Private equity : Weinberg Capital lance un fonds dans l'industrie de la défense

On the same subject

• 

  September 21, 2018 | International, Aerospace

  Dutch defense chief opens door for more F-35s

  By: Sebastian Sprenger COLOGNE, Germany – Dutch defense minister Ank Bijleveld has eliminated the country's budget cap for F-35 purchases, opening the possibility of buying more planes in the future, a spokesman confirmed to Defense News. The defense ministry spokesman described the move as “just a formality” that would not require parliamentary approval, as the Dutch objective of buying 37 copies of the Lockheed Martin-made jet for €4.7 billion remains in place. But it means “we leave the option open to buy new planes” beyond those already envisioned in the budget, the spokesman said. The development was first reported by the Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf, which wrote that the air force was angling to eventually get 67 aircraft. That amount would be enough to field four squadrons in the Netherlands, according to the newspaper. Dick Zandee, a defense analyst at the Dutch Clingendael foreign policy think tank, said the recently released 2019 budget still reflects the government's target of buying 37 planes. But the budget cap elimination at this time could set the stage for additional contracts in a few years' time, once deliveries of the batch already on order are nearing completion. The Dutch are set to take delivery of eight F-35s in 2019. That's in addition to two test aircraft already produced. The fifth-generation aircraft are meant to replace the country's fleet of 60 or so F-16s, with yearly deliveries scheduled between six to eight planes until the target number of 37 is reached. That inventory will allow the Netherlands to field four F-35s for operations, considering that a certain number is always set aside for training, undergoing maintenance or otherwise unavailable to deploy, said Zandee. “There is a lot of pressure from NATO that 37 are not enough,” he said, adding that there has been talk in Dutch defense circles to up the number to 52. “The air force always wants more” of the planes, and the service would consider an increase to 52 as an intermediate step to get an even greater number later, Zandee told Defense News. Meanwhile, the jet is facing some pushback in the Netherlands over its development price tag and the high cost of ownership. “The criticism is that you're buying an aircraft that is not fully developed yet," said Zandee. But, he added,"The attitude is that the Americans are throwing so many billions at the program that problems will be solved." https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2018/09/20/dutch-defense-chief-opens-door-for-more-f-35s

• 

  May 19, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  Citing TransDigm, DoD seeks new acquisition powers, and trade groups oppose

  By: Joe Gould WASHINGTON ― Four defense industry trade associations “strongly oppose" a handful of Pentagon-backed procurement reform proposals that they say would harm the defense industrial base, and they're asking Congress to reject them. Two of the proposals aim at controversial pricing practices used by TransDigm by requiring contractors to submit cost information for commercial items and by requiring contracting officers to conduct a commercial item determination for every procurement. Others would set a preference for performance-based contract payments and authorize the Defense Department to release or disclose detailed manufacturing or process data. The May 6 protest letter came from the Acquisition Reform Working Group — made up of the National Defense Industrial Association, American Council of Engineering Companies, the Computing Technology Industry Association and the Information Technology Industry Council — to the the House and Senate armed services committees. It comes as the panels were readying their drafts of the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act. The Pentagon has worked to monitor its network of suppliers from the economic shocks associated with the coronavirus pandemic and to protect suppliers by using emergency funding from Congress to speed payments and improve cash flow along the supply chain. The trade groups noted they represent “thousands of small, mid-sized, and large companies in addition to hundreds of thousands of employees that provide goods, services, and personnel to the Department of Defense,” and said the four proposals a “could have significant consequences for the defense industrial base.” Congress focused ire at TransDigm last year after the Defense Department's Inspector General found for $26.2 million in parts the military bought from TransDigm, it earned $16.1 million in excess profit. Transdigm was the only manufacturer of the majority of the parts, which let it set the market prices even for competitively awarded parts. Though DoD has argued its contractors need new latitude to make commercial item determinations and obtain cost or pricing information to prevent the excessive pricing TransDigm was accused of, the trade groups argue the TransDigm's actions weren't facilitated by an inappropriate reliance on improper commercial item determinations, or insufficient access to pricing data. “As illustrated by the TransDigm Group, Inc's pricing practices, generally once a conversion to a commercial product or commercial service is made, it is common for prices to increase and subsequent contracting officers find it difficult to obtain data necessary to determine price reasonableness and negotiate fair and reasonable prices on behalf of the taxpayer,” the department said in its proposal. Another proposal would require a contractor to submit uncertified cost information for commercial item proposals or contracts less than $2 million. The idea behind the reform is DoD wants to be able to get more insight into the costs of sole-source items and put itself in a more favorable position to negotiate with sole-source companies. Congressional hearings on TransDigm's excessive pricing showed Defense leaders need the authority to obtain the data “to the extent necessary to determine price reasonableness is paramount in ensuring that such excessive pricing practices are curtailed.” But the trade groups argue that levying the new regulations would “add a significant barrier to commercial item acquisition, reduce information sharing, further burden the system, and impede—rather than enable—the delivery of capabilities to the warfighter at the ‘speed of relevance'—all with little to no added protection for the government or the taxpayer." The trade associations also opposed DoD's legislation to set a preference for performance-based contract payments. The groups said a DoD proposal to “recouple” total performance-based payments to total cost incurred would reverse Congress's previous work to emphasize performance over cost and contradict a spate of defense acquisitions rules. DoD's argument is that it shouldn't be reimbursing a contractor more than its actual costs, or it “would result in negative levels of contractor investment,” and create a disincentive for contractors to deliver. Another disputed proposal would let DoD release detailed manufacturing or process data, or DPMD, pertaining to privately funded commercial or noncommercial items outside of the government to third parties seeking to compete against the original equipment manufacturer. It's the latest episode in a running game of tug-of-war between industry and DoD over intellectual property. While Congress has in recent years prodded DoD to set intellectual property strategies early in acquisition programs and negotiate for IP rights on a case-by-case basis, the trade groups argue the proposal would give DoD “an automatic default authority” and “eliminate the possibility of a negotiated solution.” https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/05/15/citing-transdigm-dod-seeks-new-acquisition-powers-and-trade-groups-oppose/

• 

  July 6, 2020 | International, C4ISR, Security

  Ligado would be banned from DoD contracts under House plan

  Joe Gould WASHINGTON ― Lawmakers took another apparent jab at Ligado Networks on Wednesday as the House Armed Services Committee passed a ban on the Pentagon awarding contracts to firms that interfere with Global Positioning System signals. The panel adopted an amendment from House Strategic Forces Subcommittee Chairman Michael Turner to bar the Department of Defense from contracting with an entity that engages in commercial terrestrial operations using certain frequency ranges ― unless the defense secretary certifies the operations do not cause harmful interference to a the military's GPS devices. Ligado is not specifically named. However, the Federal Communications Commission unanimously approved the plan from Ligado to use the bands identified in the amendment: the 1525–1559 MHz band and the 1626.5–1660.5 MHz band. The FCC's decision in April came despite objections from the DoD and a number of nondefense industry trade groups, which argue that Ligado's plan would create wide-ranging disruptions for GPS usage. During the markup, the panel approved a separate amendment from Turner that would bar DoD from spending any money to mitigate impacts from Ligado's potential interference with the military's GPS signals. The moves by lawmakers during the HASC's markup of its version of the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act is the latest salvo from lawmakers on Congress' defense committees. Earlier this month, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., offered legislation that would require the company to cover the costs of any GPS user — government or commercial — hurt by its spectrum use. Turner, a defense hawk in Congress, is among 22 HASC members who called on the FCC to reverse its support for Ligado's plan. He has called for an inspector general to probe consulting company Roberson and Associates, the firm that determined Ligado's plan wouldn't cause GPS interference. https://www.c4isrnet.com/congress/2020/07/01/ban-on-dod-contracts-to-ligado-approved-by-house-panel/