Helo drone maker unveils new electric aircraft for maritime, covert missions

On the same subject

• 

  April 2, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  Pentagon turns to new buying tools 10 times more often

  By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — The amount of funding for defense research awarded through other transaction authorities have increased nearly tenfold in five years, according to a new analysis seen exclusively by Defense News. The report, by data and analytics firm Govini, shows the use of OTAs and small business innovation research contracts has expanded to the point that, in 2019, the two methods accounted for $9.6 billion, or 10 percent of the Defense Department's research, development, test and evaluation spending. OTAs are small contracts awarded to companies of any size, in theory targeted at nontraditional defense contractors, with the purpose of conducting research or prototype efforts on a specific project; they are not subject to Federal Acquisition Regulation rules. SBIR contracts are targeted at small businesses in order to act as seed money for them to conduct research and development efforts; they are subject to the FAR rules. Overall, $34.5 billion have been handed out in the last five years through the two contracting methods, to 6,503 unique vendors. However, more than half the OTA dollars are going to only three consortia. The two contracting methods may be about to jump in importance for the department, in light of the new coronavirus outbreak. Navy acquisition head Hondo Geurts, in a March 24 memo, ordered his workforce to do what they can to keep small companies assigned to naval research programs on track, including specifically calling out the need to protect SBIR efforts. Govini tracked the use of OTA and SBIR contracts over a five-year period, from fiscal 2015 through fiscal 2019. “The Defense Department's surging use of OTAs reflects its strong desire to break free from the stringent acquisition process, better access innovative technologies, and lure new companies to the defense ecosystem who otherwise may not see the federal government as a viable or lucrative potential market,” said Tara Murphy Dougherty, Govini CEO. “Fundamentally, the Department is driven by the imperative to outpace China's military modernization in order to retain a military advantage, and they understand that leveraging emerging technologies and the very best technology available in American industry — not just the Defense Industrial Base — are critical to achieving that goal,” she added. OTA dominance The numbers tell a particularly stark story of how the department is increasing its use of OTA contracts. From 2015-2017, the government awarded $12.5 billion in SBIR contracts, versus $4.9 billion in OTA contracts. But from 2018-2019, the government awarded $5.7 billion in SBIR contracts, while it handed out $11.4 billion in OTA deals — an increase large enough to nearly draw even over the five-year period. That increase in OTA funding also ties into the mission laid out by the National Defense Strategy, which encourages a focus on great power competition with China and Russia. According to Govini, the two biggest OTA investments of RDT&E dollars during this time period were $5 billion for munitions and long-range fires, and $3 billion for space systems. While the dollar totals are becoming closer, overall SBIR recipients continue to dwarf OTAs — 6,213 to 290 during the five-year period. In the number of OTA awards per service, the Army leads the way. (Govini) The Army leads the way with use of the two contract methods ($14.1 billion) during this period, followed by the Air Force ($10.4 billion), defensewide agencies ($6 billion) and the Navy ($4 billion). The two contract types also split their dollars in divergent ways. The top SBIR vendor, Colsa Corporation, received 4 percent of total SBIR awards, and the top ten (which includes Colsa) received less than 20 percent of the overall total. In comparison, the top three OTA vendors are consortia managers that make up more than half of total OTA contracts. Those three are Analytic Services Inc. ($5.429 billion), Advanced Technology International ($1.616 billion) and Consortium Management Group Inc. ($1.238 billion). Traditional defense corporations are taking advantage of OTAs as well. The fourth highest recipient of OTA money is United Launch Alliance, co-owned by Lockheed Martin and Boeing; the sixth highest recipient is Lockheed; the eight highest is Northrop Grumman; and the 10th highest is Boeing. Given that OTAs were designed to reach out to nontraditional defense firms, “it's surprising how many traditional defense contractors benefit from OTA arrangements,” Murphy Dougherty said. “Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Boeing were all top OTA vendors over the past five years. This is a good example of how accessing the data can help the Department measure its success in terms of achieving intended outcomes through actions like increased OTA use.” Earlier this month, Ellen Lord, the Defense Department's top acquisition official, was asked at a McAleese & Associates conference about data that shows prime contractors taking advantage of OTA contracts. Lord indicated her office needed to gather more data on the issue before taking a look. “The whole premise of OTAs was to get the nontraditional [vendors] and the smalls there,” Lord responded. “I find it hard to imagine a situation where large primes would predominately use OTAs, but I don't know what I don't know. That wasn't the objective. “Oversight is one of our responsibilities in A&S [the office of acquisition and sustainment] that I take very seriously, so we need to make sure that we don't have unintended results from some of the polices that we implement. We're always trying to improve that.” https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2020/04/01/pentagon-turns-to-new-buying-tools-10-times-more-often/

• 

  October 11, 2018 | International, Land

  Industry, nations hope to cash in on unmanned ground vehicle growth

  By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — With the presence of drones ubiquitous in the skies, industry and international partners are turning their eyes closer to earth in an attempt to cash in on a growing sector: unmanned ground vehicles. “UGV market growth has historically been slow and steady, mostly S&T and niche procurements. What we're seeing now is an inflection point,” said Joshua Pavluk, a principal with Avascent. “There's a lot of activity happening and several DoD new starts happening nearly all at once.” That inflection point is partly the result of improved autonomy and navigation opening up opportunities, Pavluk said. But there is also a desire to see how these systems can transition from sole-mission capabilities, such as explosive ordnance disposal, to multi-mission systems capable of doing ISR, EW and communications. According to a report from the Center for the Study of the Drone at Bard College, total spending for ground drones in FY19 was set at $429 million, of which only $86 million is for procurement — DoD planned to buy 134 new systems during the fiscal year — and the rest for research and development. That pales in comparison to the $6.05 billion the Pentagon planned to spend on UAVs, and half the expected $982 million in naval drones. But that number shows steady growth, doubling in just two years from $212 million in FY17 and $310 million in FY18. And while explosive ordnance disposal systems still represent the biggest spending from the Army in this arena, it will likely be overtaken by programs such as the Army Common Robotic Systems and Robotic Ground System Advanced Technology Development. “The market won't match overall UAS spending levels anytime soon, but it's fast growing, and there's opportunity for the taking,” Pavluk said. However, Michael Blades, an analyst with Frost and Sullivan, is more subdued in his predictions. “It's a significant market and it is growing, but not at the levels of sea or air systems, or even counter-drone capabilities,” Blades said. “We will see some unmanned-unmanned teaming between UAS and UGV, but the land market for unmanned will be orders of magnitude smaller than the markets for air and maritime.” From a competition standpoint, Blades sees “the usual suspects” who are already in the market continuing to dominate in the coming years. And internationally, there are only a few players, with the market largely dominated by Israel. Could that change in the future? The international market generally lags behind the U.S. on such capabilities, Pavluk said, but he noted that “other countries will get in on the act, and it doesn't have to be large ones” to try and participate. Full article: https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/ausa/2018/10/09/industry-nations-hope-to-cash-in-on-unmanned-ground-vehicle-growth

• 

  June 4, 2024 | International, Aerospace

  NATO space enterprise must throttle up — or risk falling short

  Opinion: Here are some actions NATO should undertake and articulate as specific objectives at the 2024 NATO summit in Washington.