Contract Awards by US Department of Defense - December 26, 2018

On the same subject

• 

  October 9, 2020 | International, Aerospace, C4ISR

  Collins Aerospace adds navigation receivers to its expansive content on Boeing T-7A Red Hawk

  Oct 9, 2020 SOURCE: Collins Aerospace Systems Cedar Rapids, Iowa, October 8, 2020 – Collins Aerospace Systems, a unit of Raytheon Technologies Corp. (NYSE: RTX), has been selected by Boeing to provide its proven NAV-4500 navigation receivers for the T-7A Red Hawk, the U.S. Air Force's (USAF) new advanced pilot training system in development by both Boeing and Saab. This award builds on previously announced Collins Aerospace positions on the T-7A, including its ACES 5® ejection seat; the platform‘s fully integrated landing gear system; various Power & Controls components, including the aircraft's Power Take Off (PTO) shaft, Auxiliary Power Engine Control Unit (APECU), engine start system and Main Electric Power Generation System (MEPGS); as well as air data, ice detection and total air temperature sensors. By selecting the NAV-4500, Boeing brings Collins Aerospace's commercial technology proven over multiple generations of aircraft to its T-7A program. These navigation receivers package the VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR) and Instrument Landing System (ILS) radio signals, glideslope and marker beacon into a single, space-saving product designed for simple and flexible installation via a remote mount. “The NAV-4500 will provide the T-7A with proven technology in the military operating environment, while offering industry-leading size, weight and power resulting from the system's commercial baseline,” said Dave Schreck, vice president and general manager of Military Avionics and Helicopters at Collins Aerospace. “We are proud to bring a number of solutions from across Collins Aerospace to support both Boeing and the USAF on their next-generation advanced pilot training system.” About Collins Aerospace Collins Aerospace Systems is a leader in technologically advanced and intelligent solutions for the global aerospace and defense industry. Collins Aerospace has the capabilities, comprehensive portfolio and expertise to solve customers' toughest challenges and to meet the demands of a rapidly evolving global market. With 2019 net sales of approximately $26 billion, the business has 78,000 employees across more than 300 locations globally. It is one of the four businesses that form Raytheon Technologies. For more information, visit www.CollinsAerospace.com About Raytheon Technologies Raytheon Technologies Corporation is an aerospace and defense company that provides advanced systems and services for commercial, military and government customers worldwide. With 195,000 employees and four industry-leading businesses ― Collins Aerospace Systems, Pratt & Whitney, Raytheon Intelligence & Space and Raytheon Missiles & Defense ― the company delivers solutions that push the boundaries in avionics, cybersecurity, directed energy, electric propulsion, hypersonics, and quantum physics. The company, formed in 2020 through the combination of Raytheon Company and the United Technologies Corporation aerospace businesses, is headquartered in Waltham, Massachusetts. View source version on Collins Aerospace Systems: https://www.collinsaerospace.com/newsroom/News/2020/10/Collins-adds-navigation-receivers-Boeing-T-7A-Red-Hawk

• 

  August 13, 2020 | International, Naval

  Shipyards Not At Risk, Despite DoD Warning It Needs $$ To Save Them

  A DoD paper for Congress suggests COVID could shut down shipyards, but Navy officials and analysts say there is little risk. By PAUL MCLEARYon August 12, 2020 at 4:04 PM WASHINGTON: A top Navy official today tried to clarify a Pentagon information paper leaked last week which warned that “at least one” of the seven shipyards that churns out ships for the Navy could close unless Congress handed over billions more to the service. As part of an $11 billion package the Pentagon is requesting from Congress to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on the defense industry, the Navy is requesting $4.7 billion in part to ward off the chances “at least one” of the big seven shipyards shutting down. The paper, which has been delivered to lawmakers on Capitol Hill, also warned of over 100,000 lost jobs across shipyards and factories that make aircraft and other weapons for the military. But the Navy's top acquisition executive told reporters today that the wording continued in the paper might leave too much out. “The words could be taken out of context,” James Geurts said. “There probably should be the word ‘temporarily' in there.” If a shipyard started to see a significant portion of its workforce test positive for COVID, “we might have to temporarily close down the shipyard for a period of time until we got it under control. Not that we would have to shut down a shipyard permanently.” The memo contains no such caveats, however. It flatly states a shipyard could close unless the Navy gets the funding boost. Asked where the paper came from, and who it was intended for, DoD spokesman Christopher Sherwood told me via email the department “provided informational material to our oversight committees when asked about the impacts COVID-19 has had on the Defense Industrial Base and our suppliers.” The Navy has gone to great lengths to help its shipyards weather the COVID storm, pumping $130 billion into its supplier base this year in upfront payments, spending that is 25% higher than at this point last year. But some yards have experienced pain keeping to schedule, with uncertain futures ahead as the Navy looks to change its fleet mix in the coming years to better compete with China and Russia. Mark Cancian, a defense expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, acknowledged that all Navy shipyards “have a backlog of work, including Bath Iron Works, which was the subject of speculation about closing.” Bath, already six months behind on building seven destroyers in dock, is stumbling to the conclusion of a six-week strike by 4,300 shipbuilders which will likely make those delays even longer. Likewise, the Mississippi-based Austal is looking at the end of the road for its contract to build dozens of aluminum Littoral Combat Ships in a few years, which would likely mark the end of the Navy's interest in buying aluminum hulls. That shipyard “would be at more risk” Cancian said. Neither shipyard is any worse off than the others due to COVID-related shutdowns, however, making the Pentagon's point that yards could shut and require COVID relief funds to keep going, an argument that finds few adherents. There's little doubt COVID is slowing down both ship construction and repair, “but that doesn't mean the Navy doesn't need the ships anymore,” said Bryan Clark of the Hudson Institute. “It just means everything takes longer, but it doesn't necessarily mean that the shipyards are going to close.” Clark noted that while Bath is in a bad spot with delays to its destroyer work that will be compounded by the strike, the Navy still needs it to build destroyers in the future, since relying on Huntington Ingalls as the nation's only shipyard that can build the ships is too risky. Add to that the likelihood that the Navy will move toward buying more numerous small cruisers, unmanned ships, and smaller platforms for Marines and away from small numbers of large destroyers and amphibious ships in the future, means there will be more contracts, and work to go around later this decade. The service is still on track to deliver its much-delayed 30 year shipbuilding plan and force structure assessment this fall, in which several options like a new class of destroyers, a new class of smaller frigates, and smaller hospital ships will all likely find their way into the plans. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/08/shipyards-not-at-risk-despite-dod-warning-it-needs-money-to-save-them/

• 

  February 3, 2021 | International, Naval

  How Kathleen Hicks will approach nukes, shipbuilding and the budget

  By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — Following a smooth confirmation hearing, it appears Kathleen Hicks is headed to the Pentagon. As had been expected, Hicks, the nominee to be deputy secretary of defense for Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, received little in the way of pushback from senators. A significant number of them — including outgoing Senate Armed Service Committee Chairman Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., and his successor, Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I. — indicated they would support her nomination out of the committee. The hearing, which lasted more than three hours, gave insight into how Hicks would approach a number of key issues for the Defense Department if she arrives in office. Hicks is open to changing budget traditions to drive joint activity. It is commonly accepted in defense circles that the Pentagon's budget will be flat at best, if not declining, in the coming years. That led to a number of questions from senators about how to drive reforms and find savings for the department. Hicks said the incentive structure must change, particularly for general officer- and senior civilian-level hires, in order to focus on joint impacts. A service that has “given up the capacity or the capability often believes that they will lose out overall, and the incentive structure is built around budget share. We should make clear always from a leadership perspective that the incentive is about serving the joint war fighter,” she said. “So the incentives start around promotion, but they also include how we keep the money, if you will, oriented towards services who are putting forward good ideas, even if those good ideas seem to go against a vested interest.” Hicks later committed to looking at “pass through” funding included in the Air Force budget each year. That money, which can account for as much as 20 percent of the service's budget request, goes to other government organizations and has for years been a thorn in the side of Air Force advocates, who argue it leads to the service having a smaller budget than the Army and Navy. The Navy's shipbuilding plan may get changed. The Trump administration delivered a long-awaited shipbuilding plan to Congress toward the end of 2020, one that was met with a skeptical eye from outside analysts who questioned some of the baked-in assumptions. Hicks, it seems, falls into that camp, although she said the broad structure is likely correct. “There's some really interesting operational themes that I'm attracted to: There's a focus on increasing use of autonomy, there's a focus on dispersal of forces and there's a focus on growing the number of small surface combatants relative to today,” Hicks said. “But there are some things in that unclassified report, as I mentioned to you, that I saw as flags. There's an indication that the information in there would require further analysis to validate the numbers.” Hicks said she would hope to work quickly once Navy leadership is in place on developing the Biden administration's plan. Focusing just on allied defense spending misses the point. President Donald Trump often focused his personal ire on allied nations who were not spending as much on defense as he would like. While NATO, with its pledge for countries to spend 2 percent of their respective gross domestic product on defense, was an early and common target, Japan and South Korea also drew his ire over the last four years. Hicks said she watched that with “concern,” noting that the focus purely on spending would impact how other nations work with the U.S. She believes the Biden administration will work to smooth over tensions around burden-sharing. “We should always be focused on burden-sharing, ensuring that allies fulfill their commitments. But when it becomes that tactical issue that overrides the strategic value of the alliances, alliances that the Chinese and Russians could only hope to match ... if we get to that point, we have become astrategic,” Hicks said. “We need to make sure that we're taking a strategic approach to what commitment means,” she added. “I think we need to make sure that allies are as into the security relationship as we are. Sometimes it's through spending. Sometimes it's through defense spending. And sometimes that commitment is expressed in other ways, and I think we should be strategic about how we consider those commitments.” Because of Austin's recusals, she'll be the point person on any Raytheon projects. Prior to assuming office, Austin served on the board of defense giant Raytheon Technologies. During his confirmation process, he pledged to recuse himself, if at all possible, from any decisions related to Raytheon while serving as defense secretary. That means Hicks will be the highest-ranking voice on programmatic decisions regarding two key nuclear capabilities: the replacement program for America's intercontinental ballistic missiles known as the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent, or GBSD; and the Long Range Standoff Weapon, or LRSO, a nuclear cruise missile. In her written answers to members, Hicks noted she would likely end up running programmatic decisions on those systems as well as “other timely missile defense issues.” Hicks backs nuclear modernization, but won't comment on specific projects. Like Austin did during his confirmation hearing, Hicks was unequivocal in her support for broad nuclear modernization. But just like Austin, she stopped short of pledging specifically to uphold the entirety of the current nuclear modernization strategy, notable at a time when both the LRSO and GBSD programs find themselves as targets from the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, as well as from the nonproliferation community. She deferred on technical questions about GBSD and its timeline, noting she doesn't currently have access to that data. “My view is that the triad has served us very well, it has created stability and it has value,” Hicks said. However, she stressed that major decisions on nuclear policy, including about a potential “no first use” declaration, would come from above her. “I think our decisions on nuclear weapons should be driven foremost by strategy,” not money, she added. Hicks said it is her “understanding” that a Nuclear Posture Review will be conducted by the Pentagon; the assumption among experts is that the NPR under a Biden administration will come to some different conclusions than that of the Trump administration, whose document called for the creation of two new low-yield nuclear warheads. The transition fight will impact the fiscal 2022 budget. Before being announced as the deputy defense secretary nominee, Hicks was the leader on President Joe Biden's Pentagon landing team. While transitions between administrations are usually smooth, the unprecedented situation of Trump's refusal to accept his election loss bled over into the transition effort at the Department of Defense. By mid-December, officials on the Biden team were publicly complaining about political appointees at teh DoD blocking their access. Pentagon officials canceled a number of planned meetings but insisted there was no issue. Asked during Tuesday's hearing about the impact those delays may have going forward, Hicks stressed the issue was “really around a handful of folks who made things difficult,” but said there would be a hangover effect for the FY22 budget. “I think the biggest challenge that I will face, if confirmed, because of this is around budget transparency,” she said, indicating that the transition team was unable to look at what the Trump administration was doing with the FY22 budget request until late in January. “Typically that information is shared with the transition team because the administration will owe to Congress a president's budget submission in the spring. So the inability to look at that information ... I think it will cause some delay in the timeline by which we can give budget quality information back to Congress. So that would be the area [where] I would ask for a little relief or understanding.” https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2021/02/02/how-kathleen-hicks-will-approach-nukes-shipbuilding-and-the-budget/