Triumph Group - 10-K annual report 2012

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

____________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of "large accelerated filer," "accelerated filer," and "smaller reporting company" in Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. (Check one)

Triumph Group, Inc. ("Triumph" or the "Company") was incorporated in 1993 in Delaware. Our companies design, engineer, manufacture, repair, overhaul and distribute a broad portfolio of aerostructures, aircraft components, accessories, subassemblies and systems. We serve a broad, worldwide spectrum of the aviation industry, including original equipment manufacturers, or OEMs, of commercial, regional, business and military aircraft and aircraft components, as well as commercial and regional airlines and air cargo carriers.

We offer a variety of products and services to the aerospace industry through three groups of operating segments: (i) Triumph Aerostructures Group, whose companies' revenues are derived from the design, manufacture, assembly and integration of metallic and composite aerostructures and structural components for the global aerospace original equipment manufacturers, or OEM, market; (ii) Triumph Aerospace Systems Group, whose companies design, engineer and manufacture a wide range of proprietary and build-to-print components, assemblies and systems also for the OEM market; and (iii) Triumph Aftermarket Services Group, whose companies serve aircraft fleets, notably commercial airlines, the U.S. military and cargo carriers, through the maintenance, repair and overhaul of aircraft components and accessories manufactured by third parties.

The products that companies within this group design, manufacture, build and repair include:

The products that companies within this group design, engineer, build and repair include:

We benefit from our proprietary rights relating to designs, engineering and manufacturing processes and repair and overhaul procedures. For some products, our unique manufacturing capabilities are required by the customer's specifications or designs, thereby necessitating reliance on us for the production of such specially designed products.

We view our name and mark, as well as the Vought tradename, as significant to our business as a whole. Our products are protected by a portfolio of patents, trademarks, licenses or other forms of intellectual property that expire at various dates in the future. We develop and acquire new intellectual property on an ongoing basis and consider all of our intellectual property to be valuable. However, based on the broad scope of our product lines, management believes that the loss or expiration of any single intellectual property right would not have a material effect on our results of operations, our financial position or our business segments. Our policy is to file applications and obtain patents for our new products as appropriate, including product modifications and improvements. While patents generally expire 20 years after the patent application filing date, new patents are issued to us on a regular basis.

While each of our operating companies maintains responsibility for selling and marketing its specific products, we have developed two marketing teams at the group level who are focused on cross-selling our broad capabilities. One team supports the Aerostructures and Aerospace Systems Groups and the other the Aftermarket Services Group. These teams are responsible for selling systems, integrated assemblies and repair and overhaul services, reaching across our operating companies, to our OEM, military, airline and air cargo customers. We also conduct sales activities in the Wichita, Kansas area through Triumph Wichita Support Center, a third-party sales organization dedicated solely to a sales effort on behalf of Triumph Group companies, which is staffed by sales professionals focused on Boeing IDS, Spirit AeroSystems, Cessna, Bombardier/Learjet and Raytheon. In certain limited cases, we use independent, commission-based representatives to serve our customer's changing needs and the current trends in some of the markets/geographic regions in which we operate.

All three of these marketing organizations operate as the front-end of the selling process, establishing or maintaining relationships, identifying opportunities to leverage our brand, and providing service for our customers. Each individual operating company is responsible for its own technical support, pricing, manufacturing and product support. Also, within the Aerospace Systems Group, we have created a group engineering function to provide integrated solutions to meet our customer needs by designing systems that integrate the capabilities of our companies.

We have a number of long-term agreements with several of our customers. These agreements generally describe the terms under which the customer may issue purchase orders to buy our products and services during the term of the agreement. These terms typically include a list of the products or repair services customers may purchase, initial pricing, anticipated quantities and, to the extent known, delivery dates. In tracking and reporting our backlog, however, we only include amounts for which we have actual purchase orders with firm delivery dates or contract requirements generally within the next 24 months, which primarily relates to sales to our OEM customer base. Purchase orders issued by our aftermarket customers are usually completed within a short period of time. As a result, our backlog data relates primarily to the OEM customers. The backlog information set forth below does not include the sales that we expect to generate from long-term agreements for which we do not have actual purchase orders with firm delivery dates.

We compete primarily with Tier 1 and Tier 2 systems integrators and the manufacturers that supply them, some of which are divisions or subsidiaries of other large companies, in the manufacture of aircraft systems components and subassemblies. OEMs are increasingly focusing on assembly and integration activities while outsourcing more manufacturing, and therefore are less of a competitive force than in previous years.

Competition for the repair and overhaul of aviation components comes from three primary sources, some of whom possess greater financial and other resources than we have: OEMs, major commercial airlines, government support depots and other independent repair and overhaul companies. Some major commercial airlines continue to own and operate their own service centers, while others have begun to sell or outsource their repair and overhaul services to other aircraft operators or third parties. Large domestic and foreign airlines that provide repair and overhaul services typically provide these services not only for their own aircraft but for other airlines as well. OEMs also maintain service centers which provide repair and overhaul services for the components they manufacture. Many governments maintain aircraft support depots in their military organizations that maintain and repair the aircraft they operate. Other independent service organizations also compete for the repair and overhaul business of other users of aircraft components.

The aerospace industry is highly regulated in the United States by the FAA and in other countries by similar agencies. We must be certified by the FAA and, in some cases, by individual OEMs, in order to engineer and service parts and components used in specific aircraft models. If material authorizations or approvals were revoked or suspended, our operations would be

We must also satisfy the requirements of our customers, including OEMs, that are subject to FAA regulations, and provide these customers with products and repair services that comply with the government regulations applicable to aircraft components used in commercial flight operations. The FAA regulates commercial flight operations and requires that aircraft components meet its stringent standards. In addition, the FAA requires that various maintenance routines be performed on aircraft components, and we currently satisfy these maintenance standards in our repair and overhaul services. Several of our operating locations are FAA-approved repair stations.

Generally, the FAA only grants licenses for the manufacture or repair of a specific aircraft component, rather than the broader licenses that have been granted in the past. The FAA licensing process may be costly and time-consuming. In order to obtain an FAA license, an applicant must satisfy all applicable regulations of the FAA governing repair stations. These regulations require that an applicant have experienced personnel, inspection systems, suitable facilities and equipment. In addition, the applicant must demonstrate a need for the license. Because an applicant must procure manufacturing and repair manuals from third parties relating to each particular aircraft component in order to obtain a license with respect to that component, the application process may involve substantial cost.

The license approval processes for the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA was formed in 2002 and is handling most of the responsibilities of the national aviation authorities in Europe, such as the United Kingdom Civil Aviation Authority), which regulates this industry in the European Union, the Civil Aviation Administration of China, and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities are similarly stringent, involving potentially lengthy audits.

Our business, operations and facilities are subject to numerous stringent federal, state, local and foreign environmental laws and regulation by government agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency, or the EPA. Among other matters, these regulatory authorities impose requirements that regulate the emission, discharge, generation, management, transportation and disposal of hazardous materials, pollutants and contaminants, govern public and private response actions to hazardous or regulated substances which may be or have been released to the environment, and require us to obtain and maintain licenses and permits in connection with our operations. This extensive regulatory framework imposes significant compliance burdens and risks on us. Although management believes that our operations and our facilities are in material compliance with such laws and regulations, future changes in these laws, regulations or interpretations thereof or the nature of our operations or regulatory enforcement actions which may arise, may require us to make significant additional capital expenditures to ensure compliance in the future.

A substantial percentage of our gross profit and operating income derives from commercial aviation. Our operations have been focused on designing, engineering, manufacturing, repairing and overhauling a broad portfolio of aerostructures, aircraft components, accessories, subassemblies and systems. Therefore, our business is directly affected by economic factors and other trends that affect our customers in the aerospace industry, including a possible decrease in outsourcing by OEMs and aircraft operators or projected market growth that may not materialize or be sustainable. We are also significantly dependent on sales to the commercial aerospace market, which has been cyclical in nature with significant downturns in the past. When these economic and other factors adversely affect the aerospace industry, they tend to reduce the overall customer demand for our products and services, which decreases our operating income. Economic and other factors that might affect the aerospace industry may have an adverse impact on our results of operations and liquidity. We have credit exposure to a number of commercial airlines, some of which have encountered financial difficulties. In addition, an increase in energy costs and the price of fuel to the airlines, similar to that which occurred in 2008, could result in additional pressure on the operating costs of airlines. The market for jet fuel is inherently volatile and is subject to, among other things, changes in government policy on jet fuel production, fluctuations in the global supply of crude oil and disruptions in oil production or delivery caused by sudden hostility in oil producing areas. Airlines are sometimes unable to pass on increases in fuel prices to customers by increasing fares due to the competitive nature of the airline industry, and this compounds the pressure on operating costs. Other events of general impact such as natural disasters, war, terrorist attacks against the industry or pandemic health crises may lead to declines in the worldwide aerospace industry that could adversely affect our business and financial condition.

In addition, demand for our maintenance, repair and overhaul services is strongly correlated with worldwide flying activity. A significant portion of the MRO activity required on commercial aircraft is mandated by government regulations that limit the total time or number of flights that may elapse between scheduled MRO events. As a result, although short-term deferrals are possible, MRO activity is ultimately required to continue to operate the aircraft in revenue-producing service. Therefore, over the intermediate and long-term, trends in the MRO market are closely related to the size and utilization level of the worldwide aircraft fleet, as reflected by the number of available seat miles, commonly referred to as ASMs, and cargo miles flown. Consequently, conditions or events which contribute to declines in worldwide ASMs and cargo miles flown, such as those mentioned above, could negatively impact our MRO business.

The military and defense market is largely dependent upon government budgets, particularly the U.S. defense budget, and even an increase in defense spending may not be allocated to programs that would benefit our business. Moreover, the new military aircraft programs in which we participate may not enter full-scale production as expected. A change in the levels of defense spending or levels of military flight operations could curtail or enhance our prospects in the military and defense market depending upon the programs affected.

We currently have agreements in place with Boeing for orders to support C-17 production through March 2014. Boeing currently has confirmed orders with the U.S. Air Force, India and various other foreign governments to support production of C-17 through 2014 at a rate of approximately 10 aircraft per year. We do not anticipate that the U.S. Air Force will support the procurement of additional C-17 beyond those currently ordered. The President’s proposed fiscal 2013 budget does not include funding for the procurement of new C-17 aircraft. Boeing has reported that there is interest for additional orders from India, other foreign governments and other potential customers. However, there can be no assurance that these additional orders will materialize. Our business could be adversely impacted if Boeing does not secure future orders from the U.S. Air Force, Foreign Militaries or other customers. The loss of the C-17 program and the failure to win additional work to replace the C-17 program could materially reduce our cash flow and results of operations.

Our overall operating results are affected by many factors, including the timing of orders from large customers and the timing of expenditures to manufacture parts and purchase inventory in anticipation of future sales of products and services. A large portion of our operating expenses are relatively fixed. Because several of our operating locations typically do not obtain long-term purchase orders or commitments from our customers, they must anticipate the future volume of orders based upon the historic purchasing patterns of customers and upon our discussions with customers as to their anticipated future requirements. These historic patterns may be disrupted by many factors, including changing economic conditions, inventory adjustments, or work stoppages or labor disruptions at our customers' locations. Cancellations, reductions or delays in orders by a customer or group of customers could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

On June 16, 2010, we completed the acquisition of Vought. Vought was a company with revenues almost twice our revenues prior to the acquisition and approximately as many employees. The acquisition of Vought is by far the largest acquisition we have made. The success of the acquisition of Vought will depend, in part, on our ability to realize the anticipated benefits from combining the businesses of Triumph and Vought. However, to realize these anticipated benefits, we must successfully combine the businesses. If we are not able to achieve these objectives, or do not do so in a timely manner, the anticipated benefits of the acquisition of Vought may not be realized fully or at all or may take longer to realize than expected.

In addition, it is possible that the integration process could result in the loss of key employees, the disruption of each company's ongoing businesses or inconsistencies in standards, controls, procedures and policies that adversely affect our ability to maintain relationships with customers, suppliers and employees or to achieve the anticipated benefits of the acquisition of Vought. Integration efforts between the two companies will also divert management attention and resources and could have an adverse effect on us during the transition period.

We have a consistent strategy to grow, in part, through the acquisition of additional businesses in the aerospace industry and are continuously evaluating various acquisition opportunities, including those outside the United States and those that may have a material impact on our business. Our ability to grow by acquisition is dependent upon, among other factors, the availability of suitable acquisition candidates. Growth by acquisition involves risks that could adversely affect our operating results, including difficulties in integrating the operations and personnel of acquired companies, the risk of diverting the attention of senior management from our existing operations, the potential amortization of acquired intangible assets, the potential impairment of goodwill and the potential loss of key employees of acquired companies. We may not be able to consummate acquisitions on satisfactory terms or, if any acquisitions are consummated, successfully integrate these acquired businesses.

Future turmoil in the capital markets may impede our ability to access the capital markets when we would like, or need, to raise capital or restrict our ability to borrow money on favorable terms. Such market conditions could have an adverse impact on our flexibility to react to changing economic and business conditions and on our ability to fund our operations and capital expenditures in the future. In addition, interest rate fluctuations, financial market volatility or credit market disruptions may also negatively affect our customers' and our suppliers' ability to obtain credit to finance their businesses on acceptable terms. As a result, our customers' need for and ability to purchase our products or services may decrease, and our suppliers may increase their prices, reduce their output or change their terms of sale. If our customers' or suppliers' operating and financial performance deteriorates, or if they are unable to make scheduled payments or obtain credit, our customers may not be able to pay, or may delay payment of, accounts receivable owed to us, and our suppliers may restrict credit or impose different payment terms. Any inability of customers to pay us for our products and services or any demands by suppliers for different payment terms may adversely affect our earnings and cash flow.

We must comply with all applicable export control laws and regulations of the United States and other countries. United States laws and regulations applicable to us include the Arms Export Control Act, the International Traffic in Arms Regulations ("ITAR"), the Export Administration Regulations ("EAR") and the trade sanctions laws and regulations administered by the United States Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control ("OFAC"). EAR restricts the export of dual-use products and technical data to certain countries, while ITAR restricts the export of defense products, technical data and defense services. The U.S. Government agencies responsible for administering EAR and ITAR have significant discretion in the interpretation and enforcement of these regulations. We cannot provide services to certain countries subject to United States trade sanctions unless we first obtain the necessary authorizations from OFAC. In addition, we are subject to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act which generally bars bribes or unreasonable gifts to foreign governments or officials.

Violations of these laws or regulations could result in significant additional sanctions, including fines, more onerous compliance requirements, more extensive debarments from export privileges, loss of authorizations needed to conduct aspects of our international business and criminal penalties and may harm our ability to enter into contracts with the U.S. government. A future violation of ITAR or the other regulations enumerated above could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

As we pursue customers in Asia, South America and other less developed aerospace markets throughout the world, our inability to ensure the creditworthiness of our customers in these areas could adversely impact our overall profitability. In addition, with operations in China, France, Germany, Mexico, Thailand and the United Kingdom, and customers throughout the world, we will be subject to the legal, political, social and regulatory requirements and economic conditions of other jurisdictions. In the future, we may also make additional international capital investments, including further acquisitions of companies outside the United States or companies having operations outside the United States. Risks inherent to international operations include, but are not limited to, the following:

A key element of our strategy has been, and continues to be, internal growth supplemented by growth through the acquisition of additional aerospace companies and product lines. In order to grow internally, we may need to make significant capital expenditures, such as investing in facilities in low-cost countries, and may need additional capital to do so. Our ability to grow is dependent upon, and may be limited by, among other things, access to markets and conditions of markets, availability under the Credit Facility and the Securitization Facility, each as defined below, and by particular restrictions contained in the Credit Facility and our other financing arrangements. In that case, additional funding sources may be needed, and we may not be able to obtain the additional capital necessary to pursue our internal growth and acquisition strategy or, if we can obtain additional financing, the additional financing may not be on financial terms that are satisfactory to us.

We have numerous competitors in the aerospace industry. We compete primarily with the top-tier systems integrators and the manufacturers that supply them, some of which are divisions or subsidiaries of OEMs and other large companies that manufacture aircraft components and subassemblies. Our OEM competitors, which include Boeing, Airbus, Bell Helicopter, Bombardier, Cessna, General Electric, Gulfstream, Honeywell, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, Rolls Royce and Sikorsky, may choose not to outsource production of aerostructures or other components due to, among other things, their own direct labor and overhead considerations, capacity utilization at their own facilities and desire to retain critical or core skills. Consequently, traditional factors affecting competition, such as price and quality of service, may not be significant determinants when OEMs decide whether to produce a part in-house or to outsource. We also face competition from non-OEM component manufacturers, including Alenia Aeronautica, Fuji Heavy Industries, GKN Westland Aerospace (U.K.), Goodrich Corp., Kawasaki Heavy Industries, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Spirit AeroSystems and Stork Aerospace. Competition for the repair and overhaul of aviation components comes from three primary sources: OEMs, major commercial airlines and other independent repair and overhaul companies.

The aerospace industry is constantly undergoing development and change and it is likely that new products, equipment and methods of repair and overhaul service will be introduced in the future. In order to keep pace with any new developments, we may need to expend significant capital to purchase new equipment and machines or to train our employees in the new methods of production and service.

The aerospace industry is highly regulated in the United States by the FAA and in other countries by similar agencies. We must be certified by the FAA and, in some cases, by individual OEMs in order to engineer and service parts, components and aerostructures used in specific aircraft models. If any of our material authorizations or approvals were revoked or suspended, our operations would be adversely affected. New or more stringent governmental regulations may be adopted, or industry oversight heightened in the future, and we may incur significant expenses to comply with any new regulations or any heightened industry oversight.

Many new aircraft programs require that major suppliers bear the cost of design, development and engineering work associated with the development of the aircraft usually in exchange for a long-term agreement to supply critical parts once the aircraft is in production. If the aircraft fails to reach the full production stage or we fail to win the long-term contract, the outlays we have made in research and development and other start-up costs may not generate our anticipated return on investment.

We continually make significant capital expenditures to implement new processes and to increase both efficiency and capacity. Some of these projects require additional training for our employees and not all projects may be implemented as anticipated. If any of these projects do not achieve the anticipated increase in efficiency or capacity, our returns on these capital expenditures may be lower than expected.

Our operations expose us to potential liability for personal injury or death as a result of the failure of an aircraft component that has been serviced by us or the failure of an aircraft component designed or manufactured by us. While we believe that our liability insurance is adequate to protect us from these liabilities, our insurance may not cover all liabilities. Additionally, as the number of insurance companies providing general aviation product liability insurance coverage has decreased in recent years, insurance coverage may not be available in the future at a cost acceptable to us. Any material liability not covered by insurance or for which third-party indemnification is not available could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition.

From time to time, some of our operating locations have experienced difficulties in attracting and retaining skilled personnel to design, engineer, manufacture, repair and overhaul sophisticated aircraft components. Our ability to operate successfully could be jeopardized if we are unable to attract and retain a sufficient number of skilled personnel to conduct our business. Additionally, the service of key members of the Vought management team and other personnel are expected to be critical to ensure the smooth and timely integration of Vought's business into Triumph.

Our business, operations and facilities are subject to numerous stringent federal, state, local and foreign environmental laws and regulations, and we are subject to potentially significant fines or penalties, including criminal sanctions, if we fail to comply with these requirements. In addition, we could be affected by future laws and regulations, including those imposed in response to climate change concerns and other actions commonly referred to as "green initiatives." Compliance with current and future environmental laws and regulations currently requires and is expected to continue to require significant operating and capital costs.

Pursuant to certain environmental laws, a current or previous owner or operator of a contaminated site may be held liable for the entire cost of investigation, removal or remediation of hazardous materials at such property, whether or not the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of any hazardous materials. Although management believes that our operations and facilities are in material compliance with such laws and regulations, future changes in such laws, regulations or interpretations thereof or the nature of our operations or regulatory enforcement actions which may arise, may require us to make significant additional capital expenditures to ensure compliance in the future. Certain of our facilities, including facilities acquired and operated by us or one of our subsidiaries, have at one time or another been under active investigation for environmental contamination by federal or state agencies when acquired and, at least in some cases, continue to be under investigation or subject to remediation for potential or identified environmental contamination. Lawsuits, claims and costs involving environmental matters are likely to continue to arise in the future. Individual facilities of ours have also been subject to investigation on occasion for possible past waste disposal practices which might have contributed to contamination at or from remote third-party waste disposal sites. In some instances, we are indemnified by prior owners or operators and/or present owners of the facilities for liabilities which we incur as a result of these investigations and the environmental contamination found which pre-dates our acquisition of these facilities, subject to certain limitations, including but not limited to specified exclusions, deductibles and limitations on the survival period of the indemnity. We also maintain a pollution liability policy that provides coverage, subject to specified limitations, for specified material liabilities associated with the clean-up of certain on-site pollution conditions, as well as defense and indemnity for certain third-party suits (including Superfund liabilities at third-party sites), in each case, to the extent not otherwise indemnified. However, if we were required to pay the expenses related to environmental liabilities for which neither indemnification nor insurance coverage is available, these expenses could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations, and cash flows.

We and other companies in our industry possess certain proprietary rights relating to designs, engineering, manufacturing processes and repair and overhaul procedures. In the event that we believe that a third party is infringing upon our proprietary rights, we may bring an action to enforce such rights. In addition, third parties may claim infringement by us with respect to their proprietary rights and may initiate legal proceedings against us in the future. The expense and time of bringing an action to enforce such rights or defending against infringement claims can be significant, as in the case of the litigation arising out of the claims of Eaton Corporation discussed in "Item 3. Legal Proceedings." Intellectual property litigation involves complex legal and factual questions which makes the outcome of any such proceedings subject to considerable uncertainty. Not only can such litigation divert management's attention, but it can also expose the Company to damages and potential injunctive relief which, if granted, may preclude the Company from making, using or selling particular products or technology. The expense and time associated with such litigation may have a material and adverse impact on our profitability.

In our overhaul and repair businesses, OEMs of equipment that we maintain for our customers increasingly include language in repair manuals relating to their equipment asserting broad claims of proprietary rights to the contents of the manuals used in our operations. Although we believe that our use of manufacture and repair manuals is lawful, there can be no assurance that OEMs will not try to enforce such claims, including through the possible use of legal proceedings, or that any such actions will be unsuccessful.

Our business also depends on using certain intellectual property and tooling that we have rights to use pursuant to license grants under our contracts with our OEM customers. These contracts contain restrictions on our use of the intellectual property and tooling and may be terminated if we violate certain of these restrictions. Our loss of a contract with an OEM customer and the related license rights to use an OEM's intellectual property or tooling would materially adversely affect our business.

We are highly dependent on the availability of essential raw materials such as carbon fiber, aluminum and titanium, and purchased engineered component parts from our suppliers, many of which are available only from single customer-approved sources. Moreover, we are dependent upon the ability of our suppliers to provide raw materials and components that meet our specifications, quality standards and delivery schedules. Our suppliers' failure to provide expected raw materials or component parts could require us to identify and enter into contracts with alternate suppliers that are acceptable to both us and our customers, which could result in significant delays, expenses, increased costs and management distraction and adversely affect production schedules and contract profitability.

We have from time to time experienced limited interruptions of supply, and we may experience a significant interruption in the future. Our continued supply of raw materials and component parts are subject to a number of risks including:

In addition, some contracts with our suppliers for raw materials, component parts and other goods are short-term contracts, which are subject to termination on a relatively short-term basis. The prices of our raw materials and component parts fluctuate depending on market conditions, and substantial increases in prices could increase our operating costs, which, as a result of our fixed-price contracts, we may not be able to recoup through increases in the prices of our products.

Due to economic difficulty, we may face pressure to renegotiate agreements resulting in lower margins. Our suppliers may discontinue provision of products to us at attractive prices or at all, and we may not be able to obtain such products in the future from these or other providers on the scale and within the time periods we require. Furthermore, substitute raw materials or component parts may not meet the strict specifications and quality standards we and our customers demand, or that the U.S. Government requires. If we are not able to obtain key products on a timely basis and at an affordable cost, or we experience significant delays or interruptions of their supply, revenues from sales of products that use these supplies will decrease.

Our manufacturing facilities could be damaged or disrupted by a natural disaster, war, or terrorist activity. We maintain property damage and business interruption insurance at the levels typical in our industry, however, a major catastrophe, such as an earthquake, hurricane, flood, tornado or other natural disaster at any of our sites, or war or terrorist activities in any of the areas where we conduct operations could result in a prolonged interruption of our business. Any disruption resulting from these events could cause significant delays in shipments of products and the loss of sales and customers and we may not have insurance to adequately compensate us for any of these events.

The aerospace industry has recently experienced consolidation among suppliers. Suppliers have consolidated and formed alliances to broaden their product and integrated system offerings and achieve critical mass. This supplier consolidation is in part attributable to aircraft manufacturers more frequently awarding long-term sole-source or preferred supplier contracts to the most capable suppliers, thus reducing the total number of suppliers. This consolidation could cause us to compete against certain competitors with greater financial resources, market penetration and purchasing power. When we purchase component parts and services from suppliers to manufacture our products, consolidation reduces price competition between our suppliers, which could diminish incentives for our suppliers to reduce prices. If this consolidation continues, our operating costs could increase and it may become more difficult for us to be successful in obtaining new customers.

Our financial statements are prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. These principles require our management to make estimates and assumptions regarding our contracts that affect the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting period. Contract accounting requires judgment relative to assessing risks, estimating contract sales and costs, and making assumptions for schedule and technical issues. Due to the size and nature of many of our contracts, the estimation of total sales and cost at completion is complicated and subject to many variables. While we base our estimates on historical experience and on various assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances at the time made, actual results may differ materially from those estimated.

Many aircraft manufacturers, airlines and aerospace suppliers have unionized workforces. Strikes, work stoppages or slowdowns experienced by aircraft manufacturers, airlines or aerospace suppliers could reduce our customers' demand for our products or prevent us from completing production. In turn, this may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

As a result of the acquisition of Vought, we have become a more significant provider of aerostructures to military aircraft manufacturers. The military aircraft manufacturers' business, and by extension, our business, is affected by the U.S. Government's continued commitment to programs under contract with our customers. The terms of defense contracts with the U.S. Government generally permit the government to terminate contracts partially or completely, either for its convenience or if we default by failing to perform under the contract. Termination for convenience provisions provide only for our recovery of unrecovered costs incurred or committed, settlement expenses and profit on the work completed prior to termination. Termination for default provisions provide for the contractor to be liable for excess costs incurred by the U.S. Government in procuring undelivered items from another source. On contracts where the price is based on cost, the U.S. Government may review our costs and performance, as well as our accounting and general business practices. Based on the results of such audits, the U.S. Government may adjust our contract-related costs and fees, including allocated indirect costs. In addition, under U.S. Government purchasing regulations, some of our costs, including most financing costs, portions of research and development costs, and certain marketing expenses may not be subject to reimbursement.

We bear the potential risk that the U.S. Government may unilaterally suspend our customers or us from new contracts pending the resolution of alleged violations of procurement laws or regulations. Sales to the U.S. Government are also subject to changes in the government's procurement policies in advance of design completion. An unexpected termination of, or suspension from, a significant government contract, a reduction in expenditures by the U.S. Government for aircraft using our products, lower margins resulting from increasingly competitive procurement policies, a reduction in the volume of contracts awarded to us, or substantial cost overruns could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

A Department of Defense, or DoD, facility security clearance is required in order to be awarded and perform on classified contracts for the DoD and certain other agencies of the U.S. Government, which is a significant part of our business. We have obtained clearance at appropriate levels that require stringent qualifications, and it may be required to seek higher level clearances in the future. We cannot assure you that we will be able to maintain our security clearance. If for some reason our security clearance is invalidated or terminated, we may not be able to continue to perform our present classified contracts or be able to enter into new classified contracts, which could affect our ability to compete for and capture new business.

In May 2011, Vought "went live" with an ERP system. If this implementation is not managed effectively, it could continue to cause disruption resulting in additional costs and it may delay our ability to obtain accurate financial information with respect to the Vought business or obtain the information necessary to effectively manage the Vought business, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

None.

On July 9, 2004, Eaton Corporation and several Eaton subsidiaries filed a complaint against us, our subsidiary, Frisby Aerospace, LLC (now named Triumph Actuation Systems, LLC), certain related subsidiaries and certain employees of ours and our subsidiaries. The complaint was filed in the Circuit Court of the First Judicial District of Hinds County, Mississippi and alleged nineteen causes of action under Mississippi law. In particular, the complaint alleged the misappropriation of trade secrets and intellectual property allegedly belonging to Eaton relating to hydraulic pumps and motors used in military and commercial aviation. Triumph Actuation Systems and the individual defendants filed separate responses to Eaton's claims. Triumph Actuation Systems filed counterclaims against Eaton alleging common law unfair competition, interference with existing and prospective contracts, abuse of process, defamation, violation of North Carolina's Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act, and violation of the false advertising provisions of the Lanham Act. We and defendant Jeff Frisby, President of Triumph Actuation Systems at the time the engineer defendants were hired, moved to dismiss the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction.

The above allegations also relate to alleged conduct that has been the subject of an investigation by the office of the U.S. Attorney in Jackson, Mississippi. On January 22, 2004, a search warrant was executed on the offices of Triumph Actuation Systems in connection with this investigation. Triumph Actuation Systems cooperated with the investigation. On December 20, 2006, five engineers of Triumph Actuation Systems who are former employees of Eaton Aerospace, LLC, were indicted by a grand jury sitting in the Southern District of Mississippi on five counts of trade secret misappropriation, conspiracy to misappropriate trade secrets, and mail and wire fraud. On June 15, 2007, all counts other than part of one count were dismissed by the court, leaving a charge of conspiracy to misappropriate trade secrets.

On October 11, 2007, the government obtained a new indictment against the same five engineer defendants, raising new charges arising out of the same investigation, which were essentially reiterated in a second superseding indictment obtained on November 7, 2007. The defendant engineers subsequently filed pretrial motions, including motions to dismiss. On April 25, 2008, the court granted some of those motions and dismissed seven of the twelve counts of the second superseding indictment. The government appealed the dismissal with respect to three of the seven counts dismissed. On January 21, 2009, while the appeal was still pending, the government obtained a new indictment against the five engineers containing three counts stating essentially the same charges as those covered by the government's appeal. On February 9, 2009, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit unanimously affirmed the dismissal of one of the counts covered by the government's appeal and

No charges have been brought against Triumph Actuation Systems or us, and we understand that neither Triumph Actuation Systems nor the Company is currently the subject of the criminal investigation.

In the civil case, following stays of most discovery while the parties litigated a motion to dismiss and a motion to protect the defendant engineers' Fifth Amendment rights, discovery recommenced in late August 2007. However, on January 4, 2008, the judge in the civil case, Judge Bobby DeLaughter, recused himself on his own motion. The case was reassigned to Chief Judge W. Swan Yerger.

On January 24, 2008, Triumph Actuation Systems filed a motion to stay all discovery in order to review and reconsider Judge DeLaughter's prior orders based on the ongoing federal investigation of an alleged ex parte and inappropriate relationship between Judge DeLaughter and Ed Peters, a lawyer representing Eaton for whom Judge DeLaughter had worked prior to his appointment to the bench. Judge DeLaughter was thereafter suspended from the bench and indicted by a federal grand jury sitting in the Northern District of Mississippi. On July 30, 2009, Judge DeLaughter pled guilty to a count of obstruction of justice contained in the indictment and, on November 13, 2009, was sentenced to 18 months in federal prison.

Triumph Actuation Systems filed other motions relating to this alleged inappropriate relationship with Mr. Peters, including a motion for sanctions. Judge Yerger ordered that this conduct be examined and has undertaken, along with a newly appointed Special Master, to review Judge DeLaughter's rulings in the case from the time Mr. Peters became involved.

On December 22, 2010, the court entered a final order dismissing with prejudice all of the claims that had been asserted by Eaton. The order of dismissal fully ended the litigation of claims by Eaton in the Circuit Court. On December 28, 2010, Eaton filed a notice of appeal to the Mississippi Supreme Court appealing the order of dismissal and other matters.

On December 28, 2010, Triumph, Triumph Actuation Systems and the engineer defendants filed a motion for leave to amend the counterclaims which remained pending to include causes of action based on the Eaton misconduct that led to the dismissal of their claims. Judge Yerger retired from the bench on December 31, 2010, and the matter was reassigned to Judge Jeffrey Weill. On March 14, 2011, Judge Weill granted to the motion for leave to amend the counterclaims. The amended counterclaims were filed on March 18, 2011. In addition, on February 1, 2011, Triumph Actuation Systems filed a complaint in the District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina against Eaton Corporation and several of its subsidiaries alleging three counts of antitrust violations under the Sherman Act based on the various actions and misconduct of Eaton and its subsidiaries in the Mississippi state court litigation.

On April 18, 2012, in the course of a hearing in the proceedings remaining before Judge Weill in the civil case, Eaton produced several e-mails that were responsive to discovery requests propounded in the investigation of the involvement of Mr. Peters which should have been produced several years earlier. The appearance of the e-mails has led to the suspension of Eaton's appeal in the Mississippi Supreme Court and caused Judge Weill to issue an order on May 10, 2012 directing Eaton's counsel (both inside and outside) and its Chairman and CEO, Alexander M. Cutler, to produce within seven days all remaining relevant documents, accompanied by sworn affidavits explaining the failure to produce the documents earlier and suggesting appropriate sanctions against Eaton and its counsel for the failure.

Given the fact of Eaton's appeal of the dismissal of its claims, it is too early to determine what, if any, exposure to liability Triumph Actuation Systems or the Company might face as a result of the civil suit. We intend to continue to vigorously defend the dismissal of Eaton's claims on appeal and to vigorously prosecute the counterclaims brought by Triumph Actuation Systems.

In addition to the foregoing, in the ordinary course of our business, we are involved in disputes, claims, lawsuits, and governmental and regulatory inquiries that we deem to be immaterial. Some may involve claims or potential claims of substantial damages, fines or penalties. While we cannot predict the outcome of any pending or future litigation or proceeding, we do not believe that any pending matter will have a material effect, individually or in the aggregate, on our financial position or results of operations, although no assurances can be given to that effect.

Not applicable.

Our Common Stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol "TGI." The following table sets forth the range of high and low prices for our Common Stock for the periods indicated:

Dividend Policy

Repurchases of Stock

COMPARISON OF 5-YEAR CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN*

(The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and notes thereto contained elsewhere herein.)

We are a major supplier to the aerospace industry and have three operating segments: (i) Triumph Aerostructures Group, whose companies' revenues are derived from the design, manufacture, assembly and integration of metallic and composite aerostructures and structural components for the global aerospace original equipment manufacturers, or OEM, market; (ii) Triumph Aerospace Systems Group, whose companies design, engineer and manufacture a wide range of proprietary and build-to-print components, assemblies and systems also for the OEM market; and (iii) Triumph Aftermarket Services Group, whose companies serve aircraft fleets, notably commercial airlines, the U.S. military and cargo carriers, through the maintenance, repair and overhaul of aircraft components and accessories manufactured by third parties.

On June 16, 2010, we acquired Vought Aircraft Industries, Inc. ("Vought") from The Carlyle Group. The acquisition of Vought establishes the Company as a leading global manufacturer of aerostructures for commercial, military and business jet aircraft. Products include fuselages, wings, empennages, nacelles and helicopter cabins. Strategically, the acquisition of Vought substantially increased our design capabilities and provided further diversification across customers and programs, as well as exposure to new growth platforms. The acquired business is operating as Triumph Aerostructures—Vought Commercial Division and Triumph Aerostructures—Vought Integrated Programs Division. The Company's consolidated financial statements include Vought's results of operations and cash flows from June 16, 2010.

In fiscal 2012, our wholly-owned subsidiary, Triumph Interiors, LLC, acquired the assets of Aviation Network Services, LLC ("ANS"), a leading provider of repair and refurbishment of aircraft interiors primarily for commercial airlines. ANS provides Triumph Interiors, LLC with additional capacity and expanded product offerings, such as the repair and refurbishment of passenger service units and other interior products. The results of Triumph Interiors, LLC continue to be included in the Company's Aftermarket Services segment. This acquisition did not have a material impact on the fiscal 2012 results of operations.

In fiscal 2012, we began efforts to establish a new facility in Red Oak, Texas to expand our capacity, particularly under the Bombardier Global 7000/8000 program. As of March 31, 2012, we have incurred approximately $9.0 million in capital expenditures.

The following includes a discussion of our consolidated and business segment results of operations. The Company's diverse structure and customer base do not provide for precise comparisons of the impact of price and volume changes to our results. However, we have disclosed the significant variances between the respective periods.

Non-GAAP Financial Measures

We prepare and publicly release quarterly unaudited financial statements prepared in accordance with GAAP. In accordance with Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") guidance on Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations, we also disclose and discuss certain non-GAAP financial measures in our public releases. Currently, the non-GAAP financial measure that we disclose is EBITDA, which is our income from continuing operations before interest, income taxes, amortization of acquired contract liabilities, curtailment gains (losses), depreciation and amortization, and Adjusted EBITDA, which is EBITDA adjusted for acquisition-related costs associated with the acquisition of Vought. We disclose EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA on a consolidated and a reportable segment basis in our earnings releases, investor conference calls and filings with the SEC. The non-GAAP financial measures that we use may not be comparable to similarly titled measures reported by other companies. Also, in the future, we may disclose different non-GAAP financial measures in order to help our investors more meaningfully evaluate and compare our future results of operations to our previously reported results of operations.

We view EBITDA as an operating performance measure and, as such, we believe that the GAAP financial measure most directly comparable to it is income from continuing operations. In calculating EBITDA, we exclude from income from continuing operations the financial items that we believe should be separately identified to provide additional analysis of the financial components of the day-to-day operation of our business. We have outlined below the type and scope of these exclusions and the material limitations on the use of these non-GAAP financial measures as a result of these exclusions. EBITDA is not a measurement of financial performance under GAAP and should not be considered as a measure of liquidity, as an alternative to net income (loss), income from continuing operations, or as an indicator of any other measure of performance derived in accordance with GAAP. Investors and potential investors in our securities should not rely on EBITDA as a substitute for any GAAP financial measure, including net income (loss) or income from continuing operations. In addition, we urge investors and potential investors in our securities to carefully review the reconciliation of EBITDA to income from continuing operations set forth below, in our earnings releases and in other filings with the SEC and to carefully review the GAAP financial information included as part of our Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and our Annual Reports on Form 10-K that are filed with the SEC, as well as our quarterly earnings releases, and compare the GAAP financial information with our EBITDA.

EBITDA is used by management to internally measure our operating and management performance and by investors as a supplemental financial measure to evaluate the performance of our business that, when viewed with our GAAP results and the accompanying reconciliation, we believe provides additional information that is useful to gain an understanding of the factors and trends affecting our business. We have spent more than 15 years expanding our product and service capabilities partially through acquisitions of complementary businesses. Due to the expansion of our operations, which included acquisitions, our income from continuing operations has included significant charges for depreciation and amortization. EBITDA excludes these charges and provides meaningful information about the operating performance of our business, apart from charges for depreciation and amortization. We believe the disclosure of EBITDA helps investors meaningfully evaluate and compare our performance from quarter to quarter and from year to year. We also believe EBITDA is a measure of our ongoing operating

Set forth below are descriptions of the financial items that have been excluded from our income from continuing operations to calculate EBITDA and the material limitations associated with using this non-GAAP financial measure as compared to income from continuing operations:

Management compensates for the above-described limitations of using non-GAAP measures by using a non-GAAP measure only to supplement our GAAP results and to provide additional information that is useful to gain an understanding of the factors and trends affecting our business.

The following table shows our EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA reconciled to our income from continuing operations for the indicated periods (in thousands):

    

The following tables show our EBITDA by reportable segment reconciled to our operating income for the indicated periods (in thousands):

 

 

The fluctuations from period to period within the amounts of the components of the reconciliations above are discussed further below within Results of Operations.

Net sales increased by $1.6 billion, or 124.4%, to $2.9 billion for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2011 from $1.3 billion for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010. The acquisition of Vought and the fiscal 2010 acquisitions contributed $1.5 billion in net sales. Excluding the effects of the Vought and fiscal 2010 acquisitions, organic sales increased $106.8 million, or 8.2%. The prior year period was negatively impacted by the reduction in demand for business jets, major program delays (particularly in the 747-8 and 787 programs), the decline in the regional jet market due to the overall economy, lower passenger and freight traffic and airline inventory de-stocking. While organic sales demonstrated improvement, we continued to face challenges such as the decreased demand for business jets and regional jets as well as commercial rate reductions (particularly in the 777 program).

Cost of sales increased by $1.3 billion, or 140.7%, to $2.2 billion for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2011 from $927.2 million for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010. This increase resulted from the acquisitions noted above, which contributed $1.27 billion. Gross margin for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2011 was 23.2% compared with 28.4% for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010. The decline in gross margin was impacted by lower margins contributed from the acquisition of Vought. Excluding the effects of the Vought and fiscal 2010 acquisitions, gross margin was 29.2% for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2011, compared with 28.4% for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010.

Segment operating income increased by $190.3 million, or 104.8%, to $371.9 million for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2011 from $181.6 million for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010. Operating income increased due to the contribution from the Vought and fiscal 2010 acquisitions ($163.1 million) and favorable settlements of retroactive pricing agreements ($3.0 million), offset by costs related to the signing of a collective bargaining agreement.

Corporate expenses increased by $31.5 million, or 119.9%, to $57.8 million for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2011 from $26.3 million for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010. Corporate expenses included $20.9 million of non-recurring acquisition-related transaction and integration costs associated with the acquisition of Vought. Corporate expenses also increased due to increased compensation and benefits ($5.4 million) due to increased corporate head count as compared to the prior year period, and an increase of $4.3 million of start-up costs related to the Mexican facility compared to the prior year period.

Interest expense and other increased by $50.7 million, or 175.6%, to $79.6 million for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2011 compared to $28.9 million for the prior year. This increase was due to higher average debt outstanding during the fiscal year ended March 31, 2011 in connection with the financing of the acquisition of Vought, as compared to the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010, including the Senior Subordinated Notes due 2017 (the "2017 Notes"), the Senior Notes due 2018 (the "2018 Notes") and the Term Loan, along with higher interest rates on our revolving credit facility.

The effective tax rate was 35.0% for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2011 and 32.6% for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010. The effective income tax rate was impacted by the $20.9 million in acquisition and integration expenses, which were only partially deductible for tax purposes, offset by the retroactive reinstatement of the research and development tax credit back to January 1, 2010. In December 2010, the Tax Hike Prevention Act of 2010 reinstated the research and development tax credit retroactive to January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2011.

Loss from discontinued operations before income taxes was $3.9 million for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2011, compared with a loss from discontinued operations before income taxes of $26.9 million for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010, which included impairment charges of $19.9 million. Loss from discontinued operations for the fiscal year ended

Business Segment Performance

We report our financial performance based on the following three reportable segments: the Aerostructures Group, the Aerospace Systems Group and the Aftermarket Services Group. The Company's Chief Operating Decision Maker ("CODM") utilizes EBITDA as a primary measure of profitability to evaluate performance of its segments and allocate resources.

The results of operations among our reportable segments vary due to differences in competitors, customers, extent of proprietary deliverables and performance. For example, our Aerostructures segment generally includes long-term sole-source or preferred supplier contracts and the success of these programs provides a strong foundation for our business and positions us well for future growth on new programs and new derivatives. This compares to our Aerospace Systems segment which generally includes proprietary products and/or arrangements where we become the primary source or one of a few primary sources to our customers, where our unique manufacturing capabilities command a higher margin. Also, OEMs are increasingly focusing on assembly activities while outsourcing more manufacturing and repair to third parties, and as a result, are less of a competitive force than in previous years. In contrast, our Aftermarket Services segment provides MRO services on components and accessories manufactured by third parties, with more diverse competition, including airlines, OEMs and other third-party service providers. In addition, variability in the timing and extent of customer requests performed in the Aftermarket Services segment can provide for greater volatility and less predictability in revenue and earnings than that experienced in the Aerostructures and Aerospace Systems segments.

The Aerostructures segment consists of the Company's operations that manufacture products primarily for the aerospace OEM market. The Aerostructures segment's revenues are derived from the design, manufacture, assembly and integration of metallic and composite aerostructures and structural components, including aircraft wings, fuselage sections, tail assemblies, engine nacelles, flight control surfaces as well as helicopter cabins. Further, the segment's operations also design and manufacture composite assemblies for floor panels and environmental control system ducts. These products are sold to various aerospace OEMs on a global basis.

The Aerospace Systems segment consists of the Company's operations that also manufacture products primarily for the aerospace OEM market. The segment's operations design and engineer mechanical and electromechanical controls, such as hydraulic systems, main engine gearbox assemblies, accumulators, mechanical control cables and non-structural cockpit components. These products are sold to various aerospace OEMs on a global basis.

The Aftermarket Services segment consists of the Company's operations that provide maintenance, repair and overhaul services to both commercial and military markets on components and accessories manufactured by third parties. Maintenance, repair and overhaul revenues are derived from services on auxiliary power units, airframe and engine accessories, including constant-speed drives, cabin compressors, starters and generators, and pneumatic drive units. In addition, the segment's operations repair and overhaul thrust reversers, nacelle components and flight control surfaces. The segment's operations also perform repair and overhaul services and supply spare parts for various types of cockpit instruments and gauges for a broad range of commercial airlines on a worldwide basis.

We currently generate a majority of our revenue from clients in the commercial aerospace industry, the military, the business jet industry and the regional airline industry. Our growth and financial results are largely dependent on continued demand for our products and services from clients in these industries. If any of these industries experiences a downturn, our clients in these sectors may conduct less business with us. The following table summarizes our net sales by end market by business segment. The loss of one or more of our major customers or an economic downturn in the commercial airline or the military and defense markets could have a material adverse effect on our business.