Remington: Ilion and Huntsville Facilities

[Kynoch]

From Remington's 2013 Annual Report:

"We currently manufacture our products in 12 primary facilities with an aggregate 2.4 million square feet of manufacturing space, enabling us to deliver our products in the U.S. and globally to over 60 countries
.
Approximately 60% of our revenue in 2013 was derived from two key firearms facilities in Ilion, New York and Mayfield, Kentucky and our primary ammunition plant in Lonoke, Arkansas. We are continuously evaluating options to expand our domestic manufacturing capacity while simultaneously implementing production best practices to drive margin improvement within our existing facilities. We are currently expanding operations at our ammunition facility in Lonoke, Arkansas. In February 2014, we agreed to acquire a facility in Huntsville, Alabama, in order to increase capacity and expand research and development capabilities."

So Remington had a total of 2.4M square feet of manufacturing space. About 1M of that is the Ilion, NY Plant, 750K the Lonoke, AK plant and 75K is the Mayfield KT factory. So 2.4M - 1.825M = 575K. This 575K is "everything else."

I suspect at least half of that remaining 575K square feet is used in ammo or clay pigeon production which won't be moving. That suggests to me that all the other Remington companies (Tapco, Bushmaster, DPMS, etc.) slated to move to Huntsville, AL collectively consume about 287K square feet.

The Huntsville facility is 800K square feet, total. Once Tapco, Bushmaster, DPMS, etc. move in that will leave about 513K square feet to work with -- keeping in mind this facility is to house production, R&D and GROWTH.

Unless the market really free-falls, there is no way that Ilion's 1M square feet of production will fit into production's share (possibly 200-300K square feet?) of the open 513K feet in Huntsville, AL.

Therefore I conclude that Remington branded firearms made in Ilion, NY are not going to be made in Huntsville, AL anytime soon.

Ref: http://www.freedom-group.com/2013 10-K.pdf

 

[Tirod]

Remington, Bushmaster, and DPMS are mostly rollmarks on a lower and no self respecting production manager is going to allocate separate floor space for the assembly of an identical product.

The one caveat is milspec contract production and that won't get moved. I see plenty of room in the Huntsville plant for AR15 production when one line of workbenches can do it all.

Same as cars, GM had Buicks, Olds, and Pontiacs all coming off one line in KCMO in the day. Keeping track of firearms in assembly is much simpler and there's no reason to repeatedly duplicate tooling, fixtures, benches and work flow in multiple areas for a product that is distinguished by a mark on one part.

They do exactly the same with washing machines - multiple brands, one line.

Of course, that would be doing it right, and we are talking about Remington, so the point is still valid - they can't stuff it all in the Huntsville plant as distinct and separate production.

So, they won't.

 

[Kynoch]

Remington, Bushmaster, and DPMS are mostly rollmarks on a lower and no self respecting production manager is going to allocate separate floor space for the assembly of an identical product.

Volume is volume, space is space. While there's definitely more differences between the lines than simply "rollmarks" (they're hardly "identical"), the greater the volume the more production resources required including more floorspace, workers, machines, etc.

The one caveat is milspec contract production and that won't get moved. I see plenty of room in the Huntsville plant for AR15 production when one line of workbenches can do it all.

There's a lot more to producing AR15's from scratch than "one line of workbenches." There's forging/casting, machining, molding, hardware production, finishing, assembly (you did mention this), test, packaging and shipping, to name just a few. Remington isn't the back room of your local gun shop that assembles a handful of AR15's now and then.

Same as cars, GM had Buicks, Olds, and Pontiacs all coming off one line in KCMO in the day. Keeping track of firearms in assembly is much simpler and there's no reason to repeatedly duplicate tooling, fixtures, benches and work flow in multiple areas for a product that is distinguished by a mark on one part.

Unless: 1.) Production throughput requirements require more than one line and 2.) Each line is distinct enough (ex. DPMS vs. Bushmaster) that they require different line-loads of parts and in some cases different processes.

They do exactly the same with washing machines - multiple brands, one line.

Unless of course they had enough orders for one brand in which case they would have to build more lines, else risk losing business.

Of course, that would be doing it right, and we are talking about Remington, so the point is still valid - they can't stuff it all in the Huntsville plant as distinct and separate production.

So, they won't.

Thank goodness you're not their IE. Whew...

 

[Tirod]

I've worked in four plants locally, and I'll hold my own counsel on it.

One was a defense contractor supplying thermal batteries to the Armed Forces. Nope, no separate lines unless absolutely necessary. If the internal wafers can be stamped from the same machines, assembled, x-rayed, leaked tested, and etched by the same crews in those departments, transported on the same work carts, what was good for one was good for all of the dozens of different units.

I worked a 100 ton Amada press brake in another plant, making parts for dozens of end items AND all the optional accessories offered. If they needed a variant I produced it using the same tooling if possible - and if not, it was still universal dies stacked in a different way or worked in a different manner. Not on a special different machine solely dedicated to it. Same for the end product moving down assembly. There weren't two lines when it was the same product with options.

If a particular batch of parts need to be at one station to assemble them, it's a no brainer for them to be at the workstation. It's what factories do. Having spent years in the environment I don't see it as anything more than production scheduling. Work there for years and you start seeing patterns after just a few months.

An AR15 is an AR15. Remington, DPMS, and Bushmaster don't get separate different ways to install a hammer on a pin, tighten a barrel nut, or pin a gas block. It's the same operation and very often the same parts. And since the parts don't often vary or have the brand on them - except the lower - then the significant difference is the color of the finish and equipping it the way the buyer wants it.

Just as more insight, S&W is making HD transmission parts, and AGP was keeping their CNC machine busy knocking out AR lowers. Owners of multimillion dollar machines don't leave them sitting idle, and work crews who aren't scheduled 100% of the time find a new place to work where they can at least get 40 hours a week.

The economic reality is that production facilities don't triplicate assets and then under utilize them. It's not profitable and those who own the buildings and machinery employ people to maximize profit wherever possible.

Either that or Remington is trying to stuff to many lines in a plant that is too small - and considering the long list of blunders they've pulled off in the past, it sounds kind of sad. I was hoping better for them and that they would start moving into the world of modern production and stable profits.

Maybe I don't know I own a future collectible that is going out of production. Is that the future of Remington? Hope not.

 

[Kynoch]

I've worked in four plants locally, and I'll hold my own counsel on it.

One was a defense contractor supplying thermal batteries to the Armed Forces. Nope, no separate lines unless absolutely necessary. If the internal wafers can be stamped from the same machines, assembled, x-rayed, leaked tested, and etched by the same crews in those departments, transported on the same work carts, what was good for one was good for all of the dozens of different units.

I've run more than one large manufacturing operation. You don't seem to grasp the reality of plant (or more likely cell) capacity. It makes little difference if a cell can easily be tooled to produce more than one part or assembly. If it's fully consumed with making Widget A, other widgets will require additional processes, cells and people -- no matter what the commonality of tooling. Sabe?

I worked a 100 ton Amada press brake in another plant, making parts for dozens of end items AND all the optional accessories offered. If they needed a variant I produced it using the same tooling if possible - and if not, it was still universal dies stacked in a different way or worked in a different manner. Not on a special different machine solely dedicated to it. Same for the end product moving down assembly. There weren't two lines when it was the same product with options.

Yep and you're still not getting it. If you and your press brake were consumed making Widget A's, you'd never get around to Widget B's -- it would take someone else with another brake. Further, a press brake is a fairly universal tool -- they're not hard tooled for the most part. Change your story from press brake to punch press or rotary transfer machine and see what happens. Depending on the machine, use rate, labor rate and set-up times, it might well be cheaper to idle a tooled press rather than making and breaking set-ups.

If a particular batch of parts need to be at one station to assemble them, it's a no brainer for them to be at the workstation. It's what factories do. Having spent years in the environment I don't see it as anything more than production scheduling. Work there for years and you start seeing patterns after just a few months.

You're back to your low output, batch/job shop style of production. I have no doubt that the different manufacturers run certain models continuously. DPMS might make several different AR15 variants in the same cell using the same common hardware, etc., but I doubt they strip out the cell, load new hardware and other small parts and then start making Bushmasters. If they did a good job on their line/cell balancing, they wouldn't have the capacity to do so anyway.

An AR15 is an AR15. Remington, DPMS, and Bushmaster don't get separate different ways to install a hammer on a pin, tighten a barrel nut, or pin a gas block. It's the same operation and very often the same parts. And since the parts don't often vary or have the brand on them - except the lower - then the significant difference is the color of the finish and equipping it the way the buyer wants it.

The parts are different and I'm sure in some cases those differences necessitate different tooling and techniques. You're also looking once again at nothing more than final assembly. As I said before, there's a great deal more to making guns then assembling the individual parts.

Just as more insight, S&W is making HD transmission parts, and AGP was keeping their CNC machine busy knocking out AR lowers. Owners of multimillion dollar machines don't leave them sitting idle, and work crews who aren't scheduled 100% of the time find a new place to work where they can at least get 40 hours a week.

Actually in some cases, expensive, specialized equipment IS kept idle...

The economic reality is that production facilities don't triplicate assets and then under utilize them. It's not profitable and those who own the buildings and machinery employ people to maximize profit wherever possible.

You still don't seem to grasp the fact that there needs to be enough process time to do the job. You're suggesting that most of the Ilion factory is idle until Remington needs parts or assemblies and then they bring a crew into a cell(s) or machines and make what they need. That's ridiculous.

On the other hand to suggest that Remington doesn't have dedicated lines or cells to make specific products or groups of products is absurd. I strongly suspect that Bushmaster firearms and Remington firearms are made using fairly dedicated resources.

Either that or Remington is trying to stuff to many lines in a plant that is too small - and considering the long list of blunders they've pulled off in the past, it sounds kind of sad. I was hoping better for them and that they would start moving into the world of modern production and stable profits.

Maybe I don't know I own a future collectible that is going out of production. Is that the future of Remington? Hope not.

Hmmm... You just jumped the shark...