Intuitive Machines gets $116.9 mln NASA contract for delivery to Moon's south pole

On the same subject

• 

  July 9, 2018 | International, Aerospace, C4ISR

  Air Force quietly, and reluctantly, pushing JSTARS recap source selection ahead

  By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — Congress is waging a public battle on the fate of the JSTARS recap program, but behind the scenes, the Air Force is quietly taking steps that will allow them to award a contract for a program that leaders say they don't need. The service received final proposal revisions for the JSTARS recap program on June 22, confirmed Air Force spokeswoman Maj. Emily Grabowski in a statement to Defense News. “The Air Force wants to be postured to move forward with JSTARS recap, if required. Therefore, we are continuing source selection while we continue to work with Congress on the way forward,” Grabowski said in a statement. Usually, the government solicits final proposals and pricing information from competitors just weeks before making a final downselect. Thus, if Congress decides to force the Air Force to continue on with the program, it's likely the service will be able to award a contract in very short order. The Air Force began the JSTARS recap program as an effort to replace its aging E-8C Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System ground surveillance planes with new aircraft and a more capable radar. The initial plan was to buy 17 new JSTARS recap jets from either Boeing, Lockheed Martin or Northrop Grumman. However, the service announced during February's fiscal year 2019 budget rollout that it preferred to cancel the JSTARS recap program and fund an “Advanced Battle Management System” that would upgrade and link together existing aircraft and drones, allowing them to do the JSTARS mission. The Air Force's continued source selection efforts are necessary due to Congress, which is split on the issue of whether to continue to the program. Both Senate defense committees have sided with the Air Force, and would allow it to kill JSTARS recap as long as it continues to fund the current JSTARS fleet. The Senate version of the defense spending bill also includes an additional $375 million to accelerate the ABMS concept with additional MQ-9 Reapers and other technologies. Meanwhile, the House version of the bill would force the Air Force to award an engineering and manufacturing development contract for JSTARS recap to one of the three competitors, which had been valued at $6.9 billion. However, some lawmakers have said they might be willing to accept a truncated recap program to bridge the way until ABMS is fielded. “All of the committees understand the need for moving to the advanced battle management system,” Gen. Mike Holmes, head of Air Combat Command, told reporters in June. “If there are disagreements between the committees, it's about whether we can move straight to that and hold onto our legacy JSTARS as a way to bridge until we do that, or do we need to do one more recap of that system” The timing of final proposal revisions actually puts source selection for JSTARS recap ahead of that of the still ongoing T-X trainer jet program, which as of late June had not reached that stage. However, Congress will likely need time to resolve the JSTARS recap issue — meaning a contract decision is far from imminent. The House and Senate armed services committees began the conference process in June, which could allow them to reconcile differences in the defense policy bill as early as this summer. However, only appropriations bills can be used to fund government programs like JSTARS recap, and spending legislation could be stuck in limbo for months past that. If deliberations stretch out, “the Air Force will continue to assess contract award timelines and approvals. If necessary, the Air Force will request an extension of proposal validity or updated pricing as appropriate,” Grabowski said. Meanwhile, lawmakers continue to debate the case in the public eye. In a July 3 editorial for The Telegraph, Republican Rep. Austin Scott, one of the biggest proponents of the recap program, argued that it would be more economical to proceed with JSTARS recap than to continue to do extensive depot maintenance on the legacy aircraft. “After 10 years of work, the Air Force is considering canceling the JSTARS recap program,” wrote Scott, whose district in Georgia is home to Robins Air Force base, where the JSTARS aircraft reside. “Their arguments do not take into account the significantly improved capabilities and increased capacity that the new aircraft will provide. The Air Force has ignored its own assessments in their recommendation for cancellation.” https://www.defensenews.com/air/2018/07/06/air-force-quietly-and-reluctantly-pushing-jstars-recap-source-selection-ahead/

• 

  March 15, 2019 | International, Land

  QinetiQ wins US Army’s small ground robot competition

  By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — The U.S. Army has chosen Waltham, Massachusetts-based QinetiQ North America to produce its new small ground robot following a head-to-head competition with the company's Boston-based neighbor Endeavor Robotics. The serviced awarded a production contract for up to $152 million to QinetiQ on March 11 for its Common Robotic System—Individual or CRS-I program, which is its first small-sized — less than 25 pounds — ground robot program of record, according to an Army statement from Fort Benning, Georgia. Fort Benning is the birth place of the capability requirements for CRS-I. Ultimately, follow-on contracts and options could amount to roughly $400 million for roughly 3,000 robots. Full article: https://www.defensenews.com/land/2019/03/14/qinetiq-wins-armys-small-ground-robot-competition/

• 

  January 17, 2019 | International, Naval

  Facing a sealift capacity collapse, the Navy seeks strategy for new auxiliary ships

  By: David B. Larter ARLINGTON, Va. – The U.S. Navy is moving toward settling on an approach for recapitalizing the nation's aged sealift fleet, moving away from a single common hull for five missions. The sealift fleet, which is facing the prospect of an imminent collapse in capacity due to the ships all reaching or exceeding their hull life according to the U.S. Army, is what the U.S. would use to transport up to 90 percent of Army and U.S. Marine Corps gear in the event of a major conflict overseas. The program, known as the Common Hull Auxiliary Multi-Mission Platform, was envisioned as we way to recapitalize the country's surge sealift force and replace other auxiliary ships such as hospital ships and submarine tenders with a common hull form. But the Navy found after studies last year that one hull simply wasn't going to work for all the disparate functions the Navy was looking to fulfill with the platform. Now, the Navy thinks it has a better answer: Two platforms. “We started out thinking it was going to be one hull ... but what we found from our own examination and from industry feedback is that these missions fall into two basic categories,” said Capt. Scot Searles, the strategic and theater sealift program manager, in a brief at the annual Surface Navy Association's national symposium. “One is a very volume-intensive category where you need large volume inside the ship – that's the sealift mission where you are trying to carry a lot of Marine and Army cargo. The other bucket it falls into is the people-intensive mission. When you talk about a hospital ship or a submarine tender, those are people-intensive, and we found we didn't need as much internal volume. It could be a smaller ship but needed more berthing capability.” The Navy released a request for information this week for industry studies that they hope to award in March that will validate the approach, Searles said. “We believe it's going to be two hulls, but that's still a great savings over designing five hulls,” he said. Congress wants the Navy to start ordering hulls by 2023 to deliver by 2026, something the Navy told Congress in a report last year could be done if it ponies up the cash. The most urgent need in the surge sealift fleet is the ready reserve force, a fleet of ships run by the Maritime Administration that are in reduced operating status and spend most of their time in port on standby waiting to be activated in case of a national emergency. Searles said the plan would be to bring the newly constructed auxiliary sealift ships online and use them as maritime prepositioning ships, then take the current prepositioning ships – which still have plenty of life left in the hull – and move them into the ready reserve force. Prepositioning ships are operated by Military Sealift Command and deploy forward with logistics and equipment that can be used in a crisis on short notice. Developing the new ships will take anywhere from three-to-five years, Searles said, and in the meantime the Navy plans to buy used ships off the open market and modify them for DoD use. They will also extend the lives of the current ships in the sealift force to the best of their ability. Collapse In February, the Army sent a letter to Congress saying that the country's organic sealift capacity would fall below the level required to move the Army's equipment by 2024 if the Navy did not act fast. “Without proactive recapitalization of the Organic Surge Sealift Fleet, the Army will face unacceptable risk in force projection capability beginning in 2024,” the document said, adding that the advanced age of the current fleet adds further risk to the equation. “By 2034, 70% of the organic fleet will be over 60 years old — well past its economic useful life; further degrading the Army's ability to deploy forces,” the document reads. The Army's G-4 also alluded to then-Defense Secretary Jim Mattis' readiness push, adding that even the most prepared forces wouldn't matter if they can't reach the front line. “Shortfalls in sealift capacity undermine the effectiveness of US conventional deterrence as even a fully-resourced and trained force has limited deterrent value if an adversary believes they can achieve their strategic objective in the window of opportunity before American land forces arrive,” the paper reads. “The Army's ability to project military power influences adversaries' risk calculations.” The document reflects the Army's growing impatience with the Navy's efforts to recapitalize its surge sealift ships, which are composed of a series of roll-on/roll-off ships and other special-purpose vessels operated by Military Sealift Command and the Maritime Administration. And Capitol Hill shares the Army's view, according to two HASC staffers, who spoke to Defense News last year on condition of anonymity. The Navy, which is responsible for recapitalizing the surge sealift force, put forward a budget in 2019 that called for about $242 million over the next five years, the bulk of which would go toward designing and developing a new platform that will replace the current vessels. HASC lawmakers considered that amount of funding not enough to make any serious inroads on recapitalization, and certainly not enough to forestall the critical shortfall identified in the information paper, the staffers said. https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2019/01/16/facing-a-sealift-capacity-collapse-the-navy-hones-in-on-a-strategy-for-new-auxiliary-ships