Back to news

January 3, 2019 | International, Aerospace

Army's Decision On Huge Helicopter Engine Program Will Impact GE, Honeywell, United Technologies

Loren Thompson

Sometime in the very near future, probably this month, the U.S. Army will announce the winner of a competition to develop a new engine for most of the service's helicopters. Called the Improved Turbine Engine Program (ITEP), it is a multibillion-dollar effort that has often been described as the Army's top aviation modernization priority.

It isn't hard to see why. The weight of Army light and medium helicopters has been growing by 70-100 pounds per year since they debuted in the last century as new equipment, munitions and armor were added. As a result, both the Black Hawk utility helicopter and the Apache attack helicopter are under-powered when operating in “high-hot” conditions, meaning above 6,000 feet in temperatures of 95 degrees or greater.

Such conditions are common in places like the Persian Gulf, and pose a challenge to conducting missions successfully. In 2006, the Army launched an effort to develop an engine that could provide 50% more power than the existing General Electric T700 engine (3,000 versus 2,000 shaft horsepower), while reducing fuel consumption by 25% and extending the life of the engine 20%.

That in itself was a tall order, but the new engine also had to fit into thousands of fielded helicopters with minimal modifications, and it couldn't weigh more than 500 pounds (the current engine weighs 456 pounds). The Army also wanted each engine to cost much less than the T700–not just in the cost of manufacturing the new engines, but in the cost of maintaining them across a multi-decade service life.

Given these very demanding requirements, and a dearth of money for modernization during the Obama years, it isn't surprising that a dozen years passed before the Army felt it was in a position to pick a design that met all the service's needs. But now it is. The choice is between a successor to the T700 built by General Electric Aviation, and a competing design offered by a joint venture of Honeywell and Pratt & Whitney (a unit of United Technologies, and contributor to my think tank). The decision has probably already been made, and simply awaits formal announcement later this month.

Full article: https://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthompson/2019/01/02/armys-decision-on-huge-helicopter-engine-program-will-impact-ge-honeywell-united-technologies

On the same subject

  • Northrop Grumman Short Range Air Defense System Selected as Command and Control for US Forces to Counter Aerial Threats

    July 10, 2020 | International, Aerospace, C4ISR

    Northrop Grumman Short Range Air Defense System Selected as Command and Control for US Forces to Counter Aerial Threats

    Huntsville, Ala. – July 8, 2020 – Northrop Grumman Corporation's (NYSE: NOC) Forward Area Air Defense Command and Control (FAAD C2) system has been selected by the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) as the interim command and control system for future Counter-Small Unmanned Aerial System (C-sUAS) procurements. The decision follows the findings of a service board established by the DOD's Joint Counter-Small Unmanned Aerial Systems (C-sUAS) Office to evaluate and provide an order-of-merit list for “best-of-breed” systems to counter small drones. The down-select board was comprised of representatives from the U.S. Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force and Special Operations Command, and senior representatives from the acquisition, technical, operational and other communities. FAAD C2 will serve as the current joint common C-sUAS C2 platform while an enduring solution is developed. “Our FAAD C2 has been saving lives at Forward Operating Bases and locations around the world since 2005,” said Kenn Todorov, vice president and general manager, combat systems and mission readiness, Northrop Grumman. “FAAD C2 continuously evolves to defend against new threats like small unmanned aerial systems and will continue to be the gold standard for protection of our troops whether stationed at bases or on the move.” FAAD C2 is a battle-proven C2 system, deployed in several theaters of operation for the C-UAS and C-RAM (Counter-Rocket, Artillery and Mortar) missions for its proven performance and flexibility that enables easy integration with available sensors, effectors and warning systems to launch rapid, real-time defense against short range and maneuvering threats. It also has been selected as the C2 system for the Army's Initial Maneuver Short Range Air Defense (IM-SHORAD) platforms. FAAD-C2 is built on the open architecture common to the Northrop Grumman all-domain C4I solution ecosystem and will ultimately converge into the US Army's Integrated Air and Missile Defense Battle Command System (IBCS). Northrop Grumman solves the toughest problems in space, aeronautics, defense and cyberspace to meet the ever evolving needs of our customers worldwide. Our 90,000 employees define possible every day using science, technology and engineering to create and deliver advanced systems, products and services. Media Contact Bridget Slayen 703-556-2224 Bridget.Slayen@ngc.com View source version on Northrop Grumman: https://news.northropgrumman.com/news/releases/northrop-grumman-short-range-air-defense-system-selected-as-command-and-control-for-us-forces-to-counter-aerial-threats

  • Hornet Extension Project remains on schedule - Skies Mag

    December 16, 2021 | International, Aerospace

    Hornet Extension Project remains on schedule - Skies Mag

    Two projects to increase the size of the CF-188 Hornet fleet and improve systems interoperability and combat capability are hitting their targets.

  • Can The Army Convince Congress It’s Learned From FCS?

    March 17, 2020 | International, Land

    Can The Army Convince Congress It’s Learned From FCS?

    The reboot of the Bradley replacement reminded many on the Hill of past procurement disasters like the Future Combat System. Can the Army exorcise the specter of FCS? By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR. CAPITOL HILL: “This is the Army's third attempt at replacing the Bradley,” the grim-faced chairman of defense appropriations, Rep. Pete Visclosky, warned Army officials last week. “We've been told, time and again, that this time it is different.... but the first large acquisition program that has come out of the Army Futures Command has fallen flat. You do need to convince this committee today that our continued support of modernization will eventually be a good investment.” At three hearings in the last two weeks, members of the House bombarded Army leaders with questions about the Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle, the semi-robotic replacement for the Reagan-era M2 Bradley. The Army cancelled its original competition after every vendor either dropped out or failed to meet requirements, then rebooted OMFV on a new, less rushed schedule that began with humbly seeking industry's input on what was actually possible. “We learned early on this program [that] there was confusion over the requirements,” the Army Chief of Staff, Gen. James McConville, told appropriators. With the new approach of listening assiduously to industry, he said, “we think we can save time up front and get the vehicle we need...and have requirements that we know industry can meet.” That was met with some skepticism. “That sounds great, general, but I wonder why we didn't start this process, you know, a long time ago,” replied the panel's ranking Republican, Rep. Ken Calvert. “What happened?” “I think what happened, Congressman, is we have learned,” said McConville, not quite answering the question. “We are learning with industry. We're learning with our acquisition folks who are used to doing it the old way, where we spent [10-14 years] developing requirements [and] a system, and then investing a lot of money in it, and finding out at the end we didn't get what we wanted. So, we are stopping early and we are redefining the way we do the process to encourage innovation.” So what's the new schedule? That's the question Rep. Paul Mitchell asked, without getting a clear answer, in two different House Armed Services Committee hearings, on March 3rd and March 5th. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/03/can-the-army-convince-congress-its-learned-from-fcs

All news