Back to news

August 22, 2019 | International, Aerospace

B-21 Development Applying Tough Lessons From B-2

By Lee Hudson

PALMDALE, California— The U.S. Air Force is taking lessons learned from the plagued B-2 Spirit bomber development program and applying them to the next-generation B-21 Raider.

While it is unknown when the B-2 will retire, the aging stealth bomber may end up flying alongside the B-21.

The B-2 bomber flew its inaugural flight 30 years ago from the Plant 42 runway here. Today, the Northrop Grummansite is preparing for development of the Raider and two newly erected beige buildings have popped up, likely tied to the next-generation bomber.

Although technical and acquisition problems inundated B-2 development, the classified B-21 is taking a different approach. Many details remain classified, but the company and service officials acknowledge the team is being run by the Rapid Capabilities Office instead of a traditional program office.

B-21 development appears to be progressing; the Air Force's No. 2 officer—Air Force Vice Chief of Staff Gen. Stephen Wilson—has said first flight is slated for December 2021. But House Armed Services seapower and projection forces subcommittee Ranking Member Rep. Rob Wittman (R-Va.) alerted the public last year that there was a problem with the inlet design for the B-21's Pratt & Whitney-manufactured engines. Wittman says those issues were fully addressed and the program has made tremendous progress.

“I've been pretty impressed by what both the Air Force and what Northrop Grumman have done in addressing these particular issues and I think we're on the right course,” he says. “Getting those things right to begin with and setting the tone and path I think is critically important.”

An Air Force illustration issued in 2016 of the B-21 design suggests it may closely resemble the B-2. “The B-2 will be setting the path course for the B-21,” says Janis Pamiljans, aerospace systems sector president at Northrop Grumman. “What we've learned on B-2 are finding themselves baselined in the design for B-21 for supportability, sustainability, [and] mission capable rate.”

The aging B-2s must be overhauled every nine years and are taken off the flight line for up to 12 months. Maintenance includes modifications and upgrades to antenna technology, avionics and software systems, costing U.S. taxpayers an average of $60 million for each aircraft, says Richard Sullivan, vice president and B-2 program manager at Northrop Grumman.

Separately, the Air Force is funding the $3 billion B-2 Defensive Management System Modernization (DMS-M) program to enhance the aircraft's direct attack capability and upgrade its integrated air defense systems. The current DMS was designed in the 1980s and has not received any upgrades.

“By leveraging ‘state-of-the-art' electronic warfare antennae, processors, controller and displays, B-2 aircrews will realize unprecedented situational battlespace awareness and dynamic, real-time threat avoidance in the most complex radio frequency emitter environments,” the Air Force says. “The inherent increased sensitivity of the modernized DMS over the legacy system, with increased processing power, will build a battlespace picture that could be shared with joint force platforms by onboard communication systems.”

DMS-M is facing a possible eight-month delay as the service works with Northrop Grumman to implement an agile software development framework, Air Force acquisition executive Will Roper told lawmakers in March. Engineering and manufacturing development for the effort goes through July 2022, according to fiscal 2020 budget documents.

Lawmakers acknowledge it is important that the nation's only operational stealth bomber remain relevant. But the House Armed Services Committee is concerned about DMS-M schedule delays, according to a report accompanying the lower chamber's mark of the fiscal 2020 defense policy bill.

“Unless the B-2 DMS-M program makes significant changes, there may continue to be delays that will impact the success of the program,” the report says. The committee directs the Air Force to brief members on sufficient government software development expertise; contract definitization schedule; delivery schedule; determination of software baseline; and an assessment of related DMS-M-related program support.

The Senate Armed Services Committee also is asking for answers regarding the U.S. bomber force. The upper chamber is requesting a brief on an updated bomber road map and plans for B-2 life cycle sustainment, among other items, according to a report accompanying the Senate's mark of the fiscal 2020 defense authorization bill. The upper chamber also would require details on Raider basing.

To date, the service has been “real[ly] happy with the way Northrop has approached” the B-21 program, says Maj. Gen. James Dawkins, Eighth Air Force commander and overseer of the Joint-Global Strike Operations Center. The next-generation bomber completed a successful critical design review in December.

“Everything I hear is that cost, schedule and performance is right on expectations,” Dawkins says.

https://aviationweek.com/defense/b-21-development-applying-tough-lessons-b-2

On the same subject

  • Northrop Grumman Receives $4.8 Billion Contract for USAF Global Hawk Modernization

    November 30, 2020 | International, Aerospace

    Northrop Grumman Receives $4.8 Billion Contract for USAF Global Hawk Modernization

    Northrop Grumman has been awarded a $4,800,000,000 contract for Global Hawk surveillance drone development, modernization, retrofit and sustainment activities for all Air Force Global Hawk variants, a Pentagon contract announcement said. This contract provides for management, including program, business and technical areas; configuration management, data management, reliability, availability and maintainability. Technical refresh; studies and analyses; design, development, integration, test and evaluation; contract/production line closeout/shutdown; training; sparing; overseas contingency operations support; fielding; cyber security/information assurance; interoperability support; facilities modifications/renovation; integrated logistics support; requirements management specification management; and quality assurance. Guidance will be included within each individual delivery order/task order statement of work and performance work statement regarding these and other tasks. This contract provides flexibility to accommodate the broad enterprise of activities associated with the Global Hawk program. Work will be performed in San Diego, California, and is expected to be completed Sept. 30, 2030. Global Hawk drones provide the US Air Force with wide area surveillance. The high-altitude, long-endurance unmanned system provides leading-edge intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capability that is able to deliver near real-time 24X7 situational awareness. https://www.defenseworld.net/news/28395#.X8U4681KiUk

  • Arms trade momentum: Globalization and US defense spending drive defense industry growth

    August 17, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

    Arms trade momentum: Globalization and US defense spending drive defense industry growth

    By: Joe Gould 5:00 AM WASHINGTON ― Defense revenues of the top 100 defense companies in the world climbed for a fourth straight year, pushed upward by U.S. defense spending growth combined with strong foreign military sales. Fiscal 2019 defense revenues recorded in Defense News' Top 100 list totaled $524 billion, up about 7 percent from $488 billion in fiscal 2018, according to numbers compiled by Defense News as part of the annual Top 100 list. “The single most striking thing about these data is the year-over-year growth, the median of which is 7 percent,” said Atlantic Council Senior Fellow Steven Grundman. “For an industry generally regarded as mature, revenue growth that runs at two times global GDP is downright sporty.” The defense industry remained top heavy, as the top 10 firms accounted for 50 percent of total defense revenue on this year's list, and the top 25 companies accounted for about 75 percent of the total. Geographically, U.S. firms made up seven of the top 10, and 10 of the top 25. The combined defense revenue of the 41 U.S. firms in the Top 100 list comprised more than half of the total defense revenue. China this year had five firms in the top 15 companies versus six last year. Eight Chinese firms made the Top 100 list this year, with a combined $95 billion in defense revenue for FY19 ― which is $11.7 billion shy of the list's total for Europe and Turkey. The Aviation Industry Corporation of China, which appeared with other Chinese firms for the first time last year, fell from No. 5 to No. 6, though its defense revenue grew by a percentage point over last year. China South Industries Group Corporation fell from No. 11 to No. 18, as its revenue declined 26 percent, from about $12 billion to around $9 billion. China is unquestionably a defense giant in the Asia-Pacific region, dwarfing its nine neighbors (excluding Russia) on the list. Their 2019 defense revenues totaled $21 billion. The combined revenues of the Chinese firms marks the country as the rising superpower it's billed to be in political and strategic circles, said Daniel Gouré, a senior vice president with the Lexington Institute. “For all the discussions we have been having over the last weeks and months about China as a potential threat and challenges, they are building all kinds of blue-water ship classes that mirror the U.S. Navy,” he said. “For a country that was once thought of as a continental or near-shore power, it's amazing the stuff they're building, and its reflected in these companies.” From Europe and Turkey, a NATO ally, there were 35 firms across the list. The combined defense revenue there comprised roughly 20 percent of the Top 100 total. Seven Turkish firms made the list, with FNSS Savunma Sistemleri A.S., and Havelsan A.S. joining the list at No. 98 and No. 99 respectively. For Russia, some past participants declined to provide data this year for unknown reasons. The two that participated made it into the list: Almaz-Antey placed 17th, with $9.2 billion in defense revenue for 2019, and Tactical Missiles Corporation JSC placed 35th, with $3.5 billion in defense revenue. The annual Defense News Top 100 list relies for the most part on self-reporting from companies, many of whom provide estimates rather than definitive data for their defense percentages. That means that while the list is the industry standard, the numbers come with some variance. Heritage firms dominate Lockheed Martin was a lock for No. 1, for the 21st year in a row, with defense revenue that represents nearly 11 percent of the total. Its defense revenue jumped 12 percent between FY18 and FY19, from $51 billion to $57 billion ― with Boeing trailing at No. 2 at $34 billion in defense revenue for FY19. Within the top five, General Dynamics climbed back from No. 6 last year, passing both Raytheon and Northrop Grumman. Northrop fell from No. 3 to No. 4, likely based on a full-year accounting of its acquisition of Orbital ATK in 2017, said analyst Roman Schweizer, managing director of Cowen and Company. GD led Northrop by $912 million in defense revenue, with Raytheon (5th place) trailing Northrop by $1.2 billion in defense revenue. Ten companies increased their defense revenue by $1 billion or more, and Lockheed Martin led the pack with a $6 billion boost. The merger between L3 Technologies (18th place last year) and Harris Corp. (26th place last year) saw a new entry, L3Harris Technologies, take the No. 9 spot, with $13.9 billion in defense revenue ― just ahead of United Technologies Corp., which acquired Rockwell Collins in 2018 and whose merger with Raytheon should be reflected in next year's list. At the same time, the data doesn't support the argument that the defense industry is growing progressively more concentrated, according to Grundman. “The top-quartile of firms account for exactly three-quarters of the revenue both in 2018 and 2019,” he said. “Looking back at the data for 2013, the top quartile took 73 percent of the revenue, but that's not appreciably less than last year.” Still, despite the Pentagon's push to work with nontraditional suppliers, the top of this year's list, and the list overall, is almost like the automotive sector, it's so dominated by familiar names, said Byron Callan, an analyst with Capital Alpha Partners. “The interesting thing is just the relative stability of this,” Callan said. “For all of DoD's emphasis to get new entrants into the sector, and reach out to innovative suppliers, you just don't see it. When you compare it to the technology sector, we're all using things made by companies that weren't even household names 10 years ago. ... Where is the Tesla [of the defense sector]?” It's not out of the question that the list changes over the next five years, if the U.S. Department of Defense and foreign militaries make good on their promises to boost innovation, Callan said. For all the DoD's discussion of the growing role of software, artificial intelligence and machine learning, there's no company known for those things on the list, Gouré observed. Beyond General Dynamics, which completed its acquisition of IT services giant CSRA in 2018, “AI, software, IT aren't there because they're still subcontractors,” Gouré said. “Microsoft and Amazon Web Services, they aren't anywhere on the list.” That's not to say there isn't massive spending on all of the above, but it remains a subcomponent within companies, and therefore not captured on the list, Gouré said. “If we keep saying it's the kill chain, the network matters and the country with the best AI will win, are we not investing enough, are we doing the right thing?” Gouré wondered. “There are more questions than answers.” (Booz Allen Hamilton, No. 26 this year, did win an $800 million Pentagon artificial intelligence contract. But as that occurred in May 2020, it will likely impact future lists.) For now, the large, multiplatform firms dominate and should continue to do so, even if government defense spending declines, Gouré said. “These guys are showing it's good to have a finger in many pies.” Furthermore, the data tend to contradict the conventional wisdom that defense is an industry of mostly large-scale, pure-play firms, according to Grundman. “In fact, the median [defense] revenue of the top 100 is only $2 billion. And on average, only slightly more than half each firm's revenue ... derives from defense sales,” he said. Flat-budget future? The consensus among analysts is that government defense spending will level off amid the coronavirus pandemic, and its effects as well as the result of the upcoming U.S. presidential election in November will be reflected in future lists. “Successful years of investment spending growth appears to be ending, but outlays are still growing due to the surge in spending over the last three years. But they are starting to taper significantly after this year,” Schweizer said. Schweizer sees foreign spending softening, at least in the short term due to COVID-19, but he predicts defense budgets, backlogs, outlays and foreign military sales will hold together for at least 12-18 months to help defense firms weather the unprecedented damage visiting the commercial aerospace sector. The biggest risk is the U.S. budget trajectory, which is likely to be flat, at best, or decline in mid-single digits, at worst, over the next five years, Schweitzer added. He anticipates a drop of 3-5 percent, but with the Pentagon's eye on Russia and China, the department will likely make trade-offs to protect core modernization areas. As global growth rates slow, future lists may see some familiar companies grow leaner. “These companies are going to figure out what their growth businesses are so they can shrink to grow,” Callan said. “They all say they're well positioned [for slower defense spending], but what the hell does that mean? They can't all be right.” Other notable moves included Reston, Virginia-based engineering and construction company Bechtel, which fell to No. 47 from No. 31 last year; the firm's defense revenue declined 39 percent, from $3.7 billion to $2.3 billion. In France, Safran's defense revenue jumped from $1.6 billion in FY18 to $4.4 billion in FY19, bumping it from No. 56 to No. 28. However, the company told Defense News that it attributes the large rise to a difference in calculation for this year's list. Since 2015, the data from Safran were made up of Safran Electronics & Defense activities. This year, the firm changed its approach by adding the military activities of the group's other subsidiaries. Also in France, Dassault nearly doubled its revenue from $2.9 billion in FY18 to $5.7 billion in FY19 ― jumping from No. 38 to No. 22. Japan's Mitsubishi Heavy Industries vaulted back onto the list to No. 21, with $6.6 billion in defense revenue. However, it's worth noting that defense revenue numbers reflect awards made by the Japanese Ministry of Defense, which leads to more year-over-year volatility among Japanese firms. The three Israeli companies on this year's list — Elbit Systems, Israel Aerospace Industries and Rafael Advanced Defense Systems — moved up in the ranking. The sole South American company on the lsit, Embraer, also moved up, from No. 84 to No. 79. Meanwhile, the only non-U.S. North American company on this year's list — Canada's CAE — dropped four spots to No. 74, but its defense revenue grew by a percentage point. https://www.defensenews.com/top-100/2020/08/17/arms-trade-momentum-globalization-and-us-defense-spending-drive-defense-industry-growth

  • La cellule de soutien aux industries de défense toujours active

    September 9, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

    La cellule de soutien aux industries de défense toujours active

    Mise en place dès mars dernier, la cellule de soutien de la DGA (Direction générale de l'armement) à la base industrielle et technologique de défense (BITD) lancée à l'initiative du ministère des Armées est toujours mobilisée pour les entreprises qui en ont besoin, rappelle Air & Cosmos. Cette « task force » a déjà réussi à trouver des solutions pour 47 entreprises dont l'activité est stratégique ou critique pour la BITD française. Cela représente pratiquement la moitié « des 92 chantiers ouverts » et d'autres s'annoncent pour l'automne. « Une vague va arriver avec l'automne mais nous ne connaissons pas son ampleur. Certaines sociétés ne le savent peut être pas elles-mêmes et toute la difficulté sera de détecter les problèmes et d'utiliser au mieux les moyens dont nous disposons et dans des délais très contraints », indique l'ingénieur général Vincent Imbert qui dirige cette cellule. Air & Cosmos du 9 septembre 2020

All news