Back to news

July 5, 2019 | International, Other Defence

Building on a successful fifteen-year relationship, Her Majesty’s Armed Forces awards a new framework contract with Rheinmetall in the field of infantry ammunition

On 6 June 2019, Rheinmetall AG and Defence Equipment and Support, the UK's defence procurement agency, signed a new framework agreement to enable the repeat procurement of infantry ammunition. The framework agreement will represent the default source of supply for specific impact rounds, ammunitions and grenades in the next 5-7 years and has an estimated throughput of up to €100 million (£90m).

Rheinmetall continues to expand its role as a major supplier of ammunition. Only a few days ago, the Dutch armed forces also renewed a partnership agreement for the supply of ammunition with the Düsseldorf-based specialist for security and mobility technology, which runs through to the end of 2030.

The contract, which has now been renewed with the British procurement authorities, establishes Rheinmetall as the preferred supplier of 25 infantry ammunition products produced by four manufacturing locations in Germany and Switzerland. Simon Valencia, Sales Director Rheinmetall Weapon and Munitions UK commented “we are delighted to be able to renew our long standing supply agreement with the UK MoD and provide the British Armed Forces with high quality, reliable, products that have been proven both operationally and in training for the last fifteen years. This new contract provides the UK MoD with value for money and continued confidence in re-supply of assured munitions products. The UK MoD is a key strategic partner for Rheinmetall and this new contract supports Rheinmetall's continued growth into the UK Defence Market”.

Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) is currently is the process of negotiating a portfolio of framework agreements with defence suppliers to enable repeat procurement of in-service munitions. The contract with Rheinmetall Defence is the first contract DE&S has agreed with the munitions industry on framework terms and marks a positive step change in the way UK MoD engages with industry.

https://www.rheinmetall-defence.com/en/rheinmetall_defence/public_relations/news/latest_news/index_20864.php

On the same subject

  • Navy Exploring Options for Multi-Engine Training Aircraft to Replace T-44

    May 29, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval

    Navy Exploring Options for Multi-Engine Training Aircraft to Replace T-44

    Posted on May 28, 2020 by Richard R. Burgess, Senior Editor ARLINTON, Va. — Naval Air Systems Command is looking at options for an aircraft to replace the T-44C Pegasus multi-engine training aircraft, but the ultimate choice may not be “new.” The Navy is exploring options for adapting an existing aircraft design to the service's Multi-Engine Training System (METS). According to a draft request for information (RFI) posted May 26, the Navy is looking at existing twin-engine aircraft to replace the service's fleet of 54 T-44Cs used to train Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard pilots to fly aircraft such as the V-22 Osprey, E-2C/D Hawkeye, P-8 Poseidon, P-3 and EP-3 Orion, C-130/KC-130/HC-130 Hercules, E-6 Mercury, C-40 Clipper, HC-27 Spartan and HC-144 Ocean Sentry. The T-44A, a variant of the Beech King Air 90 business aircraft, first entered service in 1980. The existing T-44As all have been modified to the T-44C configuration. The Navy said the METS should have an FAA type certification for single- and dual-pilot operations under day and night visual flight rules and under instrument flight rules. It shall cruise at speeds greater or equal to 195 knots and shall be able to operate at a minimum of 20,000 feet above sea level. The aircraft also should have an endurance of 3.5 or more flight hours. The pressurized aircraft cockpit will have side-by-side seating, as well as a jump seat for an instruct. The cockpit will be equipped with multifunction displays with digital moving map; redundant VHF and UHF radios; an integrated GPS/inertial navigation system; Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast; flight management system; weather radar, radar altimeter, and a cockpit data recorder. The METS aircraft also shall have tricycle landing gear and a reconfigurable cargo bay in the cabin. https://seapowermagazine.org/navy-exploring-options-for-multi-engine-training-aircraft-to-replace-t-44/

  • Coulson Aviation Fireliner wins USDA Forest Service contract

    April 3, 2020 | International, Security

    Coulson Aviation Fireliner wins USDA Forest Service contract

    Coulson Aviation U.S.A. has been awarded a multi-year contract with the USDA Forest Service for next generation large air tanker services throughout the United States. The contract beginning in 2020 will see the first Boeing 737, Tanker 137 in operation. Coulson Aviation is the first in the world to modify Boeing 737s into Fireliners which utilize a new advanced delivery system specifically designed for this application, the RADS-XXL/2. To convert a 737 into a Fireliner takes over 43,000-man hours and includes the RADS-XXL/2 installation, avionics upgrades, full strip and re-paint, new interior, and 72 refurbished passenger seats. Once complete, the Fireliner is differentiated from all other next generation large airtankers by its ability to transport firefighters without re-configuration and to fly at maximum speeds and altitudes with a load of retardant and no restrictions. “This firefighting repurposed Boeing 737 was designed, manufactured and had the installation of the tanking system done in house which is a testament to the creativity of our teams led by Britt Coulson,” said Wayne Coulson, CEO of Coulson Group. “I could not be prouder of our company based on all the dedication, hard work and commitment of teams to design, manufacture, build, operate and maintain this superior air tanker. Both our Lockheed C-130s and Boeing 737 Fireliners played keys roles in saving homes and lives in Australia this past devastating fire season which we are all proud of.” “The Fireliner is truly the next generation of next generation large airtankers,” said Britt Coulson, president and COO of Coulson Aviation. “The Fireliners are a perfect complement to our C-130s and having a diverse fleet assures our customers always have the right airtanker for the mission.” Coulson Aviation has over 36 years of experience in aerial fire suppression and the Coulson RADS Firefighting Systems were designed to make firefighting easier, safer and more effective than other systems. We are excited to continue supporting the USDA Forest Service with this essential service during the U.S. fire season. https://www.skiesmag.com/press-releases/coulson-aviation-earns-usda-forest-service-contract/

  • Is the Air Force’s Advanced Battle Management System program gearing up to be the next major acquisition failure?

    April 21, 2020 | International, Aerospace

    Is the Air Force’s Advanced Battle Management System program gearing up to be the next major acquisition failure?

    Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — Since Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Dave Goldfein took over as the service's top general in 2016, the Air Force has made figuring out how to connect its weapons with those of the Army, Navy and Marine Corps its biggest priority. The Air Force is set to have spent $300 million on the Advanced Battle Management System through fiscal year 2021. However, the service is still struggling to define what ABMS needs to do and how much it will cost, the Government Accountability Office said in a report released April 16. "The Air Force has not established a plan or business case for ABMS that identifies its requirements, a plan to attain mature technologies when needed, a cost estimate, and an affordability analysis. ... To date, the Air Force has not identified a development schedule for ABMS, and it has not formally documented requirements,” it read. That could have significant consequences for the program down the road, GAO continued: “GAO's previous work has shown that weapon systems without a sound business case are at greater risk for schedule delays, cost growth, and integration issues.” The GAO made four recommendations: create a cost estimate and a plan laying out how to afford the program, formalize the decision-making authorities of those involved in ABMS, and develop a list of technologies that are expected to fit into the initial system. In a response to the report, Kevin Fahey, the assistant secretary of defense for acquisition, concurred with all four recommendations — a sign that, going forward, the Air Force may be required to solidify more of its ABMS plans. The Air Force has maintained that the program's unconventional structure and methodology is a feature, not a bug. It wants to use a series of experiments to help discover and mature new technologies that can be weaved in alongside legacy platforms. For instance, the first ABMS experiment connected SpaceX's Starlink constellation with an AC-130 gunship, and the next demo will employ a Kratos Valkyrie drone carrying communications gear that enables the F-22 and F-35 to securely share data while allowing them to maintain stealth. Air Force officials have said technologies that are proven to be successful and mature during the experiments could become programs of record inside the ABMS family of systems. However, the Air Force does not seem to have a firm plan for what technologies it needs and when to bring them online, the GAO said. The service has identified 28 development areas that includes a new cloud network, a new common radio, and apps that provide different ways of presenting and fusing data. However, none of those areas are linked to specific technical requirements, and the Air Force hasn't explained what organizations are responsible for the development of those products. In one damning section, GAO compared ABMS with several cancelled programs with similar aims, such as the Army's Future Combat Systems program that sought to field a family of manned and unmanned technologies and the Joint Tactical Radio System, which was intended to create a government-owned software defined radio. These programs publicly flamed out after millions of dollars were spent in development, in part because certain technologies were not mature enough and caused the schedule to unravel. The scope of ABMS will be far larger than those previous programs, the Pentagon's Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation told the GAO. But because the Air Force has not provided a detailed acquisition strategy, CAPE does not have confidence that the Air Force will be able succeed where those programs have failed. “Given the criticality of the battle management command and control mission and the planned retirement of legacy programs, the lack of an ABMS business case introduces uncertainty regarding whether the needed capabilities will be developed within required time frames,” the GAO said. Figuring out who has responsibility and decision-making authority for ABMS is also a messy proposition, the GAO said. The ABMS effort is led by a chief architect, Preston Dunlap, who is responsible for managing tradeoffs among the portfolio of technologies and guide experimentation efforts. However, existing programs that will be part of the ABMS family will retain their separate program office with their own independent management, and the Air Force has yet to clarify whether Dunlap will be able to redirect those program's funding to fall in line with ABMS objectives. For example, the Air Force's program office for space is currently working on a data integration project that could correspond with ABMS efforts to field a cloud network. But “although some ABMS funds have been obligated for this project, there is no documentation to support that the Chief Architect will be able to direct the PEO to change the project objectives or timeline to align with ABMS requirements once they are defined,” the GAO said. The role of the Air Force Warfighting Integration Capability or AFWIC, which was established in 2017 to help define how the service will fight wars in the future, is also unclear. An AFWIC senior official told the GAO that the organization began leading the service's multidomain command and control initiatives in 2019, but it is uncertain whether AFWIC also has the power to change the direction of the ABMS program. https://www.c4isrnet.com/c2-comms/2020/04/20/is-the-air-forces-advanced-battle-management-system-program-gearing-up-to-be-the-next-major-acquisition-failure/

All news