deliveries. Of course, we are monitoring this situation very carefully, containing the impact. The fact is that the tariff situation creates a new element of potential disturbance in the supply chain.
We are going to remain focused on making sure we can deliver to our airframes and airline customers.
Okay, great. Thank you.
Thank you. We'll now take our next question. This is from Christophe Menard from Deutsche Bank. Please go ahead.
Yes. Thank you for taking my question. I had actually two questions. The first one on your guidance and explaining tariffs, obviously. Would you say that the better performance of Q1 puts you more at the high end of the guidance in terms of free cash flow and EBIT? The second question is more linked to the LEAP delivery performance. Can you comment a little bit more on the mix? What was the percentage of spare engine in Q1? And how confident are you in terms of, you know, delivering that increase in the full year? Obviously, you confirmed the guidance, but what are the means? What was in place to actually achieve that guidance? Thank you.
Christophe. On the guidance, yes, indeed. We are confident to reach the high end of the guidance.
It gives Christophe, hi. It gives room for maneuver in case we have to experience an impact on tariff because clearly the Q1 quarter was really strong. It helps.
On LEAP, yes, we had a slow start in Q1. We are confident we will be able to recover in Q2 and Q3. We confirm our guidance to a + 15%-20% increase compared to 2024. Relating to the mix of spare engines, as you know, we have already communicated on that. We are in the low double-digit situation, mix of spare engines compared to the overall, let's say, delivery of engines. By the way, I've looked at basically the numbers since the start of the LEAP program. If I go back and see what happened since the start of the program, we are at low double digits, in fact, since 2016. We are there. The mix in Q1 was even way above that average.
This is just the reflection of, let's say, the fact that we have prioritized LEAP deliveries to Airbus at the end of last year. We had to reprioritize airlines at the beginning of this year. That was an impact. Now, the mix that we have seen in Q1 was extremely good of spare engine versus installed engines, but it's not a reflection of the full year. The spare engines deliveries are going to be mainly front-loaded.
Okay. Thank you. Is it a number above 20%, for instance, or?
It's up year-over-year, and it's slightly down quarter on quarter. It was a good number, a good ratio in Q1, but we won't comment further.
Okay. Thank you very much.
Thank you. We'll now take our next question. This is from Chloé Lemarie from Jefferies. Please go ahead.
Yes. Good morning. I'm limiting myself to one today. Just one follow-up on tariffs. Could I maybe ask a bit more details on where you need to share those cuts at the CFM level versus what would be your own responsibility? Would it be fair to assume that the CFM-level tariffs would only be a fraction of the $500 million impact disclosed by your partner this week? Thank you.
Bonjour, Chloé. Hello. As I said, on CFM, as part of the partnership, we share the burden of transportation and tariff costs on the final assembly module. Any module that we ship to the U.S. for assembly in the U.S. within the GE factory, basically those tariff and those transportation costs are shared. It goes the same way on the reverse side. Any transportation cost, including potentially tariff sent by GE Aerospace to our final assembly line in France for deliveries to Airbus, those costs are shared: transportation costs and tariff costs. Now, as you know, within the partnership, everyone is responsible for its own cost and its own supply chain cost. Let's say the potential supply chain inflationary costs, which are basically the result, which could be the result of the tariff, will have to be managed by each of the partners separately.
This is the situation. Now, it means that most of our exposure relating to the CFM56 and the LEAP engines are shared between GE Aerospace and us. Of course, this is a meaningful part of what our partner has communicated, I guess.
Very clear. Thank you.
Thank you. We'll now take our next question. This is from Ian Douglas-Pennant from UBS. Please go ahead.
Thanks for taking my question, and thanks for all the helpful commentary on tariffs. Just to continue the conversation, pleased to hear you talking about a temporary surcharge to your customers to cover the costs of any tariffs. How should we think about the offset and the risk of an increase in engine retirements that results from that? To what extent is this potential temporary surcharge dependent on a continued strong macroeconomic environment? The second question I have is, I just want to ask you directly, please, if you're willing to recognize the quantification that GE gave yesterday, do you think that that $500 million number that they communicated could be translated to your business? Thank you.
Yeah. On your question relating to offset and potential impact on engine retirements, we do not expect an impact on engine retirements today. We do not expect that. As you know, today, the situation is such that airlines are still starving from getting aircraft. This is a good situation for us because the demand for aircraft capacity is still higher than basically the supply and the ramp-up of new aircraft. We do not see today, we do not expect, let's say, a sort of acceleration of aircraft or engine retirement. We are monitoring the situation, of course. On your second question relating to the $500 million that has been communicated by GE, no comment, I would say.
Yeah. What we can say, Ian, is that Safran has a different business mix. We are not only in propulsion, but also in equipment, defense, interiors. We can have also different geographical flows with respect to supply chain or on the footprint. When you look to what was communicated by GE and RTX, there are not comparable numbers because their underlying assumptions about what tariffs apply to these scenarios was different to my understanding. The $500 million mentioned by GE and $850 million mentioned by RTX do not use the same assumption with respect to what could be the country-by-country rate starting early July. You see, putting out a number is quite dangerous because people think about the number, but what were the underlying assumptions?
Absolutely.
That's why we believe it's pointless to develop scenarios and quantify today that will be disproven the next day.
Please do not look at numbers in isolation. You always need to link the numbers that have been communicated by our peers with the underlying assumptions. This is critical.
Thank you. Appreciate the insight.
Thank you. We'll now take our next question. This is from the line of Milene Kerner from Barclays. Please go ahead.
Yes. Good morning, Olivier, Pascal, and Armelle. Pascal, just coming back on your slide seven, could you help us understand a little bit more the barrier option dynamic from your hedging strategy? There is two things to that question. Firstly, what happens to the size of your hedge book if the dollar is above 1.15 for the rest of the year as your knockout starts at 1.15? Secondly, what could be the targeted hedge rate for 2025 in that scenario? Thank you.
Good morning, Milene. I will enter a bit into technical details. We have indeed, in part of the options in our portfolio, what we call knockout barriers. There are different kinds of KO barriers. Some are called American KO, meaning that for an option to be deactivated, it could happen at any time between now and the expiration of a given option. We have other options with European KO barriers, meaning that we will only look at the option the day it expires. For example, if you have an option expiring, I don't know, in September, it's only in September that we will look if the same day the spot rate is above or not the KO barrier.
We have some other options with window KO barriers, meaning that even if an option is expiring, let's say, in December, we will only look in a given period of time, let's say, September, October, if the spot rate is above the KO. There are a variety of options inside our book. Even if the spot rate goes beyond 1.15, 1.16, or 1.17, it's not a given that options will be deactivated. It depends on the mix of American KOs, European KOs, or window KO barriers. Sorry to enter this detail. What the trading floor is doing now is to remove the American KOs options in our portfolio. What we do is to extend the lifetime of these options in order to translate the American KO barrier into European or window barriers in order to avoid any deactivation.
As an evidence of that, last Monday, spot rate went above 1.15. It did reach 1.1580, and we had no option deactivated in our portfolio. We try to manage our portfolio in a very proactive manner. Regarding 2025, there is no risk at all to be away from the $1.12 per euro hedge rate because this is already firm in our book. The only risk we carry should the spot go to 1.20, 1.25, or 1.30 is to maybe change our long-term guidance for the hedge rate in 2028 or 2029. We are far from that, and we will do anything we can to avoid that. Again, as an evidence as well, back in 2018, 2019, we had part of our portfolio being deactivated at that time because there was a lot of fluctuation in our hedge book.
We have maintained our guidance each and every year on the hedge rate. There is no immediate threat. We are monitoring very closely and actively our portfolio.
Thank you, Pascal. Very clear, even if it's not a clear subject.
Thank you. We'll now take our next question. This is from David Perry from J.P. Morgan. Please go ahead.
Yes. Hi, Olivier and Pascal.
Hi.
I'm just going to ask Milene's question again to be a bit annoying. I don't understand derivatives. Far too complicated for me. Are you essentially saying whatever the FX rate is, you are guaranteed to get the 1.12 for 2025, 2026, 2027? Because that seemed to be what you're saying, which to me means you may as well not tell us there's knockouts. Just without the explanation.
The answer is yes, to make it simple.
Okay. I mean, but let's okay. So what happens if we went to 1.30 or 1.35, for argument's sake, in the next month because something terrible happened? You're completely guaranteed 2025, 2026, 2027, but what would happen 2028, 2029 onwards?
Yeah. The address will go up for sure because all the new options that we will implement will take into account the new spot rate. Let's assume it's 1.30. With time, we will move away from the 1.12 to a higher number. You know that we have a hedge book of more than $50 billion, which more or less hedges our exposure for the next three to four years. It is only in 2028 or 2029 that we will start to see a change in our 1.12 hedge rates that we currently have in our book. It will be only with time that we will see a change. No panic for the next two, three years. It's already in the book.
Okay. One more from me on this. Let's imagine a scenario where you're locked into 1.12 for 2025, 2026, 2027, but you face the cliff edge of 1.30 in 2028, 2029. Wouldn't you try and smooth it? Wouldn't you try and restructure the whole book so it was a more phased impact rather than have a cliff edge?
No, it won't be a cliff edge. I mean, it will be phased. I have not simulated it, but I would assume it could move from 1.12 to 1.15. There will be steps of a couple of cents before we converge to the spot rate. There is a lot of latency in our hedge book. There can't be a cliff of $0.05-$0.1 cents from one year to the other. This is all about our strategy to hedge three, four years in advance and with quite a complex strategy around options with barriers, KO, but also knock-in barriers. We are used since 15 years now to manage such kind of risk, which proves to be benefits when I compare to what our European peers do. I guess we can be proud of 1.12 hedge rates for the next three, four years.
Last one on this, I promise. You're saying the worst-case scenario, even if spot was $1.30 in the next month, is you stay at $1.12, 2025, 2026, 2027, but then you would progressively phase in whatever increments of $0.03, $0.04, $0.05 from 2028, 2029 onwards. Is that what you're saying in all scenarios?
Yes. Correct. Yes. Correct, David.
Okay. Thank you. One more, please, maybe for Olivier. Can you just give us a bit more color on the LEAP deliveries? Obviously, a very weak start to the year. It was somewhat expected. You need a big, big improvement to make the full-year targets. Can you just give us an update on what's going on in the supply chain there and what the cadence will be and your confidence in hitting the target? Thank you.
Hello, David. Yes. We've seen a strong improvement on the supply chain side, especially on those items that were missing our 24 deliveries. I can say now that we are rightly fed in our assembly lines to recover the slow start of the year.
Any additional color apart from just telling us it's okay? Because it's a massive issue, but don't people want to give us a word?
I have to say that we also have basically seen a strike in our facility in France for a few weeks. This is behind us now, but it has also slowed down a bit our deliveries in Q1. This strike is now behind us.
Your answer to what?
An exceptional situation that occurred in March. Basically, that has been part of the slow start.
In terms of the supply chain, you're happy with all the performance there in the U.S. and Europe on lead delivery?
Yes. We've seen, let's say, a recovery. It gives us confidence in our ability to meet our guidance for LEAP deliveries this year, 15%-20%.
Awesome. Thank you.
Thank you. We'll now take the next question. This is from Ken Herbert from RBC. Please go ahead.
Yes, hi. Good morning.
Morning, Ken.
Olivier or Pascal, for the spare part sales in the quarter, can you talk about the mix of price versus volume in terms of driving the 25% growth? As we look at the guidance range for spare parts, how do we think about the main driver of the increase in the guidance, whether it be pricing or volume on spare parts?
Again, on spare parts, as you remind, it's a combination of LEAP, CFM56, and High Thrust engines , typically the GE90. We have seen different growth rates in Q1 on these three categories of engine. The high performer was High Thrust engines , okay? It was a combination of price, volume, and heavier workscope. On CFM, it was slightly above what we expected, driven by price and volume, typically volume because price was already the consequence of what we did last August. Volume was slightly better than expected. LEAP was performing, I would say, as expected. Going forward, it's more a question of volume for CFM56, depending obviously on the indirect consequence we can have from tariff. We have already discussed that. We are pretty confident that we will be now in the low teens.
Remember that we have already upped our guidance back in February from what we have told you at the CMD. We will see going forward. Next August, we will pass again mid to high single-digit gross pricing to airlines. This is without the surcharge that may apply depending on the situation of tariff. The usual price escalation of the catalog list price should be in the mid to high single digits.
Okay. Very helpful. Just with some of the incremental cautious commentary from some airlines on capacity growth in the second half of this year in particular, have you seen any airlines look to defer shop visits on engines or push out or otherwise lower maintenance spending as a result of any of the potentially slower capacity growth?
Ken, we've not seen that yet. We've not seen that yet. Remember, there have been comments on the fact that our revenue growth on spare parts was more constrained by some supply chain issues or, let's say, MRO capacity issues. We don't expect, unless the context is changing radically, but we don't expect, let's say, a slowdown coming from lower demand for MRO coming from the airlines.
Great. Thank you very much.
Thank you. We'll now take our next question. This is from Robert Stallard from Vertical Research. Please go ahead.
Thanks so much. Good morning.
Good morning.
Good morning, Robert.
Maybe just to follow up on Ken's question. We have seen U.S. airlines in particular seeing a slowdown in their domestic market and a couple of them talking about retiring some older aircraft. Has that flowed through in any way to the dollar value of shop visits they're planning for the second half or starting to destock spares in any form or another? Secondly, on the interiors business, you obviously saw a very big increase in business class seat revenues in Q1. How are you managing the demand that's coming from the OEMs versus the retrofit market? Thank you.
Robert, yeah, we've seen the communication of some of the U.S. airlines. Once again, we are monitoring this situation. As we speak today, we've not seen any signal of any decrease of the dollar value of future shop visits. We have good visibility on what's going to come in Q2. We don't see any impact there yet. On interiors, you're right. Basically, we have experienced strong demand both on line-fit aircraft and retrofit aircraft. For sure, we have to manage that very carefully. This is why we are now cautious. Okay. Cautious. We are, yeah, taking into account our overall capacity, be it engineering capacity as well as manufacturing capacity for responding to any new request from airlines.
We have now a very, let's say, strict process to look whether we respond positively or negatively to any new demand for interiors because we don't want to overcommit and underdeliver.
Very much.
Thanks. As a reminder, if you would like to ask a question, please press star, one, and one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. To withdraw your question, you can press star, one, and one again. We will now take our next question. This is from Olivier Brochet from Redburn Atlantic. Please go ahead.
Yes. Good morning, Olivier and Pascal. Thank you for taking my questions. I would have like three, if I may. The first one is on the HPT blade upgrade for the LEAP-1B. Has anything changed there? The first question. The second one is on SPS. Any update on the situation on your side on that thing? The third one is on the assembly of LEAP between the U.S. and France. Is there any specificities in terms of variant, or are you able to just manage that indiscriminately? Thank you.
Hello, Olivier. HPT blade upgrade for the 1B is expected this year. As already communicated, it is already implemented on the LEAP 1A. Any new LEAP 1A delivered to either the airlines or Airbus has the new HPT blade. For the LEAP 1B, we are expecting the certification by the end of this year. SPS, there is an impact for us mainly on wheels and brakes. We are basically managing this situation, working on alternatives for fasteners, nuts, and bolts, and so on. Of course, our priority is to protect the assembly line of our airframe or customer. We do not see an impact before, I would say, June or July as we speak. We are working hard to push out such an impact. We are going to protect this. This is our policy.
We are going to protect the assembly line of our airframe or customers to the, I would say, to the expense of temporary, to the expense of MRO and aftermarket temporarily. Prioritization to the assembly line to avoid any impact to our customers.
Okay. We'll take maybe a last question.
Sorry, sorry. Your last question on assembly. Basically, the LEAP 1A for Airbus and the LEAP 1C for Comac are assembled in France, whilst the LEAP 1B is mainly assembled in the U.S., but we are also assembling some of them in France in order to have a global equilibrium between GE Aerospace and us. We can have flexibility. I mean, we are able in France to assemble 1A and 1B, and GE Aerospace could be easily also able to assemble both 1B and 1A. I hope it answers your question.
It does. Thank you very much.
Thank you. We'll take last question, if any.
Thank you. In fact, there are no further questions at this time. I would hand the conference back to the speakers for any closing comments.
Thank you. Looking forward to getting together end of July. As we said, we are highly confident in the strength of our underlying business and reaching our guidance, excluding tariff. As we have discussed, we are monitoring very actively the situation on tariff. Here as well, we are confident to manage adequately the situation. Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you. This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating, and you may now disconnect.