BROMO

Turin scenarios: growth, selective specialisation, severe and extreme

For Turin, the dossier applies four stress tests to the same baseline, from a growth case to an extreme downside. The comparison identifies the combination of programmes, design authority, asset utilisation and supplier orders that separates one outcome from another.

Analysis by Alessandro Sannini

Four stress tests on the same baseline
The four Turin scenarios start from the same baseline: 1,318 people at the site and 780–1,250 supply-chain FTE-equivalents. They assign no probabilities and do not anticipate company decisions. Their purpose is to connect industrial…
Scenario A — Turin as a European growth platform
In the favourable scenario, Turin is not simply preserved; it becomes a European growth platform. Bromo assigns the site a complete product line for pressurised modules and habitats, with design authority over at least one lunar or…
Scenario B — selective specialisation
In the selective scenario, Turin retains the hardest-to-replicate core—structures, special processes and part of integration—but gives up some common functions, software or bid responsibilities. Existing backlog protects the near term and…
Scenario C — severe downside
The severe scenario emerges when several industrial signals converge: part of design authority and bid leadership moves elsewhere, a lunar programme slows or is reduced, and F70 remains underutilised after the Gateway peak. Turin keeps…
Scenario D — extreme downside
Scenario D combines a demand shock with a transfer of authority. Several programmes are heavily revised or delayed; a foreign site becomes lead for habitats or exploration systems; Turin loses leadership of new bids; make-or-buy turns…
Preventing a move from B to C
Preventing a move from the selective to the severe scenario means acting on industrial signals before they become social ones. The first condition is to assign Turin a complete product line with design authority, chief engineering…