February 27, 2023 | International, Aerospace
Singapore to buy eight more F-35B jets
Singapore's defense minister says the decision came after a âfull evaluationâ of the F-35, which followed increased access to the aircraft program.
July 13, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security
Raytheon Technologies CEO On Riding Out The COVID-19 Crisis
Joe Anselmo Michael Bruno July 10, 2020
When he was United Technologies Corp. chairman and CEO, Greg Hayes took a lot of heat for merging his company with Raytheon to create aerospace powerhouse Raytheon Technologies. But the critics have been silenced as defense has cushioned the company from the battering the commercial downturn has inflicted on its Collins Aerospace and Pratt & Whitney operations. Hayes spoke via videoconference with AW&ST Editor-in-Chief Joe Anselmo and Senior Business Editor Michael Bruno.
AW&ST: How long will it take the commercial aviation industry to recover from the COVID-19 crisis? Initially, we thought this was going to be like the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2002-03. We thought it was going to be relatively short-lived, where air traffic would go down for a little while but then gradually recover. I don't think any of us envisioned the morbidity or the scope of this pandemic and its impact on travel. I would say we're looking now at getting back to 2019 in 2023, maybe 2024. It is going to be a slow recovery.
- Raytheon chief looks ahead
- Commercial aviation recovery will take years
- Investing in hypersonics
- Game-changing technologies for a next-generation narrowbody
The good news is we've got plenty of liquidity. We'll see our way through this, but it is going to be a tough road. We are hunkering down for a protracted recession on the commercial aero side. Our aftermarket orders are down 50%-plus at both Collins Aerospace and Pratt & Whitney. That's where a lot of the profits come from. The reason we can spend $2.5 billion a year on R&D for the commercial businesses is because we have this spares business that generates strong cash. When that goes away, it's tough. And as a result, we're going to cut R&D this year by $500 million on the commercial side.
Unfortunately, the airlines are not in a position to weather this storm for probably more than another 12 months without government assistance. That's really going to be the key. Do governments in the U.S., Europe, South America and across Asia step up to support what is a critical industry in aerospace?
Is the industry underplaying the severity of the COVID-19 downturn? A vaccine is the key, and it has to be widely available. The World Health Organization is working on that, but we're going to have hotspots with this pandemic for the next year or two. So even if the U.S. and Europe are completely vaccinated, what does that mean for travel to Africa, Asia, to the fast-growing markets?
I'd almost bifurcate the aerospace industry between a narrowbody recovery and widebody recovery. The narrowbody is primarily domestic, whether it's Europe, the U.S. or even China. That will recover more quickly as people become confident-—there's either a vaccine or they've found new treatment options. But on the international side, we can't fly today into Europe, and we don't want the Europeans to fly to the U.S. We can't go to South America or China. Those routes are going to take much, much longer to recover.
The fact is there are so many excess aircraft out there right now that we believe you're going to see more parting out of existing fleets before we see a resurgence. And that's why even when passenger traffic starts to come back, there's probably a full 6-12 months before we're going to see a return to normalcy in our aftermarket organization.
Pratt supplies the PW1000G engine option for the Airbus A320neo. How much downside risk is there for -deliveries? We're planning for about a 40% reduction in A320 deliveries this year and next year compared with February 2020 production rates. Airbus would love to build more, but it's not clear to us that customers are going to be around to take more than that. The good news is our market share went from about 42% [of A320neo engines] to north of 50% in the last year. Customers are starting to believe in the geared turbofan because of the fuel efficiency.
Do you see the market share between Airbus and Boeing shifting? The order book for the A320 is much stronger today, with all the cancellations that we've seen on the 737 MAX because of delays. We still think the 737 will get back in the air this year, and we continue to work with Boeing on software updates. We firmly believe it's a great aircraft. Keep in mind we have about $2.5 million of content per shipset on the 737. It's going to be a tough couple of years, but we ultimately have faith in the airframe and the certification process.
Where are you focusing your future efforts with Boeing and Airbus? We were optimistically cautious about the [proposed Boeing] new mid-market airplane (NMA), but there is a lot of excess capacity now, and it's not clear another evolutionary design is going to be the answer. So our focus right now is the next-generation single--aisle. And we think that's probably been pushed out a couple of years, to maybe 2033 or 2035.
They're talking about a 30% efficiency gain from the current single-aisle. Two-thirds of that gain has to come from engine design. At the Paris Air Show last year, we talked about a hybrid electric design [Project 804]. We're going to continue on that path. We're trying to figure out how you can have enough power at takeoff while having a much lower fuel consumption at cruise. And that's where hybrid electric comes in. It's going to take us at least a decade to prove that out.
I don't know if hybrid electric is the answer. There are other things that we're working on. But obviously it's got to be something completely different than what we've been building in the past.
Governments around the world are taking on huge debt to alleviate the coronavirus crisis. Are you worried that will put pressure on military spending over the long term? You would have to have your head in the sand to not understand what's going to happen to defense budgets over time. When [Raytheon CEO] Tom Kennedy and I first talked about this merger, it was, “What can we do together that we can't do separately?” And it really was bringing the technologies of the two companies together to solve customer problems in new and innovative ways.
Defense budgets will go down, but I think the real question is where Defense Department spending is going. I remember talking two years ago with [then-Defense Secretary] Gen. [James] Mattis, and he said, “Bring us innovative solutions, not to fight the last war but to fight the next war.” And the next war, he said, is going to be fought in cyberspace and outer space. The capabilities of the legacy Raytheon business are second to none in space and are outstanding on the cyber side. You marry that up with the manufacturing and material science that Pratt & Whitney brings, with the communication systems that Rockwell Collins brings, and this is going to be a great play.
The U.S. Air Force wants more software-driven capabilities, delivered in weeks or even days. How does that square with your businesses, which often involve long-term hardware evolutions? It's making sure that we're continuing to evolve our products. The missiles we're delivering today, such as the SM-3 [interceptor] or the SM-6 [anti-air/anti-surface/-ballistic missile defense] are state of the art, and we continue to find new uses for them.
A lot of things will change over time in terms of how the weapons are deployed. Think about the Storm-Breaker missile that we just demonstrated, which has the tri-mode seeker. It can do things the last generation of missiles could never do in terms of going through smoke, fog, dust and sand. The LRSO [Long-Range Standoff nuclear cruise missile] is another example. And the Tomahawk is an established product that we will evolve as the needs of the battlefield change to meet new requirements. That's really what we want to focus on: How do we continue software-driven solutions but also find ways to redeploy and reinvigorate the product line and bring new capabilities to the warfighter?
Are you making long-term investments in hypersonics? Hypersonics are a destabilizing technology. There's only so much we can talk about, but we know we're behind the Chinese and probably behind the Russians. I think in 3-5 years we'll be on a level playing field. Our focus has been on defensive systems, using space-based assets to track hypersonics. It's nothing that a ground radar could ever do because they move too fast. And then countermeasures that we could use to defend against hypersonics is the bigger market. We're obviously investing. We've got a program, the HAWC [Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapon Concept], which is an air-breathing hypersonic missile that we're working on. I think we'll flight-test that later this year.
Also think about the materials science that Pratt brings. The key to hypersonics is how to keep the electronics from getting fried when you're operating at something like 5,000F. We're investing in cooling materials—that will be one of the big bets that we're going to have to make. Tom Kennedy saw the need to make these investments, and we're going to do that. The other piece is on the space side. There's not a lot that we can say, other than that we think space will be the frontier that will differentiate us—that is, the defense of space assets, as well as using space assets to detect, track and target hypersonic weapons.
When the merger of United Technologies and Raytheon was announced, there was a lot of criticism from investors. Now they're happy about how well-positioned the combined company is to weather the COVID-19 storm. There was a lot of pushback from investors, especially from the hedge fund guys. They saw us taking a lower-margin business, and they didn't like the fact that the technology takes 5-10 years to pay off. I was roundly criticized. All I can say is I was an idiot a year ago and now I'm a genius, through no fault of my own.
We did this for the long term, and it was completely fortuitous that the merger happened when it did. The commercial businesses won't make any money this year, and they are going to struggle for the next couple of years, but now we've got a rock-solid balance sheet and a lot of cash. And that defense business is going to grow 5-8% this year. We've got a good backlog. I'd like to say it was genius, but it really was just doing what's right for the long term. My goal is to leave this company better than I found it.
You have reshaped this company, starting with selling Sikorsky to Lockheed Martin in 2015. Then you acquired Rockwell Collins and moved to break up the UTC conglomerate, and it looked like UTC was going to be a commercial aerospace company. Now comes Raytheon. Are you done, or is there more to come? I'm never done until I'm gone, but we don't need to do anything else big. The driving force [behind the Raytheon merger] was putting two big technology companies together with cyclical balance [between commercial and defense]. Tom Kennedy always felt he was at a disadvantage against the Lockheeds of the world because of the scale of Lockheed versus Raytheon. This gives us the scale to invest and compete head on with the Lockheed Martins and Northrop Grummans, as well as being the largest supplier to both Boeing and Airbus. We have some clout in the marketplace.
We've got 700,000 different things that we deliver to customers: missiles, APUs, engines, communications gear. Some we really love; others don't have the returns that we want or require too much investment for a limited market. We hope to have a portfolio review done by the end of the year. And you'll probably see some divestitures, but not big pieces. We also continue to look for technology bolt-ons as we think about what's next in defense and the space and cyber spectrums.
Longer term, the big question in my mind is what happens to Rolls-Royce, a great technology company that is facing challenging financial circumstances. We loved the partnership Pratt had with Rolls on International Aero Engines. Could we recreate that someday? Perhaps, but not now. Ian Davis, who's the chairman over there, is a good guy. We always say, “Look, we need to find ways to collaborate so we can take on GE Aviation.” Despite the fact that GE may be on its heels today, they've got over 30,000 engines out there. Their aftermarket will recover, they will get better, and they will be the formidable competitor for both Rolls and Raytheon Technologies for the foreseeable future.
We're hearing from Wall Street that you're expected to sell off the Forcepoint business. Forcepoint is a commercial cyber business Tom Kennedy created when he brought a couple of companies together about five years ago. It has some great technology, but it clearly doesn't fit in the portfolio. We'll figure that out in the next six months.
How is the integration going? Nothing went according to plan except the merger itself. We sent everybody home the week of March 12 [because of COVID-19], and we were still three weeks away from the merger. So we had to complete the merger and all of the integration remotely. And we had to spin off Carrier and Otis. All of that came to fruition on time and exactly as we had planned while working from home. The resilience and the ingenuity of our folks to figure all this out has probably been the most pleasing.
There was some concern that the cultures at Raytheon and the commercial guys at Pratt and Collins would never come together. That is the last thing I worry about. Everything we laid out has gotten done. We're on track for synergies in cost, technology and revenue. The difference is I have yet to have a staff meeting in person. I've got 17 people who work for me, and we do everything on Zoom. Each one of our three board meetings since the merger has been done on Zoom. If you had told me 3-4 months ago that we would be working from home for a good deal of time, I'd have really panicked. But we figured it out.
On the same subject
-
-
April 27, 2020 | International, C4ISR
Recalculating: GPS, L-band and the Pentagon’s untenable position on 5G
Daniel S. Goldin Last week, Ajit Pai, the chairman of the Federal Communication Commission, submitted the L-band Ligado spectrum proposal for approval, which, he said, will “make more efficient use of underused spectrum and promote the deployment of 5G” with “stringent conditions to prevent harmful [GPS] interference.” All five FCC commissioners voted to affirm the proposal, which was formally published in a 70-page report. L-band is a critical piece of spectrum that will help accelerate the deployment of U.S. 5G so we can compete and ultimately win against China. The Department of Defense argues that use of the L-band (as Ligado proposes) will interfere with GPS, which is essential to our military and economy. The FCC's final order concludes that the testing upon which the DoD and other opponents based their GPS interference claims was invalid. L-band opponents' interference measurement (termed 1dB C/No) is “inappropriate” and “there is no connection presented in the technical studies” that prove this measure of interference “relates to performance-based metrics” of a GPS receiver. In short, the FCC said there is no harmful GPS interference, and opponents have been using a flawed methodology and an invalid test with which the FCC “strongly disagree[s].” The FCC's recent report is not the first time the Ligado proposal was determined to cause no GPS interference. In early 2019, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration under David Redl reviewed the Ligado proposal carefully — along with the 20 government agencies that comprise the review body — and determined there is no interference. The NTIA then wrote a recommendation for approval and, before it could get to the FCC, it was blocked, eventually leading to Redl's dismissal. Further, over 5,000 hours of testing, including 1,500 hours at a high-tech U.S./DoD-sponsored and designed facility (performed by the world-recognized standard-in-testing National Institute of Standards and Technology scientists and engineers), proved no harmful GPS interference. Afterward, a DoD expert who monitored and confirmed the testing results told me “there is no interference problem, only a bureaucracy problem.” Yet DoD has continued to blitz the executive and legislative branches, galvanizing opposition with a compelling plea: Ligado hurts GPS, which endangers military operations and will harm the economy. Powerful. But factually wrong. And if wrong, why is Defense Secretary Mark Esper continuing to lobby against the FCC? The FCC is an independent agency. The Communications Act of 1934 charged the FCC with regulating communications for important reasons, including “for the purpose of national defense.” So why is the DoD employing principles of war — offensive operations to mass upon and seize the objective — toward the demise of Ligado's proposal and, perhaps implicitly, Ligado itself? Members of the Senate Armed Services Committee and the House Armed Services Committee are weighing in on the DoD's behalf. They have been presented partial, one-sided information. Mr. Esper is a capable, reform-minded defense secretary who has brought much-needed change to the Pentagon. But he has also been advancing one-sided recommendations from his senior staff for GPS issues, some with longstanding connections to the highly influential Position, Navigation, and Timing Advisory Board — which enjoys a level of influence akin to a special interest group within the U.S. government. A reading of the defense secretary's November 2019 letter to the NTIA reveals that even the DoD was never really sure about its own GPS interference claims, stating merely there are “too many unknowns,” the “risks are far too great,” testing shows “potential for” disruption and the Ligado system “could have a significant negative impact.” Yet, once the Ligado proposal was presented for approval on April 15 — with no new testing or analysis since November — DoD leadership tweeted that Ligado's signal “would needlessly imperil” DoD capabilities that use GPS, and risk “crippling our GPS networks.” If taken at face value, this means the DoD has spent over $50 billion over 45 years on a military GPS system that is so fragile it can be rendered useless by a 10-watt transmitter (a refrigerator light bulb) operating 23 MHz away. If true, this would represent one of the most egregious mismanagements of taxpayer dollars in federal procurement history. The pandemic has shown that China is coercing nations in need of medical assistance to adopt Chinese 5G infrastructure. Coercion from Chinese dominance in 5G would be worse. Agencies like the FCC and NTIA are in the national security arena now. As Attorney General William Barr stated in February, “we have to move decisively to auction the C-band and bring resolution on the L-band. Our economic future is at stake. We have to bear in mind in making these spectrum decisions that, given the narrow window we face, the risk of losing the 5G struggle with China should vastly outweigh all other considerations.” It is time for bold, forward-looking leadership and a wartime mindset. Chairman Pai deserves credit for setting this example. His courageous decision, coupled with support from the FCC commissioners and the strong statements of support from Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Barr, signals a new determination to win the 5G race. L-band spectrum will enable other key elements of the U.S. 5G strategy and private sector innovation faster than any other option. It also demonstrates that a science-based approach to technology and policy is critical, otherwise we will grind to a near halt on every major decision — like this one — to China's benefit. America is truly “exceptional,” and the envy of every political system the world over, because our system is anchored on the rule of law and institutions that allow stakeholders' competing interests to be adjudicated. All parties have had many years to make their cases. The FCC's world-class scientists and engineers have come to a conclusion. The DoD has no new information; it just does not like the result. After all the internal policy battles are fought, there is only one constituency that matters: the American people and their national and economic security, consistent with U.S. policy objectives grounded in facts. This is why we must embrace this scientifically sound and strategically wise decision by the FCC and move forward, guided by another more apt principle of war: unity of effort. https://www.c4isrnet.com/opinion/2020/04/24/recalculating-gps-l-band-and-the-pentagons-untenable-position-on-5g/
-
November 26, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security
Contract Awards by US Department of Defense - November 25, 2020
AIR FORCE Northrop Grumman Systems Corp., San Diego, California, has been awarded a $4,800,000,000 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for Global Hawk development, modernization, retrofit and sustainment activities for all Air Force Global Hawk variants. This contract provides for management, including program, business and technical areas; engineering efforts, including configuration management, data management, reliability, availability and maintainability, and related areas of concern such as technical refresh, diminishing manufacturing sources, etc.; studies and analyses; design, development, integration, test and evaluation; contract/production line closeout/shutdown; training; sparing; overseas contingency operations support; fielding; cyber security/information assurance; interoperability support; facilities modifications/renovation; integrated logistics support; requirements management specification management; and quality assurance. Additional, and more specific, guidance will be included within each individual delivery order/task order statement of work and performance work statement regarding these and other tasks. This contract provides flexibility to accommodate the broad enterprise of activities associated with the Global Hawk program. Work will be performed in San Diego, California, and is expected to be completed Sept. 30, 2030. This award is the result of a sole-source acquisition. Multiple fiscal years and types of funds will be used for this contract. The Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, is the primary contracting activity (FA8690-21-D-1009). Raytheon Technologies Corp., East Hartford, Connecticut, has been awarded a $453,057,000 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for the aircraft engine Component Improvement Program. This contract provides for the following work: the Component Improvement Program establishes prioritized list of projects each calendar year to include developing engineering changes to the engines, developing organizational, intermediate and depot level repairs as needed, and designing modifications to existing support equipment as well as initiating new support equipment designs as required by engine driven changes. The program also provides support to resolve service-revealed deficiencies and maintain or extend the life limits of aircraft engines. Work will be performed in East Hartford, Connecticut, and is expected to be completed Dec. 31, 2029. This award is the result of a sole-source acquisition. Fiscal 2020 research, development, test and evaluation funds in the amount of $557,347 are being obligated at the time of award. The Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, is the contracting activity (FA8626-21-D-0001). The Boeing Co., Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, has been awarded Option Five to its indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract FA8106-16-D-0002 under order FA8134-21-F-0001, in the estimated amount of $196,477,863. The Option Five exercise will provide E4B program management, field service representatives, system integration laboratory support, emergency support, spare procurement, spare repair and overhaul, engine sustainment and scheduled and unscheduled depot maintenance. Work will be performed in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma; Offutt Air Force Base, Nebraska; and San Antonio, Texas, and is expected to be completed Nov. 30, 2021. This contract is a sole-source order. Fiscal 2021 operation and maintenance funds in the amount of $75,677,863 are being obligated at time of award. The Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Tinker AFB, Oklahoma, is the contracting activity. Lockheed Martin Missile and Fire Control, Orlando, Florida, has been awarded a $42,100,000 undefinitized modification (P00016) to contract FA8682-18-C-0009 for the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM) group one development. This contract modification supports the Global Positioning System receiver development and the development of the missile control unit gigabit cables. Work will be performed in Orlando, Florida, and is expected to be completed Dec. 31, 2023. Fiscal 2020 procurement; and fiscal 2020 research, development, test and evaluation funds in the amount of $6,774,932 are being obligated at the time of award. Total cumulative face value of the contract is $214,912,654. The Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, is the contracting activity. DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY The Bell Boeing Joint Project Office, California, Maryland, has been awarded a maximum $188,572,655 modification (P00010) exercising the second one-year option period of a one-year base contract (SPRPA1-17-D-009U) with four one-year option periods for performance-based logistics and engineering support for the V-22 platform. This is a firm-fixed-price requirements contract. Locations of performance are Maryland, Texas and Pennsylvania, with a Nov. 30, 2021, performance completion date. Using customers are Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps and military services in Japan. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2021 through 2022 (Air Force, Navy, Special Operations Command and Foreign Military Sales) appropriated funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Aviation, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. SupplyCore Inc.,* Rockford, Illinois (SPE8E3-21-D-0001, $90,000,000); and Noble Supply and Logistics,* Rockland, Massachusetts (SPE8E3-21-D-0002, $90,000,000) have each been awarded a firm-fixed-price contract under solicitation SPE8EG-13-R-0002 for facilities maintenance, repair and operations. These were sole-source acquisitions using justification 10 U.S. Code 2304 (c)(1), as stated in Federal Acquisition Regulation 6.302-1. They are 365-day bridge contracts with no option periods. Locations of performance are Illinois, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia and Tennessee, with a Nov. 28, 2021, performance completion date. Using customers are Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and Coast Guard. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2021 through 2022 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Northrop Grumman Systems Corp., Linthicum Heights, Maryland, has been awarded an estimated $16,881,210 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract to add pricing for the repair of modular receiver exciters and common radar processor components and other depot-level reparable items. This was a sole-source acquisition using justification 10 U.S. Code 2304 (c)(1), as stated in Federal Acquisition Regulation 6.302-1. This is a three-year base contract with one five-year option period. Location of performance is Maryland, with a Sept. 9, 2023, ordering period end date. Using military service is Air Force. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2021 through 2023 Air Force operation and maintenance funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Aviation, Tinker Air Force Base, Oklahoma (SPRTA1-21-D-0001). Creighton AB Inc., Reidsville, North Carolina, has been awarded a maximum $7,788,263 modification (P00002) exercising the first one-year option period of a one-year base contract (SPE1C1-20-D-1213) with four one-year option periods for men's broadfall trousers. This is a firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract. Locations of performance are New York and North Carolina, with a Nov. 24, 2021, ordering period end date. Using military service is Navy. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2021 through 2022 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. NAVY Adept Process Services Inc. (APS Marine), National City, California (N55236-21-D-0001); Amee Bay LLC, Hanahan, South Carolina (N55236-21-D-0002); Delphinus Engineering Inc., Eddystone, Pennsylvania (N55236-21-D-0003); Epsilon Systems Solutions Inc., San Diego, California (N55236-21-D-0004); Integrated Marine Services Inc., Chula Vista, California (N55236-21-D-0005); Marine Group Boat Works LLC, Chula Vista, California (N55236-21-D-0006); Q.E.D. Systems Inc., Virginia Beach, Virginia (N55236-21-D-0007); and Willard Marine Inc., Anaheim, California (N55235-21-D-0008), are awarded an overall maximum ceiling value of $64,349,360 in firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity, multiple award contracts with a five base year ordering period to provide marine boatyard services (Lot 1) including specific modifications, upgrades, service life extension and repairs to non-commissioned boats, craft, and lighterage/service crafts that can be transported via roadway by a trailer that is less than 15 meters or 50 feet in length. It includes their associated systems (i.e., hull, mechanical, electrical and electronic systems; trailers; transporters; deployment systems; slings and hoisting systems; launch and retrieval systems, etc.) and periodic maintenance. These eight companies will have an opportunity to compete for individual delivery orders. Work will be performed within the San Diego-Los Angeles County areas. These contracts have a five-year base ordering period and work is expected to be completed by November 2025. Fiscal 2021 operation and maintenance (Navy) funding in the amount of $80,000 ($10,000 for minimum guarantee per contract) will be obligated under each contract's initial delivery order and funding will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. These contracts were competitively procured via the beta.sam.gov website; nine offers were received. The Southwest Regional Maintenance Center, San Diego, California, is the contracting activity. Barnhart-Reese Construction Inc.,* San Diego, California, is awarded firm-fixed-price task order N62473-21-F-4139 at $15,814,642 under a multiple award construction contract for design-build repair to Bachelors Enlisted Quarters (BEQ) Building 210905 at Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, California. The scope of work includes repairs to building subsurface slab and waste line; interior walls, doors, floors, shower enclosures and restroom fixtures; exterior doors and hardware, downspouts, gutters, cracks on walls and balconies, paint walls and rails; electrical lines and walkways; provides an air-cooled chiller, pumps, controls and associated appurtenances; and any incidental related work. Work will be performed in Oceanside, California, and is expected to be completed by June 2022. Fiscal 2021 operation and maintenance (Navy) contract funds in the amount of $15,814,642 are obligated on this award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. Four proposals were received for this task order. Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command, Southwest, San Diego, California, is the contracting activity (N62473-17-D-4629). Innovative Defense Technologies,* Arlington, Virginia, is awarded a $14,071,754 cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for automated test and analysis capability supporting Navy surface combatant combat system development. Work will be performed in Arlington, Virginia (50%); and Mount Laurel, New Jersey (50%), and is expected to be completed by November 2021. This contract includes options, which if exercised, would bring the cumulative value of this contract to $90,490,587 and be completed in November 2025. Fiscal 2020 research, development, test and evaluation (Navy) funding in the amount of $500,000 will be obligated at time of award and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured in accordance with 10 U.S. Code 2304(c)(5). This award is the result of a Small Business Innovative Research Phase III sole-source acquisition. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity (N00024-21-C-5100). Perspecta Engineering Inc., Chantilly, Virginia, is awarded a $9,731,342 cost-plus-fixed-fee, cost-reimbursable, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract. This contract provides engineering services in support of test and evaluation and systems engineering activities related to AEGIS Ballistic Missile Defense on behalf of the Missile Defense Agency. Work will be performed in Kauai, Hawaii (90%); Oahu, Hawaii (4%); Santa Clara, California (3%); Point Mugu, California (2%); and Chantilly, Virginia (1%). Work is expected to be completed in November 2025. No funds will be obligated at the time of award and funds will be obligated on individual orders as they are issued. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation 6.302-1. The Naval Air Warfare Center, Weapons Division, China Lake, California, is the contracting activity (N68936-21-D-0007). Bristol Engineering Services Co. LLC,* Anchorage, Alaska, is awarded firm-fixed-price task order N62473-21-F-4135 at $8,257,745 under a multiple award construction contract for construction and repair of natural gas lines at Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center, Twentynine Palms, California. The work to be performed provides for construction and repair of high pressure natural gas systems' main and laterals lines. This project repairs approximately 108,000 linear feet of underground high pressure (400 psi) main piping, medium pressure piping, and low pressure (45 to 20 psi) branch natural gas piping system. Work will be performed in Twentynine Palms, California, and is expected to be completed by February 2022. Fiscal 2021 operation and maintenance (Marine Corps) contract funds in the amount of $8,257,745 are obligated on this award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. Three proposals were received for this task order. The Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command, Southwest, San Diego, California, is the contracting activity (N39430-20-D-2221). ARMY Northrop Grumman Systems Corp., Herndon, Virginia, was awarded an $11,538,508 modification (P00014) to contract W911S0-18-C-0004 to provide mission support for planning, coordination and execution of exercises conducted by the Army's Mission Command Training Program. Work will be performed in Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, with an estimated completion date of Oct. 14, 2024. Fiscal 2021 operation and maintenance (Army) funds in the amount of $11,538,508 were obligated at the time of the award. The U.S. Army Field Directorate Office, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, is the contracting activity. *Small business https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contracts/Contract/Article/2428368/source/GovDelivery/