Back to news

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

On the same subject

  • Oshkosh agrees to buy Pratt Miller for $115M

    December 17, 2020 | International, Land

    Oshkosh agrees to buy Pratt Miller for $115M

    By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — Joint Light Tactical Vehicle-maker Oshkosh Defense announced it has agreed to buy engineering company Pratt Miller, which brings with it artificial intelligence, autonomy and robotics expertise. Oshkosh said in a Dec. 15 news release that it has entered into a definitive agreement to acquire Pratt Miller in a cash-free, debt-free purchase price of $115 million. The New Hudson, Michigan-based Pratt Miller will keep its name, team, facilities and branding, according to the statement. The engineering company was founded in 1989 and is becoming known for its robotics capabilities. The firm recently won a U.S. Army contract in a partnership with QinetiQ to provide prototypes of the light variant of its Robotic Combat Vehicle for evaluation. Pratt Miller also won a contract to develop a design to integrate a new weapon system onto a Stryker combat vehicle under the Stryker Medium Caliber Weapons System lethality program. It is partnered with Rafael in the competition in which government testing of offerings is ongoing. The Israeli government recently expressed enthusiastic interest in mating Oshkosh vehicles with Rafael's Iron Dome missile defense system. In addition, Pratt Miller was one of six companies chosen by Army Futures Command to work on ways to improve the currently cumbersome, taxing and sometimes risky munitions resupply system for field artillery units operating M109 Paladin howitzers. “Pratt Miller has made significant advances in dynamic growth areas such as artificial intelligence, robotics, autonomous and connected systems and electrification,” which puts Oshkosh more into the robotics game than ever before. “We believe combining Pratt Miller's engineering expertise with Oshkosh's innovation and operational strengths will enable us to better serve customers and position our Company for growth,” John Pfeifer, Oshkosh Corporation president and chief operating officer, said in the statement. “Pratt Miller's motorsports heritage has created a culture of speed and agility that has defined our success,” added Matt Carroll, the company's CEO. “Oshkosh is an ideal partner for us to apply that mindset to some of the most significant challenges facing customers today. Together, we expect to grow our decade-long partnership and expand our pipeline of new business opportunities. We look forward to learning from one another and continuing to innovate to bring market-leading products to our customers.” The buy, which is subject to customary closing conditions, should be complete in the first quarter of calendar year 2021, the statement noted. The acquisition also could give Oshkosh more leverage in competitions like JLTV re-compete effort which has recently kicked off and the Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle program to replace the Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle. A request for proposals for the OMFV program is expected to drop by the end of the week. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2020/12/15/oshkosh-buys-pratt-miller-for-115m/

  • Boeing could be out of the Air Force’s competition for next-gen ICBMs for good

    October 22, 2019 | International, Aerospace

    Boeing could be out of the Air Force’s competition for next-gen ICBMs for good

    By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — Boeing's risk reduction contract for the Air Force's Ground Based Strategic Deterrent program is functionally cancelled, the company announced Oct. 21. “Boeing is disappointed in the Air Force's decision to not allot additional funding for the GBSD Technology Maturation and Risk Reduction (TMRR) contract,” said Boeing spokesman Todd Blecher. “The Boeing team has delivered substantial value under the contract, achieved all contract milestones on time and received strong performance feedback from the Air Force.” “Continuing Boeing's TMRR contract would advance the Air Force's objectives of maturing the missile system's design and reducing the risk for this critical national priority capability,” he added. GBSD is the Air Force's program to replace its existing Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missiles, a major priority for the service as well as for U.S. Strategic Command, which oversees the operations of America's nuclear arsenal. Earlier on Monday evening, Politico reported that the Air Force had sent a letter to Boeing last week declaring its intent to stop funding the TMRR contract. Without additional money from the Air Force to continue work, Boeing expected its funding stream for the GBSD contract to be exhausted on Oct. 18, the company stated in an Oct. 16 letter to the GBSD program office at Hill Air Force Base, Utah. “The Air Force's decision not to allocate any further funding to the TMRR contract requires immediate and irrevocable actions by Boeing to wind down contract performance within the allotted funds. These measures include the reassignment of approximately 300 Boeing employees and the flow-down of a Stop Work notice to all suppliers working on the TMRR contract,” states the letter, which was obtained by Defense News. Air Force spokeswoman Capt. Cara Bousie told Defense News that the service had not cancelled Boeing's TMRR contract. However, she declined to comment on whether the Air Force had sent Boeing a letter stating its intention to curtail funding for the contract. Regardless of the semantics, a decision to cut short the TMRR contract would effectively hand the GBSD award to Northrop Grumman, the sole company competing against Boeing to produce the weapon system. Both Boeing and Northrop were awarded risk reduction contracts worth up to $359 million in 2017, beating out Lockheed Martin for the chance to bring their designs into the production stage. But Boeing withdrew from the GBSD competition in July, claiming that Northrop Grumman's purchase of one of the only two U.S. solid rocket motor manufacturers — Orbital ATK, now known as Northrop Grumman Innovation Systems — gave the company an unfair advantage in terms of being able to offer the lowest-cost system. In a July 23 letter, Leanne Caret, who leads Boeing's defense business, wrote that the current acquisition approach gives Northrop “inherently unfair cost, resource and integration advantages.” “We lack confidence in the fairness of any procurement that does not correct this basic imbalance between competitors,” she stated. Caret added that a joint bid between the two companies was unrealistic, as Northrop would have no incentive to partner with Boeing when it can put forward a solo bid. However, Boeing switched tactics about a month later, with Frank McCall, its director of strategic deterrence systems, telling reporters in September that the company hoped to persuade the Air Force to force Northrop to partner with it. “We think clearly it's time for the Air Force or other governmental entities to engage and direct the right solution. Northrop has elected not to do that,” McCall said during the Air Force Association's annual conference. “So, we're looking for government intervention to drive us to the best solution.” The Air Force did not take Boeing up on that suggestion. Nor did Northrop, which pointedly released its list of suppliers days before the AFA conference. The list — which featured Aerojet Rocketdyne, Collins Aerospace, Lockheed Martin and other major defense contractors — did not include Boeing. Boeing, in its letter to the program office, stated that the dissolution of the risk reduction contract could disadvantage the Air Force as it moves forward with the GBSD program, even if it ultimately opts to sole-source from Northrop. “The Government's decision also prevents Boeing from completing the work left to be performed under the TMRR contract, including the major milestones of a successful Software System Review and Preliminary Design Review,” it said. "We believe this work would provide substantial value to the Government, irrespective of the fact that Boeing will not participate as a prime offeror under the current EMD [engineering, manufacturing and development] solicitation structure for the next phase of the GBSD program. In September, McCall pointed to Boeing's ongoing risk reduction work on GBSD as a positive sign that the service may not be ready to sole-source the program to Northrop. “The service is maintaining our work," he said. “They continue to accept our deliverables, continue to fund our contract. So, I think we're in good shape with the service.” But with the TMRR contract revoked, Boeing's last hope may be an appeal to Congress. Sen. Doug Jones of Alabama as someone who has already raised shown support for Boeing's position, McCall said in September. McCall declined to name others, but should this turn into a legislative fight, it could come down to Boeing's supporters – with strongholds in Alabama, Washington and Missouri – versus those of Northrop Grumman. https://www.defensenews.com/smr/nuclear-arsenal/2019/10/22/boeing-could-be-out-of-the-air-forces-competition-for-next-gen-icbms-for-good

  • New warplane sensor team boosts UK-Japan defense agenda

    February 16, 2022 | International, Aerospace

    New warplane sensor team boosts UK-Japan defense agenda

    The envisioned radio frequency system antenna is designed to prove capabilities such as locating static or moving targets and denying external surveillance technology.

All news