Contract Awards by US Department of Defense - April 21, 2020

On the same subject

• 

  September 18, 2019 | International, Aerospace

  Should the Air Force spend even more on missile warning satellites?

  By: Nathan Strout Senate appropriators have a message for the Air Force: Make early warning missile satellites a priority. The Senate Appropriations Committee expressed concern over the Air Force's plan for funding the Next Generation Overhead Persistent Infrared system in a report on their annual defense spending bill. While the Pentagon requested $1.4 billion for the program in fiscal year 2020, the Senate spending committee noted that the request was $630 million short of what the program needs. With such a gap, senators questioned whether OPIR was a priority for the Air Force. OPIR is the next-generation early warning missile defense satellite system that will ultimately replace the Space Based Infrared System. The Pentagon has contracts with Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman to build three satellites in geosynchronous orbit and two covering the polar regions, respectively. In order to close the funding gap, the Air Force has made a number of reprogramming requests. But according to Senate appropriators, that's not a responsible path forward. “If the program is to have any chance of success, the department cannot continue to rely on reprogramming requests for its funding,” the committee's report read. Instead, the Senate Appropriations Committee approved a far larger budget of $1.9 billion for OPIR. While that is still less than the program need, it represents an increase of $535.5 million. Those funds are in addition to reprogramming requests that could meet the more than $2 billion program need. Lockheed Martin representatives told reporters at the annual Air Force Association conference Sept. 17 that the requested increase in fiscal year 2020 funding doesn't represent a growth in costs for the program, but is the result of the rapid acquisition approach to the OPIR program. “This shouldn't be perceived as cost growth,”said Kay Sears, Lockheed Martin's vice president and general manager for military space. “But it is an accelerated schedule, so it comes with an accelerated budget.” “Next Gen is an absolutely critical capability. We've been asked to deliver that capability in a ‘go fast' environment by 2025 and we are planning to do that. That comes with a funding profile that is a little bit different than a traditional defense program,” she added. Part of that go fast approach, which Sears says results in higher up front costs, includes a payload competition between a Northrop Grumman/Ball team and a Raytheon team. “There's a lot of spending that can happen at all of those companies at the same time,” explained Sears. “That is what is driving the funding profile ― it's the payload development and the fact that (...) we have two payload developers and two capabilities that we're going to have to choose from in that critical mission area.” Senate appropriators noted in their report that OPIR is breaking ground for how to provide rapid prototypes for programs in the future and needs to be fully funded as an example. “The Committee believes the program will be an exemplar for rapid acquisition of space programs, whether the program succeeds or fails,” read the report. “Failure will have implications for Congress's willingness to fund future programs using the National Defense Authorization Act section 804 rapid prototyping and fielding authorities for similarly large, or even middle tier programs, for years to come.” OPIR has been a point of contention between the House and Senate as they work through the two annual defense bills. Earlier in the summer the House balked at the massive increase in what the Pentagon wanted for OPIR in fiscal year 2020. While the $1.4 billion Pentagon request is $630 million below what the program needs, it's $459 million above what the Pentagon projected it would need for the program in fiscal year 2020 in the previous years' budget. The House Armed Services Committee ultimately authorized just $1 billion for the program in their National Defense Authorization Act citing unexplained growth, prompting a letter from the White House arguing that a failure to fund the Pentagon's full budget request now would lead to delays and higher costs over time. https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/space/2019/09/17/should-the-air-force-spend-even-more-missile-warning-satellites/

• 

  January 20, 2021 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  Turkey reports nearly 15% drop in defense exports

  By: Burak Ege Bekdil ANKARA, Turkey — Turkey's defense and aerospace exports stood at $2.3 billion in 2020, marking a 14.8 percent decline in comparison to 2019, official figures have revealed. The Turkish Exporters' Assembly, or TIM in its Turkish acronym, said disruption in production, supply and logistics processes due to restrictions imposed over the coronavirus pandemic caused the fall in exports. In 2020, the defense and aerospace industry accounted for 1.3 percent of Turkey's overall exports. TIM said the top market for Turkish manufacturers in 2020 was the United States, with $784.2 million in sales, or 4 percent less than in 2019. Turkey's staunch political ally in the Caucasus, Azerbaijan, was the second-largest export market, with sales reaching $260.8 million, marking a 194 percent rise from the previous year. Another major market was the United Arab Emirates, a Gulf rival to Turkey in foreign policy. Turkish exports to the UAE were at $200.2 million, up 51 percent from 2019. Locally produced systems meet 70 percent of Turkey's military's requirements, compared to 35 percent in 2002. In that same period, the number of defense procurement programs rose from 66 to more than 700, or from $5.5 billion to $70 billion in contract value. Similarly, defense and aerospace industry turnover went up from less than $1 billion to more than $9 billion, and exports from $248 million to $2.7 billion. In 2020, there were seven Turkish companies on Defense News' list of the top 100 defense companies around the world. The government has declared its defense and aerospace industry exports target as $10.2 billion by 2023. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2021/01/19/turkey-reports-nearly-15-drop-in-defense-exports/

• 

  April 22, 2020 | International, Aerospace

  Daily Memo: Powering Down

  Guy Norris As the airframers go, so goes the aircraft engine industry. After spending most of the past decade accelerating production to keep pace with unprecedented airliner delivery rates the engine makers have spent the past month in reverse thrust. But as production lines slow, and in some cases come to a full stop, the grim guessing game about the industry's post-COVID-19 pandemic future can begin. For every engine company, anchored midway between their own supply chains and Airbus, Boeing and Embraer in particular, all scenarios paint a bleak picture and the potential impact of the virus-triggered crisis is alarming on at least three key levels. Near term, all must weather the storm and rapidly shrink capacity by 40% or even more to match the new realities of the slower airframe production rates now expected for the next couple of years. Second, having long since focused the core of their business models on the aftermarket, they must adjust to significantly lower revenues from a near term reduction in demand for maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) services. Third, with nearly all their resources dedicated to survival, reduced revenues and spending trimmed, development of new engines and propulsion technology is expected to slow significantly—at least in the near term. However, all the manufacturers know that in the mid-to-longer term the environmental pressures on performance will return and so will the relentless demand for lower emissions and greater innovation. Already committed programs will therefore continue, albeit potentially stretched over longer test and development schedules. From a volume perspective, GE Aviation and Safran's CFM joint venture is expected to see the greatest change. Having delivered 1,736 LEAP-1s and 391 CFM56-5/7s in 2019, output from the combined French and U.S. operations will decline significantly in 2020 in lockstep with urgent reductions in production at Airbus and Boeing. CFM, which was previously on track towards a planned annual production rate of more than 2,000 LEAP-1s by the end of 2020, cannot comment on numbers while its parent companies remain in a dark period prior to earnings calls at the end of April, but is expected to slash this target by around half. GE Aviation, which was already expecting a leaner 2020 before the COVID-19 pandemic because of delays to the GE9X-powered Boeing 777-9 and slow-downs to the GE90-115/GEnx-1 powered 777-200LR/300ER and 787 programs, is eyeing the even more troubling impact of the crisis on its aftermarket business. Although around a quarter of GE Aviation's revenues come from its military and other businesses, just 30% comes from commercial engine sales. A much larger portion of its revenue—approximately 45%—comes from MRO services. While some programs, like the CFM56 for the P-8 maritime patrol aircraft as well as military fighter engine efforts, will continue much as before, the company has already taken drastic action to stem losses by furloughing half of its engine manufacturing workers for four weeks. This move, taken in early April, followed an announcement in late March that it was reducing its workforce by 10% (around 2,500 employees), in direct response to the collapse of its MRO workload which the company estimates will be down by around 50% through mid-year at least. However, given the exodus of around two-thirds of the world's airline fleets into storage (almost 17,000 aircraft), the short to medium outlook for engine MRO would be described as dire at best. Compounding the issue for many of the OEMs is that the higher value aftermarket engines powering the widebody fleet, particularly the older generation Airbus and Boeing models, now look increasingly unlikely to ever return to service—at least in their existing guise. For Rolls-Royce, this problem is particularly acute as the UK engine maker focused increasingly on the widebody market over the past decade, widening its exposure to reliance on the support revenue from aftermarket work on older fleets of 747 and 777s as well as older A330s. With full-time premature retirement a possibility, including the previously unthinkable sunsetting of relatively young Trent 900-powered A380s as well as the rapid decline of the RB211-535 powered 757 and Trent 500-powered A340-600 fleets, the company can no longer bank on the expected rebound in deferred maintenance coming out of the crisis. Rolls has also rushed to mitigate losses by enacting measures aimed at saving at least £750 million ($937 million) in cash this year. These include a 10% salary cut for the global workforce and canceling dividend payments. Further moves are expected as the company adjusts to rate reductions announced by Airbus involving the Trent-powered A330no and A350-900/1000, as well as yet-to-be announced rate cuts for the Trent 1000-powered 787 which will shortly be revealed in detail by Boeing. Pratt & Whitney, now part of Raytheon Technologies, is similarly impacted across the board with production of the PW1000G geared turbofan reduced for the A220/A320neo families and commercial revenues hit by falling aftermarket revenues for the PW2000/PW4000 and V2500. Measures such as 10% pay cuts through year-end, as well as furloughs, are being introduced while research and development spending is being frozen. Deliveries of military engines, in particular the F135 for the F-35 fighter and PW4000 for the KC-45A tanker remain unaffected. The early retirements of the PW4000, as well as some CF6-powered fleets, is also significantly impacting revenues for German engine maker MTU. https://aviationweek.com/air-transport/aircraft-propulsion/daily-memo-powering-down