November 30, 2018 | International, Naval

UK: Speech by Admiral Sir Philip Jones, First Sea Lord and Chief of Naval Staff

Introduction

Good morning everyone, and Nick [Childs, IISS], thank you very much for the introduction, for the invitation for Mike [Noonan, RAN] and I to be here with you all this morning, and to everyone here at IISS for facilitating this event.

And a special thanks to Mike. He looks as fresh as a daisy this morning, but he's on a bit of a world tour, taking in London having also taken in some substantial visits in Europe to check on future RAN capability, I'm sure you'll hear more about that later, and then after a trip to Scotland tomorrow to have a look at what a Type 26 looks like, and we'll see the significance of that of course, we're then travelling together to Chile on Thursday night to help them commemorate the 200th Anniversary of their navy. So you've covered a lot of ground as Chief of Navy but for very good reason and it's really good to have you with us, Mike, today.

What I wanted to do is to set the scene, before we hear from the Theatre expert, Mike, on the Asia Pacific Region, about how the Royal Navy sees that region and the way we've shifted some of our posture to reflect that in the last year or so.

RN Pacific Presence

Because it won't have escaped the attention of most of you who are tracking what the Royal Navy does and where it goes that this year has seen a very public return to that region.

The deployments of the frigate HMS Sutherland initially, which also went to Australia, the LPD HMS Albion and her embarked Royal Marines, now followed by the frigate HMS Argyll which is in the region as we speak, and then HMS Montrose, who I'll be on board in Chile in a couple of days' time, is then crossing the Pacific to New Zealand and Australia on her way through the region too; so all of that has drawn no small amount of interest and commentary, both in the region and back here in the UK.

And I hope that comes as no surprise because those deployments have had in the region, I am told, a really tangible effect. Whether on be operations: helping to enforce UN Security Council Resolutions against the DPRK, or the significant programmes of defence engagement they have been conducting right across the region – Indonesia, Vietnam, the Republic of Korea, Brunei, Japan and of course Australia to name but a few.

But why now? Why has that change of focus to the region come now?

Importance of the Pacific

Those of you who are aficionados of IISS events may have been at their other site in June when, the US CNO, Adm John Richardson, and I spoke at a similar event about the challenges we share together in the maritime domain, challenges that have grown considerably into threats, and threats have both intensified and diversified.

And whilst it's perhaps unsurprising that our combined UK/US geographical focus is principally in the Atlantic area, we made the point that the same challenge to freedom and security on the high seas is to be found in many other places in the world, perhaps most notably over the last year or so in the Indo-Pacific region.

And that's a region we here in the UK simply can't afford to ignore.

As I said at my Sea Power conference at RUSI a few weeks before that IISSevent I did with CNO, we were feeding off the UK Defence Concepts and Doctrine Centre's analysis of Global Strategic Trends which clearly identifies the economic shift towards the Indo-Pacific region; that's already on the way and will only intensify in the years to come

When you combine this with the well established importance and growth of global maritime trade, and the UK's ambitions for an enhanced global trade network once we depart from the European Union, it becomes very easy to see why the Indo-Pacific region will be of such strategic importance to this island nation in the years to come – physically separated from that region by several thousand miles though we may be.

But this renewed ambition for trade links in the Indo-Pacific, where some of the largest and fastest growing economies reside, does rely on influence in the region; you have to earn your place there.

And that's where the key attributes of a navy can come into play, the ability, as one of my predecessors, Adm Sir Mark Stanhope, once put it, to do ‘engagement without embroilment', and that can come into play in support of cross-government objectives.

But to paraphrase our Secretary of State for Defence: it's not all about soft power, it's also about being able to back it up with credible, hard power if required. And the way we can proactively contribute to regional maritime security is clearly one component of that.

China

In any assessment of the Indo-Pacific region, the growing role and influence of China will play a major part. China is the most populous country in the world, it's home to the largest supply of natural resources, it boasts the second largest world economy. So it is perhaps only natural that given their place in world they should look to exert their influence as a world power.

And we're seeing this ambition play out very clearly in the maritime domain as the PLA(Navy) evolves from a coastal force to a regional force, and now very clearly a global force; they had 5 different task groups on deployment around the world last year.

It's an ambition backed up by a programme of Naval expansion that massively exceeds any other country in the world, including the United States. If you look at the scale of their shipbuilding programme purely in terms of tonnage, it broadly equates to launching the equivalent of the whole Royal Navy or French Navy, every year, and they'll be able to do that for the next 10 years.

Combine this with their equally rapid development of tactics and doctrine and it is very clear that they now possess a potent Naval force, equipped and ready to support China's national agenda, and this will be the case more and more in the years to come as they become bigger and more and more capable.

Now there are probably differing, even conflicting views as to how this growth in Chinese military capability is to be perceived, but these perceptions are surely influenced in no small part by their recent actions like the militarisation of artificial features in the South China Sea, and I suspect not influenced for the better.

UK/China relationship

At the national political level, Britain is very clear eyed in its relationship with China, it's a good relationship and one we hope will continue to prosper for all sorts of reasons. And at a Head of Navy level, I'm pleased to say my relationship with Admiral Shen Jinlong, Commander of the PLA(N) is a good one. I visited him in China this year and we had a further meeting at the International Sea Power Symposium in Newport, Rhode Island a couple of months ago.

Now unquestionably there were issues on which we do not see eye to eye, but the open, honest and frank discussion we have over a myriad of issues which affect all of us in the maritime domain are open and genuinely valuable, and I thank him for it.

But at the same time, to again paraphrase my Defence Secretary, we will not shy away from telling them when we feel that they do not respect the commonly accepted rules and norms of international behaviour, the laws and systems from which we all benefit and therefore have a duty to protect.

Specifically, in the Maritime domain, we are committed to ensure that the global commons remain secure and freely available for all mariners who are going about their lawful purpose, anywhere in the world, and we will continue to work to ensure that the laws and conventions that exist to protect those rights are followed.

Return to Pacific

So it's clear that the Pacific is somewhere the Royal Navy needs to be, in defence of our national interests and to promote our national prosperity, but also to exert our influence in the region as we seek to uphold the rules that have underwritten our collective security since the middle of the last century.

But all of this comes after something of a fallow period in the Royal Navy's record of operations in this region, and I'm very keenly aware of that. Following the decision in the 1960s to withdraw naval forces from the region, and the demise of the Far East Fleet in 1971, our last ship, HMS Mermaid, left the Sembawang Basin in Singapore in September 1975.

Since then we have seen a steady decline in the Royal Navy's presence in the region, exacerbated further by the withdrawal from Hong Kong in 1997, to the extent that when Sutherland arrived back in the region earlier this year, that was the first Royal Naval presence in the region for 5 years.

The stark contrast of this year's near constant presence shows that we've now passed that nadir of presence and engagement, and I think we can now look forward to far closer engagement with our key regional partners there, whether it be in the guise of FPDA activity or bi-lateral and tri-lateral relationships such as our burgeoning relationship we have with Japan, and after Chile I fly on to Japan with Admiral Richardson to have another one of our close tri-lateral meetings with Admiral Murakawa, the head of the Japanese Defence Force.

RN/RAN

But whilst we may have been removed from the Pacific for a while, we have not lost our links with Pacific-based powers, especially the Royal Australian Navy. Throughout, our 2 navies have continued to enjoy a significant programme of personnel exchanges, building those all important personal relationships, shared experiences and mutual understanding.

And at the tactical and operational level, our collective efforts in the Middle East in particular have kept our 2 navies closely aligned.

As 2 of the 4 central members around which the 33 nation Combined Maritime Forces coalition has been built over the last 15 years or so, our ships have worked side by side and we have each taken a large share of Task Force Commander responsibilities. And if you've seen in the press in the last couple of days, we've also started to muscle in on the Royal Australian Navy's drug busts as well.

In the course of these commitments the Royal Navy and Royal Australian Navy have shared in a plethora of operational tasking – and no small amount of operational success – be it counter piracy and counter narcotics focussed maritime security tasking right the way through to offensive military action.

Going back to 2003, on the gun line off the Al Faw peninsula during 3 Cdo Bde RM's assault, that gunline was HMS Marlborough, HMS Richmond, HMS Chatham and HMAS Anzac.

And that Combined approach was far from unprecedented either; 12 years earlier during the 1991 Gulf War, HMS Gloucester and HMS Cardiff had operated in the high end of the Gulf establishing air defence supremacy alongside their Australian counterparts HMAS Brisbane and HMAS Sydney.

All of that is evidence of how closely our 2 navies have, and can, integrate with each other.

Interoperability

I hope we can take it as an established fact that interoperability lies at the heart of successful international partnerships. And that for effective interoperability, how we operate and why we operate is just as important as where we operate and when we operate. So it's about far more than simply our ability for our comms fits to speak to each other – important though that may be.

In this sense, the Royal Navy and Royal Australian Navy are always going to be natural partners. We have those ties that bind our 2 countries together, our common history including being part of the Commonwealth, and we're always going to share near identical outlooks and values, and I would contend that this is especially true in the relationship between our 2 navies. But now we have a generational opportunity to further enhance this Naval partnership.

The decision by Australia to buy and operate Type 26 frigates means that our 2 navies will soon be operating common Anti-Submarine Warfare platforms, the Australian Hunter class working side by side with our near identical Royal Navy City Class. And if you add to that our common outlook on how we generate these common platforms, how we bring that capability and its characteristics into service, it's but a short leap to see that we can find a way to operate them more closely together.

And therein lies the opportunity to set the gold standard for interoperability – in the Asia-Pacific region, in Combined Maritime Forces and more widely amongst the ‘Five Eyes' community.

And if the Type 26 has a coalescing effect for Combined RN/RAN operations, it will surely enhance our Anti-Submarine Warfare strategic partnership too, and Admiral Mike and I have signed an agreement today to push that between our too navies.

There's no small amount of truth in the old adage that ‘2 heads are better than 1'. So the ability to tap into all of the skills, knowledge and experience that our navies both share, to address the future challenges in the underwater battlespace that we know we face, I think that makes a really powerful partnership.

US and Regional Leadership

Potent though this combined force may be, I think it would be remiss of me not to reflect on the predominant Naval power in the Pacific, which of course remains the US Navy, a navy with whom both the Royal Navy and Royal Australian Navy also work incredibly closely.

Given the number of maritime facing nations in the Indo-Pacific region, some of which may be small but all of which are rightly proud and keen to play their part, leadership opportunities abound.

And working alongside the USN, there's no doubt that there's something the Royal Australian Navy can provide in leadership through the region, which is significant; providing the lead for other navies to follow and providing a unifying role within the region.

And I think this is something our 2 navies very much have in common.

Just as the Royal Australian Navy provides that leading role within the Pacific, I would like to think the same can be said for the Royal Navy's corresponding leadership role in the Atlantic and the adjoining seas, bringing together, in our case, principally European navies to work together alongside the US, in our case most often under the framework of NATO.

So the leadership role we play in our respective oceans is a real point of connection for us, and I hope this is something that will allow the Royal Navy to quickly begin to deliver effect alongside the RAN in the Pacific.

I hope that this work, the unifying effect that we can bring with the Royal Australian Navy, can achieve within the region the leadership opportunity that I think is there, and by bringing to bear our mutual close relationship with the US Navy and a host of other navies in the region, I think this can have a powerful effect.

Conclusion

A few weeks ago we marked the centenary of the armistice that brought to an end the First World War. The Royal Australian Navy might only have been formed 3 years before the outbreak of that war, but from the very outset our 2 navies were entirely compatible.

The Royal Australian Navy had almost all its major units operating as part of the Royal Navy's Grand Fleet in the North Sea for most of the Great War, and the Royal Naval Division landed directly alongside the Anzacs at Gallipoli. In the Second World War, 5 Australian destroyers distinguished themselves repeatedly as part of Admiral Cunningham's Mediterranean fleet and over 1,000 Australians were serving in the Royal Navy on D Day.

Through the subsequent campaigns in Korea and Malaya, and right up to the present with those 2 recent conflicts in the Arabian Gulf, our 2 navies have been at each other's side.

It's a partnership steeped in history. But it's also modern, forward looking, and it's hugely valued, certainly on my side, and I look forward to seeing it grow in the future.

So I'm hugely grateful to Mike for being here today and for all your team is doing to lean so heavily in to the optimisation of this relationship. Because as we re-assert our presence in your region I have no doubt our cooperation with you will continue to feature very heavily.

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/iiss-global-partnerships-event-2018

On the same subject

June 25, 2019 | International, Naval

Warship selected by Canada won’t be in U.S. competition – Americans accepting only proven designs
DAVID PUGLIESE The US Navy is moving ahead with its frigate program but the ship design selected by Canada, the United Kingdom and Australia won't be considered as the Americans are only considering proven vessels. Because the U.S. FFG(X) future frigate competition will only accept proven, at-sea designs, BAE Systems of the United Kingdom has decided not to enter its Type 26 Global Combat Ship in the competition, the U.S. Naval Institute's publication, USNI News, reports. The Canadian government plans to buy 15 Type 26 warships in a project now estimated by the Parliamentary Budget Officer to cost $70 billion. The project, known as Canadian Surface Combatant, is the largest single expenditure in Canadian government history. The Liberal government announced in February that it had entered into a contract with Irving Shipbuilding to acquire new warships based on the Type 26 design being built in the United Kingdom. With Canada ordering 15 of the warships, the Royal Canadian Navy will be the number one user of the Type 26 in the world. The United Kingdom had planned to buy 13 of the ships for its Royal Navy but cut that down to eight. Australia plans to buy nine of the vessels designed by BAE. But the Type 26 design is unproven. Construction of the first ship for the Royal Navy began in the summer of 2017 but that vessel is not expected to be accepted into service until 2025. Canada hopes to begin construction of its first Type 26 in the early 2020s. Alan Baribeau, a spokesman for U.S. Naval Sea Systems Command, told USNI News, the U.S. Navy requires a proven, in-the-water design for its future frigate program. “To promote and provide for full and open competition, the Navy will consider any hull form — foreign and domestic — that meets the requirements, will be built in a U.S. shipyard and has a parent design that has been through production and demonstrated (full scale) at sea,” Baribeau told USNI News. The entry of the BAE Type 26 warship in the Canadian competition was controversial from the start and sparked complaints the procurement process was skewed to favour that vessel. Previously the Liberal government had said only mature existing designs or designs of ships already in service with other navies would be accepted, on the grounds they could be built faster and would be less risky. Unproven designs can face challenges as problems are found once the vessel is in the water and operating. But the requirement for a mature design was changed and the government and Irving accepted the BAE design, though at the time it existed only on the drawing board. Company claims about what the Type 26 ship can do, including how fast it can go, are based on simulations or projections. The two other bidders in the Canadian program had ships actually in service with other navies so their capabilities were known. The Canadian Surface Combatant program is being run by Irving Shipbuilding to replace the navy's fleet of Halifax-class frigates and the Iroquois-class destroyers the navy previously operated. The updated estimate on the surface combatant program, compiled by the Parliamentary Budget Office and released June 21, covers the cost of project development, production of the ships, two years of spare parts and ammunition, training, government program management, upgrades to existing facilities, and applicable taxes. The previous Conservative government originally estimated the cost of the ships to be around $26 billion. The Department of National Defence now states that its estimate is between $56 billion and $60 billion. BAE Systems told USNI News that it would not be submitting any proposals for the U.S. FFG(X) program unless the U.S. Navy dumps its requirements for a proven hull design. The U.S. does not have any intention of changing its requirements. Four companies are expected to submit bids for the U.S. program– Austal USA, Fincantieri Marine, General Dynamics Bath Iron Works and Ingalls Shipbuilding – with deadlines of August 22 for technical proposals and September 26 for pricing proposals, the USNI News reported. The Canadian Surface Combatant program is currently in the development phase. The government projects the acquisition phase to begin in the early 2020s with deliveries to begin in the mid-2020s. The delivery of the 15th ship, slated for the late 2040s, will mark the end of that project. https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/warship-selected-by-canada-wont-be-in-u-s-competition-americans-accepting-only-proven-designs
January 28, 2021 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

Contract Awards by US Department of Defense - January 27, 2021
ARMY Eli Lilly and Co., Indianapolis, Indiana, was awarded a $625,000,000 modification (P00007) to contract W911QY-21-C-0016 for 500,000 doses of LY-CoV555, a COVID-19 therapeutic drug treatment. Work will be performed in Indianapolis, Indiana, with an estimated completion date of Jan. 27, 2021. Fiscal 2021 Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act funds in the amount of $625,000,000 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, is the contracting activity. (Awarded Jan. 26, 2021) Bay Ship & Yacht Co., Alameda, California (W56HZV-21-D-L002); Colonna's Shipyard Inc.,* Norfolk, Virginia (W56HZV-21-D-L003); Conley Marine Services,* Harvey, Louisiana (W56HZV-21-D-L004); Fairlead Boatworks Inc., Newport News, Virginia (W56HZV21DL005); GMD Shipyard Corp.,* Brooklyn, New York (W56HZV-21-D-L006); Gulf Copper & Manufacturing Corp.,* Galveston, Texas (W56HZV-21-D-L007); Lyon Shipyard Inc.,* Norfolk, Virginia (W56HZV-21-D-L008); Mare Island Dry Dock, Vallejo, California (W56HZV-21-D-L009); Metal Trades Inc.,* Yonges Island, South Carolina (W56HZV-21-D-L010); Murtech Inc.,* Glen Burnie, Maryland (W56HZV-21-D-L011); Platypus Marine Inc., Port Angeles, Washington (W56HZV-21-D-L012); Swiftships LLC,* Morgan City, Louisiana (W56HZV-21-D-L013); Vigor Marine LLC, Portland, Oregon (W56HZV-21-D-L014); and Yank Marine Services,* Dorchester, New Jersey (W56HZV-21-D-L015), will compete for each order of the $235,000,000 firm-fixed-price contract for the purpose of performing on-condition cyclic maintenance, modifications, modernizations and repairs, requiring the use of a dry dock as well as sustainment maintenance, modernization efforts on the Army Watercraft Fleet of vessels. Bids were solicited via the internet with 16 received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Jan. 26, 2026. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Detroit Arsenal, Michigan, is the contracting activity. Swiftships LLC,* Morgan City, Louisiana (W56HZV-21-D-L018); Heavy Engineering Industries and Shipbuilding Co., Shuwaikh, Kuwait (W56HZV-21-D-L019); Japan Marine United Co., Yokohama, Japan (W56HZV-21-D-L020); Orient Shipyard Co. Ltd., Pusan, South Korea (W56HZV-21-D-L021); Sumitomo Heavy Industries Ltd., Yokosuka, Japan (W56HZV-21-D-L022); Sunjin Entech Co. Ltd, Pusan, South Korea (W56HZV-21-D-L023); and Yokohama Engineering Works Ltd., Yokohama, Japan (W56HZV-21-D-L024), will compete for each order of the $180,000,000 firm-fixed-price contract for the follow-on efforts for the Watercraft Inspection Branch and Army Watercraft Systems Product Directorate to combine its shipyard efforts to efficiently execute modifications, modernizations and on-condition cyclic maintenance efforts for its existing fleet of vessels. Bids were solicited via the internet with seven received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Jan 26, 2026. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Detroit Arsenal, Michigan, is the contracting activity. Colonna's Shipyard Inc.,* Norfolk, Virginia (W56HZV-21-D-L025); Conley Marine Services LLC,* Harvey, Louisiana (W56HZV-21-D-L026); Continental Tide Defense Systems Inc., Wyomissing, Pennsylvania (W56HZV-21-D-L027); Epsilon Systems Solutions Inc., Portsmouth, Virginia (W56HZV-21-D-L028); Guam Industrial Services Inc., Agat, Guam (W56HZV-21-D-L029); Heavy Engineering Industries & Shipbuilding, Shuwaikh Port Area, Western Extension Shuwaikh, Kuwait (W56HZV-21-D-L030); HII Fleet Support Group LLC, Virginia Beach, Virginia (W56HZV-21-D-L031); L3 Unidyne Inc., Norfolk, Virginia (W56HZV-21-D-L032); Lyon Shipyard Inc., Norfolk, Virginia (W56HZV-21-D-L033); Metal Trades Inc.,* Yonges Island, South Carolina (W56HZV-21-D-L034); QED Systems Inc., Virginia Beach, Virginia (W56HZV-21-D-L035); Sumitomo Heavy Industries Ltd., Yokosuka, Kanagawa, Japan (W56HZV-21-D-L036); Sunjin Entech Co. Ltd., Pusan, South Korea (W56HZV-21-D-L037); and Yokohama Engineering Works Ltd., Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan (W56HZV-21-D-L038), will compete for each order of the $155,000,000 firm-fixed-price contract for unprogrammed maintenance, emergency repair, modification and modernization efforts that do not require the use of a dry dock. Bids were solicited via the internet with 15 received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Jan. 26, 2026. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Detroit Arsenal, Michigan, is the contracting activity. Indtai Inc.,* Vienna, Virginia, was awarded an $8,021,713 modification (P00004) to contract W9124J-20-C-0012 to provide educational support services in education centers located on over 60 Army garrisons in the continental U.S., Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Japan and the Republic of Korea. Work will be performed in San Antonio, Texas, with an estimated completion date of Jul. 27, 2021. Fiscal 2021 operation and maintenance (Army) funds in the amount of $8,021,713 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Field Directorate Office, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, is the contracting activity. NAVY CH2M Hill Inc., Englewood, Colorado, is awarded a maximum value $480,000,000 cost-plus-award-fee, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity, architect-engineering contract for comprehensive long-term environmental action services in the Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command (NAVFAC) Atlantic area of responsibility (AOR). The work to be performed provides for architectural and engineering services to provide program management and technical environmental services in support of the Department of the Navy's Environmental Restoration Program, Munitions Response Program and other similar programs at any Navy and Marine Corps activity in the AOR covered by NAVFAC Atlantic. Future task orders will be primarily funded by environmental restoration (Navy) funds. An initial task order is being awarded at $200,000 for architect-engineering services at the program management office in Virginia Beach, Virginia, and is expected to be completed by March 2022. All work on this contract will be performed within the NAVFAC Atlantic AOR including, but not limited to, North Carolina (25%); Puerto Rico (25%); Virginia (25%); Maryland (10%); California (5%); District of Columbia (3%); West Virginia (3%); Washington (2%); and Alaska (2%), and is expected to be completed by January 2026. Fiscal 2021 environmental restoration (Navy) funds in the amount of $200,000 will be obligated at time of award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured via the Federal Business Opportunities website, with two proposals received. The Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command, Atlantic, Norfolk, Virginia, is the contracting activity (N62470-21-D-0007). Lockheed Martin Corp., Orlando, Florida, is awarded a not-to-exceed $49,663,781 undefinitized firm-fixed-price modification (P00001) to cost-plus-fixed-fee order N00019-21-F-0062 against previously issued basic ordering agreement N00019-19-G-0029. This modification adds scope for the production and delivery of 19 AN/AAQ-30A Target Sight Systems; 14 for the government of Bahrain and five for the government of the Czech Republic. Work will be performed in Orlando, Florida (36%); Burlington, Ontario, Canada (34%); Merrimack, New Hampshire (14%); Ocala, Florida (5%); Santa Barbara, California (3%); and various locations within the continental U.S. (8%), and is expected to be completed in January 2023. Foreign Military Sales funds in the amount of $7,433,265 will be obligated at the time of award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity. (Awarded Jan. 26, 2021) Maxon Furniture Inc., Muscatine, Iowa, is awarded a $34,924,508 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract. This contract provides furniture finishes and equipment to ensure office furniture standardization, sustainability and maximum flexibility of personnel office spaces including design services and installation. Work will be performed in Muscatine, Iowa, and is expected to be completed in January 2026. Fiscal 2021 working capital (Navy) funds in the amount of $2,733 will be obligated at time of award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured via an electronic request for proposal; three offers were received. The Naval Air Warfare Center, Weapons Division, China Lake, California, is the contracting activity (N68936-21-D-0011). Bell Boeing Joint Project Office, Amarillo, Texas, is awarded a $25,523,136 modification (P00005) to cost-plus-fixed-fee, firm-fixed-price order N00019-20-F-0315 against previously issued basic ordering agreement N00019-17-G-0002. This modification adds scope for the production and delivery of nine right aft sponson fuel tank kits in support of V-22 Production Aircraft 9-17 for the government of Japan. Additionally, this modification provides development and updates to existing technical data as well as services in support of aircraft deliveries and aircrew pilot and crew chief training for the government of Japan. Work will be performed in Jacksonville, North Carolina (35%); Chiba Provence, Japan (35%); Ridley Park, Pennsylvania (20%); Stennis, Mississippi (5%); and Fort Worth, Texas (5%), and is expected to be completed in March 2024. Foreign Military Sales funds in the amount of $25,523,136 will be obligated at time of award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity. Lockheed Martin Corp., Marietta, Georgia, is awarded a $11,403,660 cost-plus-fixed-fee indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract. This contract provides engineering and logistics services in support of the Maritime Patrol and Reconnaissance Aircraft program to monitor and manage fatigue and obsolescence issues and operational and/or technical problems arising from P-3 fleet usage for the Navy, Foreign Military Sales customers and other U.S. government agencies. Work will be performed in Marietta, Georgia, and is expected to be completed in January 2026. No funds will be obligated at the time of award; 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 Aircraft Division, Lakehurst, New Jersey, is the contracting activity (N68335-21-D-0045). Boeing Distribution Inc., Dallas, Texas, is awarded an $8,624,300 firm-fixed-price modification (P00008) to previously awarded contract N00019-18-C-0055. This modification adds scope for the production and delivery of two P-8A engine build up kits and associated mating to core engine; one for the government of New Zealand and one for the government of Australia. Work will be performed in Dallas, Texas (50%); and Everett, Washington (50%), and is expected to be completed in June 2022. Foreign Military Sales funds in the amount of $8,624,300 will be obligated at time of award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity. AIR FORCE Lockheed Martin Aeronautics, Marietta, Georgia, has been awarded a $129,363,552 firm-fixed-price, cost-plus-fixed-fee, cost-reimbursable, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for C-5 contractor logistic support services. This contract involves supply chain management, repair and technical support services. Work will be performed in Marietta, Georgia; and Greenville, South Carolina, and is expected to completed Jan. 31, 2022. This award is the result of a sole-source acquisition. Fiscal 2021 Material Supply Division; and operation and maintenance funds in the amount of $31,544,612 are being obligated at the time of award by way of task order FA8525-21-F0003. Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Robins Air Force Base, Georgia, is the contracting activity. L3Harris Technologies Inc., Colorado Springs, Colorado, has been awarded an $89,712,422 fixed-price-incentive-firm modification (P00024) to contract FA8823-20-C-0004 for system sustainment services Option Year Two. This modification updates and revises the Maintenance of Space Situational Awareness Integrated Capabilities system sustainment performance requirements for the current option year. Work will be performed in Colorado Springs, Colorado; and Dahlgren, Virginia, and is expected to be completed Jan 31, 2022. Fiscal 2021 operation and maintenance funds in the amount of $55,578,977 are being obligated at the time of award. Total cumulative face value of the contract is $315,420,730. Space and Missile Systems Center, Peterson Air Force Base, Colorado, is the contracting activity. Gulfstream Aerospace Corp., Savannah, Georgia, has been awarded an $83,831,036 firm-fixed-price modification (P00014) to contract FA8106-18-D-0002 for C-20/C-37 fleet sustainment. The contract modification is for exercise of Option Year Four, to include issuance of task orders for a one-year extension of contract term to support the C-20 and C-37 fleet for the Air Force, Army, Navy, Marines and Coast Guard; funding uninterrupted continuation of contractor logistics. Work will be performed in Savannah, Georgia; Naval Air Station Sigonella, Italy; Ramstein Air Base, Germany; Joint Base Andrews, Maryland; Hickam Air Force Base, Hawaii; Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Hawaii; and Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, Washington, D.C. The work is expected to be completed Jan. 31, 2022. Fiscal 2021 operation and maintenance funds in the amount of $44,482,293 are being obligated at the time of award. Total cumulative face value of the contract is $594,429,554. Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Tinker AFB, Oklahoma, is the contracting activity. MilSup LLC, Las Vegas, Nevada, has been awarded a $50,628,080 firm-fixed-price contract for the RC/OC/WC-135 and E-4B Contract Aircrew Training (CAT) and Courseware Development (CWD) program. The contractor will furnish all personnel, equipment, tools, materials, supervision and all other items and services that are required to perform RC/OC/WC-135 and E-4B CAT and CWD. Work will be performed at Offutt Air Force Base, Nebraska, and is expected to be completed March 31, 2026. This award is the result of a competitive Service Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business acquisition and six offers were received. Fiscal 2021 operation and maintenance funds in the amount of $145,476 are being obligated at the time of award. Air Combat Command, Acquisition Management and Integration Center, Joint Base Langley-Eustis, Virginia, is the contracting activity (FA4890-21-C-0001). U.S. TRANSPORTATION COMMAND Eleven (11) companies have been awarded Option Year 3 modifications under the following Category A (CAT A) III, Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity, Fixed Price contracts: HTC711-18-D-C003/P00008 American Airlines of Fort Worth, TX; HTC711-18-D-C004/P00008 Air Transportation International (ATI) of Irving, TX; HTC711-18-D-C005/P00008 Atlas Air of Purchase, NY; HTC711-18-D-C006/P00008 Delta Air Lines, Inc. of Atlanta, GA; HTC711-18-D-C007/P00008 FedEx of Washington, DC; HTC711-18-D-C008/P00008 Hawaiian Airlines, Inc. of Honolulu, HI; HTC711-18-D-C011/P00008 National Air Cargo, Inc. of Orlando, FL; HTC711-18-D-C012/P00008 Polar Air Cargo Worldwide, Inc. of Purchase, NY; HTC711-18-D-C013/P00008 United Parcel Service Co. (UPS) of Louisville, KY; HTC711-18-D-C014/P00008 USA Jet Airlines of Belleville, MI; and HTC711-18-D-C015/P00008 Western Global Airlines (WGA) of Estero, FL. The companies are eligible to compete at the task order level for an option year estimated amount of $34,732,959. The program's cumulative value increased from $124,325,701 to $159,058,660 (estimated). This modification provides international commercial scheduled air cargo transportation services. Services encompass time-definite, door-to-door pick-up and delivery, transportation, Intransit Visibility (ITV), Government-Approved Third Party Payment System participation, and expedited customs processing and clearance of less than full planeloads for the movement of regular and recurring hazardous, refrigerated/cold chain (perishable), life and death, narcotics, and other regular recurring cargo shipments. Work will be performed world-wide. Option Year 3 period of performance is Feb. 1, 2021 to Jan. 31, 2022. United States Transportation Command (USTRANSCOM), Directorate of Acquisition, Scott Air Force Base, IL, 62225-5357, is the contracting activity. *Small business https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contracts/Contract/Article/2484774/source/GovDelivery/
October 15, 2024 | International, C4ISR, Security

The Rise of Zero-Day Vulnerabilities: Why Traditional Security Solutions Fall Short

All news