Okay, why don't we get started? Good morning, I'm Doug Harned, Bernstein's Global Aerospace and Defense Analyst. I am thrilled to again have with us Chris Calio, Chairman and CEO of RTX. I think just have some few things, I think it'd be great to hear a little bit about the company overall.
Yeah, great. Well, good morning, Doug. Morning, everybody. Great to be here. Thought I'd take just a minute or so here just to sort of frame out RTX for those of you who maybe don't follow us as closely. For those of you who don't, RTX, a global aerospace and defense company, about $88 billion in sales last year, coming off a pretty strong first quarter demand on both sides of the commercial and defense pieces of our business, and our guidance remains on track for the year, Doug. I want to get that out up front. I think the big message around us is that we have strong conviction around the demand on both sides of our business, commercial and defense, and that we are exceptionally well positioned to take advantage of that demand. The thing about RTX, we go to market through our three business units.
You've got Pratt & Whitney, which makes commercial engines and military engines. You've got Collins Aerospace, which makes high-end aircraft systems, think avionics, mission systems, electric power, nacelle, wheel and brake, and the like. You've got Raytheon, of course, that makes high-end defense system franchise programs across its portfolio, things like Patriot and so forth. If you just look at our commercial business, I'll start there for a minute. Again, Collins, it is number 1 or number 2 on 70% of its product portfolio. It's got about $105 billion of out-of-warranty equipment flying around today, so just a huge aftermarket tails. It's got significant content on the fastest-growing platforms in commercial aerospace, think A320neo, 737 MAX, 787, A350, and the like. At Pratt & Whitney, just very well positioned in commercial aerospace.
Of course, everyone knows about their geared turbofan engine, well positioned in the narrowbody segment. Got about 8,000 engines in backlog today, north of 50 million hours on that platform. It's 3x larger than we thought it was going to be when we launched it about a decade ago. We've also got the V2500, which again, is a critical platform for customers today. There's about 2,500 of those out in service today, and it's a very young fleet. While it's obviously been around since the mid-1980s, today's fleet, which is about 2,500 engines, very young. About 15% haven't had a first shop visit. Those that have, about 35% haven't had a second shop visit. Long run there as well from a commercial perspective. On the defense side of our business, of course, it starts with Raytheon.
I think the book to bill over the last rolling 12 months has been 1.5. The demand has been exceptional in its portfolio. Again, I mentioned things like Patriot, Tomahawk, Standard Missile, things that you hear about, you read about being critical in today's environment. The demand there has been exceptionally strong. Of course, you've also got defense in both the Pratt and Collins portfolios. At Pratt & Whitney, you're on some of the highest priority platforms within The Pentagon. Sole source on all fifth-generation fighters. You've got the F135, Tanker, B-21. Collins has about a third of its portfolio in defense. Think about its mission systems business, provides communications and connected battle space on a number of critical platforms. Both on commercial and defense, exceptionally well positioned, Doug, as we kind of look forward over the next few years.
Our focus continues to be on execution. All of that portfolio that I just described culminates in a $271 billion backlog. Again, it goes to that narrative I just talked about in terms of the very strong demand. Our focus is on executing on that backlog. We're in a very long cycle business. We've got to continue to innovate for growth, and we've got to continue to leverage the breadth and scale of RTX across our defense and commercial portfolio. We really do believe that we're going to continue to drive margin expansion and strong free cash flow both this year and into the future. With that, Doug, maybe turn it over to you and we can get into whatever topics you want to.
Great. If we think back to when you were here last year.
Yep.
A lot's changed. A lot's changed in literally the last few months. Can you talk about how you see the macro environment today and what that means for RTX?
I agree, Doug, that a lot's changed. What I will say is our priorities haven't. It starts with this idea of the $271 billion backlog that we have, and our customers on both sides want more product, and they want it faster. You've spent the last three days talking to lots of folks in this industry, and I think the consistent message is demand is strong and we need more, whether that be engines for Airbus, Boeing. Whether it be aircraft systems, Airbus, Boeing. Whether it be U.S. government or our NATO allies needing more munitions and equipment faster. For us, it starts with execution. If you think about Raytheon, in the first quarter, we had output up 40% year-over-year on critical munitions.
We've continued to go execute our fleet management plan at Pratt & Whitney, and we continue to keep up with the rising rates with the airframers at Collins. It just starts with us with execution. Of course, as I said up front, this is a long- cycle business. You can't take any plays off. You can't take any cycles off. We're continuing to invest and innovate for future growth. We're going to do about $10 billion this year in E&D, company and customer funded in CapEx. Part of that is continuing to drive innovation in our product portfolio.
I'm sure we'll talk a lot about that today. But the other piece is making sure that we've got innovation in how we design our products, how we make our products, and continue to invest in not only having the capacity we need, but the automation and the data we need to meet the rates we're going to have to achieve on both the commercial and the defense side. As I said before, Doug, it really is about leveraging our breadth and scale. We're going to do over $90 billion in sales this year. Our companies continue to drive both cost synergies through our supply chain, through the application of best practices in our core operating system, which is our lean operating system, and then the continued development of technology synergies. I'm sure you are aware, there continues to be a convergence between the commercial and the defense.
Pentagon is looking to continue to drive more commercial application into defense. With half of our business being on the commercial side, there continues to be a lot of technology synergies that we've got to continue to take advantage of.
Yeah.
You're right, Doug. The macro, again, on both sides, both commercial and defense, continues to be really strong. Obviously, we've had Ukraine on the defense side, they've got Operation Epic Fury, there's a lot of replenishment opportunities in defense. We were really pleased to be part of the framework agreements that The Pentagon was pushing for on critical munitions. It just shows how strong the demand is for our products, both today and in the future. Again, that's why the focus continues to be on execution.
Let's get into defense. Right now, we've got a proposed budget from the President of $1.5 trillion. We'll see how that all goes. Obviously, there's a lot in there for you guys. When you look at the process right now, this has got to make its way through Congress. It's complicated. How are you seeing that budget process unfold, and how do you manage, given the uncertainty in where things may ultimately come out?
Well, a couple of things, Doug. You mentioned it, the base budget, the $1.15 trillion. Even that crossing the $1 trillion mark is significant, I think, portends for continued demand in defense both this year and in future years. I think that's not going to retract. I think it's only going to go forward. Whether or not you get the $350 billion in reconciliation or not, I think when you talk to members of the House Armed Services Committee, you talk to folks in Congress, there is general bipartisan support for the need for larger munitions ramp up, the things that are within the core capabilities of Raytheon in particular. If you just look at the five framework agreements that we've signed with The Pentagon, Tomahawk, AMRAAM, the Standard Missile family. These are things that are universally acknowledged as being needed both here in the U.S.
Keep in mind, no matter where the budget shakes out, Doug, 30% of Raytheon's sales are international.
Yeah.
If you just look at Raytheon's backlog today, about 48% of that backlog is international today. Again, you're going to continue to have strong demand here in the U.S., whether that's the $1.15 trillion or the $1.5 trillion, but you're also going to continue to have strong demand internationally.
Well, on those framework agreements, because I think this was a really important thing. We talked about it with Jim Taiclet yesterday, for example. You each have these framework agreements on specific programs and Tomahawk, SM-3, AMRAAM, I think.
Those framework agreements were put together prior to the war in Iran. Since then, we've seen a lot of usage of these products. Demand is even higher. Where do you stand in terms of being able to take production up if there's even more money in the budget? Does that turn into just an extension of backlog, or can you actually, say, in the next three years, increase volumes further?
Well, the first thing I'll say, Doug, is the framework agreements that we've signed, those aren't even in the $271 billion backlog that I've quoted a couple times here this morning.
Those aren't—
That's on top.
Those aren't under contract, yeah.
Correct.
So.
Correct. Irrespective of those framework agreements, Doug, we've been ramping significantly because of the demand in our business. The framework agreements, again, will be on top of that. For us, yes, there's significant demand that comes with those, but the mindset remains the same. We've been ramping anyway. We've got 12 consecutive quarters of material growth. We've continued to drive additional second sources into our supply chain. Just in 2025 alone, Raytheon qualified 150 new suppliers. We've been in this ramp-up mindset and mode for a while now anyway. When you think of the framework agreements, again, I think there are a couple of underlying sort of principles that we have to sort of make clear. Well, number one, obviously, very pleased to be a partner with the Department of War on their transformation efforts.
I think some of these efforts have been long overdue in bringing commercial practices into DOW procurement. I think it's something that is good for the defense industrial base and good for the country. Frankly, an area, given how large our commercial business is, we feel really well positioned to take advantage of. I would say the second thing is that these framework agreements are based on long-term demand, in our case, seven-year firm demand. The Department understands that that's critical not only for the defense primes, but more importantly, for the defense industrial base and our supply chain. A good half of our supply base are medium and small businesses, and they need to see that long-term demand signal in order to make the kinds of investments in people and plants and equipment, and to hire labor and so forth. That's the critical piece of this.
It's the firm long-term demand. Second piece is the Department wants us to continue to invest in capacity, and they're going to work with us on a collaborative funding approach, they help provide us funding sort of upfront to allow us to build the capacity and achieve the returns that we need. The third thing I would say is they've been a partner with us on trying to drive additional folks into the supply base. They understand, as I said before, how important that's going to be. That's going to be the linchpin of all of this. Do we have a healthy enough supply base? Do we have folks that come into the supply base that have historically not been in defense to come in to help us reach these levels?
Again, I think the seven-year demand that the department has put out there, I think helps drive the types of incentives we would need in order to be able to do that. As I said before, Doug, we've been ramping. We've been investing in places like Huntsville, like McKinney, like Andover because of this ramp that we've already been in. For us, it's just continuing that pace and making sure the supply chain can keep up with us.
This topic, as you, I think may have seen, is we've been talking about a lot about this over the last couple days, both from you and the missile suppliers as well as the solid rocket motor companies and others. When you look at this framework, we're looking at growth planned out five, seven years in advance. I think there's no question that the demand is huge. There's bipartisan support for these initiatives. However, if you were to roll forward, say, four years, I mean, appropriations are done annually.
Yep.
How do you get comfortable that different administration, different geopolitical situation potentially, that these investments are all going to be tied to this growth?
It's been an integral part of the discussions we've had with the Department, Doug. We've said if there's a change in posture at some point, then there needs to be a very strong recovery method and a protective set of terms and conditions in our definitive agreements to make sure that when we make these kinds of investments and when our supply chain makes these kinds of investments, that they're protected, if you will, from any type of portability and administration or posture. That's another big part of this. I think the one thing that the Department understands is that you can't have these episodic ordering patterns. I mean, there's a lot of reasons why people believe that the defense industrial base has been unable to meet the demands of the Department and others.
A big part of that has just been some of the procurement patterns that have happened that allows lines to run dry. Suppliers go into other more predictable industries. That's a big part of it. I think the Department has been really clear. We need to set these long-term firm demand signals in order to get off of that cycle of up and down ordering, because all that does is drive inconsistency in our ability to execute. I think that has been their message from day one when they've walked in. I commend them for it.
One of the things is over the years in your ramps that has been a challenge has been motors, rocket motors. How do you see that right now? I know Raytheon itself is now doing work in this area, right? How do you look at that part of your supplier base and how it's responding to enable you to move on these ramps?
I think as a general matter, rocket motors have been a constrained value stream, Doug. You know that. While we've seen some improved performance with our current suppliers, I think that is a value stream that is in need of additional investment and additional capable parties to be able to really meet the needs of the entire industry. Now we're working with a number of folks, Avio and Nammo, investments to have them continue to ramp up their capabilities here in the U.S. because, again, I think there's a generational demand shift that's happening here, and we can't get caught short by a few constrained value streams. It just won't work. You're going to need more players in that particular space.
Your view is, and Lockheed talked about this yesterday, that it's good to have sort of multiple suppliers on programs in general.
Across the board, Doug. I mean, we'll talk rocket motors because that's been kind of the headline constraint for many years. If you just go through the entire supply base, we've got to continue to get additional sources into some of these key programs. There are places where we've found supply chain vulnerabilities, where we've got sole source or people that are too small to fail. I think if you're going to try to get to these ramp rates, keep in mind, for our framework agreements, it's anywhere from 2x- 4x the rates that we're at today. In order to get to those rates, you're just going to need additional folks to be able to make some of those parts. Rocket motors surely for one, but there are others too that we've got to continue to keep a close watch on.
Castings, for instance, is one. Microelectronics is another. There's significant microelectronic demand in things outside of defense. We've got to make sure that we've got the capacity to serve the defense industrial base as well. We're working with the department, going through each of these constrained value streams. Where do we need to bring in additional suppliers? Who needs funding? We've obviously launched this Office of Strategic Capital, we've introduced suppliers to that funding source because, again, we've got to get everybody synchronized at the pace that we need.
The wars in Iran and Ukraine have sort of brought forward the need for missile defense of all types, everywhere from low-end counter- UAS things to going all the way up to what you do with SM-3 and higher end. Can you talk about how what's happened in those conflicts has shaped the way you're thinking about your portfolio in terms of missile defense?
Yeah. I think when you start with Ukraine, you moved up Operation Epic Fury. The need for integrated air and missile defense has never been more important. When you look at the core of what Raytheon does, it's radars and effectors. If you think about Patriot, NASAMS, we've got our LTAMDS that's now in production, Doug, which is sort of that next generation of radar, which 360-degree view. A, you need the sensing capability, which we have, and then of course, you need the effectors as well to go along with that. Think about GEM-T, AMRAAM. I mentioned some of the others that are part of the framework agreement. All a part of high-end integrated air and missile defense that both the U.S. and our allies have just generational demand for right now.
The other piece of this, and you've kind of referenced it, is the proliferation of UAS, drone, and whatnot. We continue to develop solutions for that piece of the layered defense as well. We've got our Coyote system, which has been exceptionally well-performing in the field, both Red Sea and here in Operation Epic Fury. We continue to develop a non-kinetic version of the Coyote, Doug, that can go out on a mission, use high-power microwave to address a swarm, come back, be recharged, be able to go out and do another mission. At each layer of that integrated air and missile defense, we've got proven capabilities, in production capabilities that are ramping.
When you go to that sort of lower tier, the counter- UAS portion, when you have Coyote, you have LIDS. This is an area a lot of people at this conference are talking a lot about it. It's so much in the headlines. How large can that business be for you? Second, there are tons of new entrants trying to work into this space. What advantages you relative to some of these new players?
Well, first thing I'll say, Doug, is I'll call them the higher-end systems, the things that are a part of our framework agreement. I think it's generally well acknowledged that they've been exceptionally effective both in this conflict, and they're going to continue to be necessary for the high-end conflict in the future. I think the framework agreements bear that out. You're going to need those long-range precision strikes that just have exceptionally high success rates.
Yeah.
I think that's something that's just going to continue to persist. On the sort of lower end, the UAS and drone and counter-drone, you're right. There are a lot of folks that are in this space. We're not chasing the commoditized sort of low end. Again, what our Coyote system is able to do in a more cost-effective manner is take out a number of those platforms that our adversaries have developed, and it's been doing it exceptionally well. If you ask what separates us from others, we've got a long history of making systems that have very high success rates. It's one thing to have a lower- cost platform, but if your success rate is in the 30% or 40%, I'm not sure that that's going to do us much good.
You're going to need to have the level of success and precision across each layer, and that's something that we've got a strong track record of being able to do.
Yeah.
I'd also say, Doug, there's other pieces of our business as people are developing unmanned platforms that we can potentially be taking advantage of. A lot of those platforms are going to need engines. They're going to need mission systems. They're going to need avionics. They're going to have potentially effectors hanging off of them. There are other parts of our business that will actually be able to be a platform-agnostic supplier to many of those platforms. The Raytheon piece, again, is focused on our LIDS and our Coyote system and some other things that we're doing in classified environments like directed energy applications.
Yeah. Switching gears a little bit within Raytheon. Over the last few years, you've had to kind of rework your space strategy. Where does that stand now? How are you looking at that part of your business?
If you think of Raytheon's historical space businesses, you've had the mission control. You've had the sensing and the payload that we make for sensing. Those continue to be very solid businesses. As you're starting to see this trend of conflict moving to space, and you hear about this as part of Golden Dome as well, I would just say our space effects portfolio will continue to be a very fast-growing piece of the portfolio. Its classified nature, there's not too much that we can get into here, but we consider it to be a core capability and have substantial capabilities in that area.
This is different than it was a few years ago when you were trying to do integrated satellites. It's more of a focus, I'm assuming, on the—
Yeah, our strategy on that has shifted a little bit to say, look, again, we're going to be a Tier 1 supplier to folks that are going to be an all-up integrator. That's not necessarily our core capability, and it was just a pivot sort of away from that. That business has stabilized as a result. There's this other piece of our space strategy, which is the space effects and defense that I think is going to be, again, a very fast-growing segment.
Within Raytheon, if we go back a few years, you've had challenges reaching your margin targets there, and I know there were fixed- price development programs that were an issue. Here we are. You got last quarter, 12% margins. Are you at the turning point here where you can move those margins up to sort of this 12%-13% level? Given you've got a lot of mature production ahead of you've got export sales. Are we going to see that upshift soon?
We're really pleased with the margin trajectory we've seen over the last couple of years with Raytheon. It has started with being able to meet our milestones and deliver the product, and that goes back to the continued focus on our supply chain. I mentioned the 12 quarters in a row of material growth. We forward deployed hundreds of people into our supply chain to enable that kind of growth. That gave us absolutely the stability that we needed to continue to deliver. We also worked through some development programs, DRED programs, got on the other side of those, Doug, as well, and those are largely now sort of sold off and through the development cycle. You mentioned it. Much of what's gone into our backlog over the last couple of years would be core products.
Those radars and effectors, part of that integrated air and missile defense core capability that makes Raytheon who it is. Yes, those are ripe for continued increases in productivity. I also mentioned that 48% of our backlog is international, which generally speaking, tend to have higher margins. Again, really pleased with the margin trajectory. We're, of course, not capping this business at 12%. I think, as you think about the framework agreements and some of the efficiencies that can be brought to bear there, we think those are really, really good potential business as well. Again, pleased where the margins are, and we're not stopping there.
Okay, great. Let's go over to Pratt. Another topic that's been right at the front over the last couple of days here has been on the aftermarket. Let's take the V2500, which is a very attractive high-margin program for you guys. With the high fuel prices out there today, there are a lot of airlines, I will say, developing market LCCs, things like that are having real challenges from a cash standpoint. So far, have you seen any impact on your aftermarket demand given some of those pressures that you're seeing?
Yeah. We had a strong Q1 in Pratt aftermarket, Doug, up 19%. When you start to sort of dig into that, again, continued strength in the V2500 and then the GTF as well. As you know, we're working through the fleet management plan. That MRO is going to continue to grow throughout the year. As we've entered here into Q2, and we are looking at this, as you might imagine, by geography, by customer, by program, the demand has continued to be good. We have not seen any change in buying patterns. We've not seen any change in airline behavior. Again, for us, it's really just about making sure that we've got the supply chain necessary to continue to meet this demand.
The GTF, as I said before, is going to continue to grow just because we're continuing to work through that fleet management plan, and we're making some very good progress there. Because of the GTF plan that we're working through, the V2500 becomes an even more important part of the airline's fleet operating plans. That demand has continued to be strong as well. When you get into some of our more legacy products, think PW2000, PW4000, things like that, they've also continued, the demand has continued to be very good. We just haven't seen any back off at this point.
Do you worry at all if this extends— how do you deal with an airline that comes to you and says, "We flat out have no cash. You were going to induct our V. We can't do it. We have no money." What's the process to deal with those kinds of situations should we start to see any of that?
First of all, we've got a really rigorous process, Doug, around evaluating all of our customers and any risk that's there. Generally speaking, we've got a long history of working with our customers on ensuring that we can continue our long-term partnership. Again, those go in ebbs and flows, we've got a track record to be able to work with our customers. In certain cases, you can restructure a deal, you can defer certain things. There are ways that we can make it sort of a win-win situation. In the unlikely event or the unfortunate event that something happens with one of our airlines, generally speaking, the assets can be redeployed in other places. The demand is pretty strong. We've never been in a situation where we haven't been able to redeploy assets.
On the GTF, so the PW1100, there still are a lot of AOGs. Some of those are inflated because you have Spirit. There's some airline-specific issues. Can you take us through how you're progressing on bringing down those AOGs and what that path is now.
Yeah. As many of you know, we continue to execute on the fleet management plan that we've announced a couple of years ago on the 1100 and the 1500. The financial and technical outlook remains intact with what we've said. Again, a big piece of that was the fallout rate from our inspections. That's been exactly, if not better than we thought it was going to be, Doug, so really pleased about that. The AOG situation continues to improve. Again, we were down 15% in the first quarter since the end of 2025. We continue to see that downward trajectory here continue in the second quarter. Now, a lot of that is on the back of our continued growth in MRO output. It was up 23% year-over-year in the first quarter. That was on the back of 26% growth in 2025.
Really good output in our 21 GTF MRO shops we've got out there. A big part of that has been the reductions in turnaround time. Turnaround time was down 20% in the first quarter, and that was on much heavier work scopes, nine points heavier, in fact. Continuing to see good material flow into our MRO shops. Castings were up 10% year-over-year. Forgings were up 18% year-over-year. As long as that material flow continues, as we've seen, and our shops continue to come down the learning curve and turnaround time continues to come down, we expect to see the AOG situation continue to improve markedly.
I'm assuming that, and we've talked about this before, but I'm assuming that you're still on that path in terms of the $3 billion- $3.5 billion, which is the provision you took back in 2023. You're still on that trajectory—
We are.
To be there.
We are. Again, our focus is on making sure that we get the assets back in the hands of our customers, which is why we've been so focused on the MRO output, Doug. Again, it's been bearing fruit, and you're seeing that show up in the fleet health.
Well, you're delivering also a pretty high number of spare engines, too, to bring these off the ground. Certainly, like Airbus has commented, I know there's been back and forth on deliveries, so the deliveries for on-wing aircraft versus in the aftermarket. Can you talk a little bit about that, how you think about that balance?
Yeah. The focus in 2026, to be very clear, is on MRO output. We have a significant step-up in MRO output. That is going to be the key linchpin to the continued fleet health. We've been in a situation over the last couple of years where we've had to be thoughtful about how we balance material that goes to our OE side of the business and to the aftermarket. As I said up front, we've got a commitment to our customers to get them back their assets. We've got to be, again, every day, every week, thoughtful about whether material goes to our shops for a shop visit or towards the OE. On the OE front, we're going to be up this year. We're going to deliver more engines to Airbus this year than we did in the last year.
As we continue to see the AOG situation improve, I expect that we'll continue to get aligned with Airbus on the volumes that they're going to need going forward.
Yeah. Okay. When you look at this rising demand, GTF, rising demand for aftermarket, for OE, and you look in your supply chain, you don't always see these two things grow at the same time. When you do, are there areas in that supply chain that you're particularly worried about that need to ensure they can deliver on both parts of this demand?
It's a really good point, Doug, because we are ramping deliveries. You're seeing it both at Airbus and of course, on the Collins side, you're seeing it at Boeing as well. Meanwhile, the demand for aftermarket continues to be very strong. To your point, you've got both of these things growing at the same time, and you're ramping at both of the airframers. Much like on the defense side of our business, the supply chain is critical to enabling all of that ramp. I mentioned up front, castings. Castings, both at Pratt and Collins, continues to be a watch area. Again, we saw structural castings at Pratt up 10% year-over-year in the first quarter. You're always seeing things arise here and there that interrupt your flow. We've got to continue to maintain that maniacal focus on the supply chain.
Sometimes that does require us to make some trades depending on is there an airline that's in a particular situation and they need a spare engine to come out of the shop? Is that where the material should go? Our program teams are making those trades each and every day. I think as we continue to mature, as we continue to see the supply chain continue to grow, those trades will happen less and less, and we'll be able to meet the needs of both.
You have a relatively new facility in Asheville you're building out, which is doing sort of coatings, castings. What are your objectives with that effort? How does that fit into your whole supply chain view?
Yeah. We opened up Asheville a few years ago as our sort of our turbine airfoil center of excellence. It's a key part of both the GTF and the F135 turbine airfoils. It's been a critical part of the engine, high margin part, high-performance part. We've also launched an ability to do some of those castings ourselves, though. That's something that we had a historical capability of doing and have since outsourced to others. That's been a constrained value stream, and we want to be able to sort of re-energize our efforts around being able to do some of that. It won't replace and fulfill all of our needs.
Again, given the demand on OE and aftermarket, we felt it was a strategic decision we needed to make to be able to provide some additional capacity for the needs on both the defense and the commercial side of our business.
That's not an easy part of the supply chain. Is this something that you look at as an ability to flex if you have issues, that you can bring some of that online?
You're right, Doug. It's a reason why it's been a constrained value stream. There are only a few players that'll do it. It is a very difficult process, but it's something that we've had historical experience doing, and we've been working through that over the last couple of years, making sure that before we go live, that we get the yields where we need them to be so it's economical, and it makes sense. Yes, it's just an area where we've seen long-term constraints, and we need additional supply, and we just, again, made the strategic decision to bring that in and try to vertically integrate a little bit to give us more options.
You mentioned F135. We're looking at flat production going forward, 156 a year. However, there's a lot of sustainment need out there, and how are you looking at the sustainment portion on that engine as well as any impact you're seeing from the high op tempo based on current conflict?
I want to start off any discussion on the F135 with just how incredibly capable a piece of machinery it has been. I think, if you ask any of the operators, they would tell you it's just a phenomenal engine, and I think the one thing that gets a little bit under-reported is that our mean time between overhaul, meaning how long you can run it before you have to take it off for maintenance, is 2x the spec. That's while we are 2x above the spec on power and thermal management because of other parts of the platform that are drawing power off the engine. It's really just been phenomenal, both from a performance perspective, but also from a durability perspective. You're right, Doug, it'll be relatively flat from an OE standpoint this year, but sustainment was already going to be on a very significant track.
We're going to start getting into the more scheduled visits, and I think the op tempo is going to continue to put demand into what was already sort of a high-demand program.
Yeah. Well, if we look farther forward, and you're looking at the next narrowbody, how are you thinking about the engine you would like to provide for something, the next narrowbody?
Well, whenever we talk about the next generation of engine, again, I feel compelled to talk about that you need to take care of your customers today in order to enable tomorrow, right? Number one, our focus is on the fleet management plan and making sure that we get the GTF assets back into our customers' hands, two, we still got 8,000 GTF engines in backlog today.
Well, and also, you have the GTF A.
Of course, we've just now certified the GTF Advantage.
Yeah.
Which will provide additional fuel burn benefits and additional thrust, really will extend the time on wing by 2x the original GTF engine. That's where our focus is today, and there's a lot of runway just on today's program. If you just think about it, Airbus is sold out into the next decade.
Right.
That's sort of priority one. When you think about what it may look like towards the back end of next decade on a next generation sort of platform, in our view, it'll be a ducted architecture with a gear. A gear is something that we've had over on the 1,150 million hours worth of experience with the gear, more than 10 years into production. We consider our GTF Advantage to be the perfect architecture for the next- generation single aisle. We will continue to provide additional technology upgrades to that architecture, whether that be a next- generation fan-drive gear system, whether that be an upgraded combustor, whether we use advanced materials in the core that can withstand greater heat to be able to extend the life and the time on wing. Those are all things that we are investing in today.
One thing I will also mention when we think about a next- generation engine application is we've got to be thoughtful about the time on wing and the durability. We're going to continue to push to get fuel efficiency, you've got to balance that with how long the engines are able to stay on wing and the durability. If you talk to any of our airlines today, they will tell you they don't want one or the other, they want both.
Yeah.
As we think about when the technology will be mature and ready, I want to make sure we're ready both from a fuel burn perspective, but also from a time on wing perspective. Again, the technology has to be ready, time on wing has to be ready when it comes out of the box, and then last but not least, again, the manufacturing readiness. When we launched the GTF, we not only launched the new center line design, but we took the ramp, in terms of deliveries, up right from the get-go. Again, the next time we do this, I want to make sure that our manufacturing readiness levels match the technology readiness levels, so we can meet the ramp while also meeting the performance requirements.
Yeah, I'd argue when you talk about those two things, everyone I talk to, durability is the first one across the board.
I think you're right. I think we're going to need to continue to drive efficiency in the engines, especially given what's happening in the world today. I think that's something that a Boeing or Airbus or whomever, when they launch, is going to want to see a sort of a step change in fuel efficiency. It's got to come with the time on wing, Doug. I couldn't agree with you more, which is why, again, I think this is a multi-year process to be able to prepare to be able to do that.
If we jump over to Collins. This has had steady revenue and earnings growth over the last few years. Again, I'm going to go back to the current environment out there, the macro environment. I remember the Collins, what was Rockwell Collins, back during the global financial crisis, and you saw the aftermarket get pressured a lot in some areas that are more discretionary, things like avionics upgrades, interiors. When you look at Collins today, it's obviously broader than just what Rockwell Collins was. How do you see risks there, given the environment?
Well, I think you got to go back to what I said earlier. When you look at the Collins out-of-warranty installed base, it's $105 billion. Those out-of-warranty flight hours are continuing to grow as things come off warranty. You've got just an incredible installed base there, Doug, that's going to continue to drive long aftermarket tails for years and years to come. If you're thinking about the current situation, I think you got to step back and break down the Collins aftermarket into some of its pieces. Two-thirds of the Collins aftermarket would be in parts and repair. That's like break, fix things that you're going to have to do. The remainder is made up of provisioning and mods and upgrades. Generally speaking, provisioning follows OE deliveries, and OE deliveries are continuing to ramp.
The good news this week on Boeing being able to go to rate 47 then wanting to move to rate 52. Provisioning, generally speaking, follows that trajectory. Then you get to the mods and upgrades. To your point, Doug, you see some upgrades in avionics, maybe in some of our interiors business and whatnot. That's something we're looking at really carefully, that if this were to extend and if there were to be more strain on operators, could that be a place where you might start to see some deferral in pushing things out? Again, I think the one thing that the airlines learned coming out of COVID is they don't want to underestimate the recovery.
Yeah.
They don't want to be out of step when it happens. That's why deferring a shop visit on the engine side can be a very dangerous proposition because you don't know when you're going to get back in the line. Same with deferring a mod and upgrade.
Yeah.
If you think about seating in particular, many of the airlines are now getting pricing because of the differentiation they're driving in the passenger experience and the cabin experience. Seating is a very big part of that. Again, I think the airlines today are looking at this like, "Hey, look, long term, RPKs are still going to be strong, and we've got to be in position, take advantage of that when it does.
Some good news on the OE side here is now we, as you said, finally have that 737 rate going up.
That's great, certainly for the integrated flight deck. It's got 787 going up. You provide vast majority of the systems on that. However, in total, this OE demand is a little bit dilutive to margins. How should we think about margin trajectory given that this portion should grow more? That's good for operating leverage with that OE work, but at the same time, it could be dilutive overall. What does this mean for the margin outlook?
Well, when you think about Collins margins, I kind of talk about it in three areas.
Yeah.
Again, I'll go back to the installed base and the out-of-warranty equipment. That's going to continue to grow, as you know, the aftermarket at Collins, very high margin. Second piece, and you've just referenced it, Doug, as these OE rates are going up, there's going to be some operating leverage there. We have been building at much higher rates in the past. We have the capacity. There's going to be that absorption benefit that comes from higher rates. While the margins in OE are a little bit less, of course, than the aftermarket, again, there's going to be an absorption benefit that comes with these higher rates because we've been capacitized for them for some time now.
Yeah.
Again, the third bucket, is the continued drive to take out structural cost within Collins. You started to see some of that play through in the first quarter. I think they're taking some really smart actions on how to consolidate certain operations, how to attack spans and layers and drive cost out of the business, and to just be more efficient. Maybe just step back for a minute, RTX-wide, we had about, what, 10%, 11% organic sales growth and pretty much flat headcount.
Yeah.
That's something that each one of our businesses is driving towards. You just got to be more efficient, more productive, and I think Collins is leading the pack there.
A while back, your goal was to have 19% margins at Collins. Where are you now on that path? Should we still be looking forward to that kind of a margin level?
I think across each one of our businesses, there's margin runway, Doug.
Yeah.
I think with Collins as well. I think we've continued to grow margins even in the face of tariff headwind last year. We're going to continue to grow margins this year, and again, we're on that trajectory. That goes for each one of our businesses. You've talked about Raytheon early on, still in that 11%, 11.5% range. There's room to grow there. Clearly at Pratt, as the GTF aftermarket continues to grow and become more profitable, that'll be a big driver. We didn't even really talk about Pratt & Whitney Canada today, which is the best small engine business in the world, with 70,000 engines in service and all the aftermarket they're going to bring to bear. Collins. Again, the three buckets I just talked about, we think we can continue to drive margins in that business as well.
If you pull this all together, and you've guided to $8.25 billion-$8.75 billion in free cash flow this year, how should we think about that in two ways? One is, are there some levers here that can provide upside to that? Second, can you give us a sense of where that may go beyond 2026?
Yeah. Well, again, we had a really strong free cash flow performance in 2025, Doug, right up at that $7.9 billion. This year, feel comfortable with the guidance that we've provided. I just think if you look long-term at our ability to generate free cash flow, we've got all of the structural pieces in place to be, again, 90%-100% of EBITDA as free cash flow. I think that's what this company is structured to do when you think about the positions we have on the fastest-growing platforms, when you think about the aftermarket content that we have across Pratt and Collins, and when you think about the franchise programs at Raytheon, it's got the ability to continue to drive to those cash levels.
Well, great. Well, we're out of time here. Chris, thank you very much for this. This was great.
Thank you. Appreciate it. Thanks, everybody.