News

By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — The fight to build America's next missile interceptor has officially begun. The Missile Defense Agency on Friday released its request for proposal for its Next-Generation Interceptor (NGI). The RFP aims to downselect to two companies who will then compete for the right to build the interceptor, which will form the core of America's homeland missile defense going forward. Proposals are due July 31, but the MDA notes that there may be some give in that schedule due to the ongoing COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic. The agency requested $664.1 million in fiscal year 2021 for the NGI program, as part of a $4.9 billion five-year budget plan. Mark Wright, a spokesman for MDA, called the RFP “a vital step forward in designing, developing, and fielding the finest capabilities of both the DoD and American industry for the extraordinarily important purpose of defending the American homeland.” “Notably, the intention of awarding two contracts for simultaneous development of the NGI effort promotes a healthy competition between the two contractor teams to produce the best NGI possible in the shortest time feasible,” Wright added. In August, the Pentagon made the surprise decision to cancel the Redesigned Kill Vehicle program, with DoD research and engineering head Mike Griffin saying he didn't want to keep throwing money at a program with fundamental technical issues. RKV would have upgraded the U.S. homeland defense system's interceptors designed to go after ballistic missile defense threats. The Pentagon decided that no more ground-based interceptors for the Ground-based Midcourse Defense System (GMD) would be built and all future interceptors that are fielded as part of the GMD system will be the new interceptor – that is, the NGI program. Critics of the decision to cancel RKV and start over with a new design have raised concerns over the timeline, which could extend past 2030. But speaking in March, MDA head Vice Adm. Jon Hill said that waiting that long for the new capability is “unacceptable from a war fighter view” and “unacceptable to me as a program manager.” Hill said once bids are on the table, the agency will be able to take a harder look at schedule and once an award has been made, it will hold industry accountable to meet “all the wickets.” If that happens, the schedule can be pulled to the left. https://www.defensenews.com/space/2020/04/24/pentagon-releases-request-for-proposals-on-next-generation-interceptor/

By: Joe Gould WASHINGTON ― Cash flow for small defense contractors is continuing to suffer under the coronavirus pandemic, according to a survey by the National Defense Industrial Association. The survey echoes warnings from the Pentagon that these firms, part of a vast network of suppliers that makes up the defense-industrial base, are especially vulnerable. The Pentagon this week announced it will make $3 billion in new “progress payments" to increase cash flow to prime contractors, expecting the money would then trickle down. Of the NDIA survey respondents: 67 percent of companies with less than $1 million in annual revenue have seen a cash-flow disruption. 60 percent said the crisis has interfered with their cash flow. 60 percent expect to have long-term financial and cash-flow issues stemming from the crisis. 66 percent said accelerated payments from the Defense Department or prime contractors would be the most helpful step toward business recovery. L3Harris Technologies said this week it will issue more than $100 million in payments to its small suppliers. Lockheed Martin announced Friday it executed $256 million in accelerated payment toward its $450 million goal. Both of these promised followed the Pentagon's announcement this month that it will boost progress payment rates from 80 percent to 90 percent for large companies, and to 95 percent for small businesses. The payments are made to contractors, usually on a monthly basis, for costs incurred and work performed under a contract; a 90 percent rate means that if $1 million in expenses are submitted on the program, the Defense Department will reimburse $900,000. Sixty-six percent of the respondents also said it would help them to receive flexibility on the performance of their contracts. Seventy-two percent expected to avoid overruns on their firm fixed-price contracts as a result of disruptions caused by COVID-19. On Thursday, acquisitions officials with the Army said they expect costs to rise, and in response will guard against program slips and closely watch vulnerable lower-tier companies with less slack in their workforces. Pentagon officials anticipate workforce and supply chain issues will yield a three-month delay across the majority of its Major Defense Acquisition Program portfolio. “The supply chain does have some challenges, and that's probably where the vast majority of any slips would occur that are tied to individual companies,” said Bruce Jette, the Army's acquisition chief. “These companies are small, and if one person gets COVID in the company, the next thing you know you've lost 14 days with the company because everybody that didn't get it is in quarantine.” As of April 10, 769 small businesses responded to the NDIA survey. The number of companies expecting cash-flow disruptions was slightly lower last month, when 458 small businesses responded. Factoring into cash-flow problems, according to the NDIA, are cuts to billable hours, delayed payments from prime contractors and government customers, a lack of telework options or schedule flexibility in contracts, and shelter-in-place orders that prevent employees from working. Beyond revenue expectations, meeting contract obligations and access to capital are where small businesses are taking the biggest hits during the pandemic. Other areas of difficulty were workforce availability, access to secure facilities, contracting officers accessibility, clear information from the Defense Department, confidence in the supply chain, and stock and cost of materials. The technology and services sectors reported more disturbances from the crisis than the manufacturing sector, NDIA noted. And businesses with fewer than 50 employees are feeling the brunt harder than businesses with more than 500 employees. Defense Contract Management Agency data this week showed that 106 out of 10,509 primary Pentagon contractors are closed, and 68 companies closed and then reopened. Of 11,413 subcontractors, 427 were closed, with 147 having closed and reopened. https://www.defensenews.com/2020/04/24/covid-cash-crunch-still-hurting-small-defense-firms/

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/

By: Thomas G. Mahnken The massive price tag associated with the response to the new coronavirus, COVID-19, coupled with the inevitable impact of the pandemic on the U.S. economy, threatens to blow a hole in the defense budget at a time when the challenges posed by China, Russia, Iran and North Korea show no signs of abating. Leaders in both the executive and legislative branches will need to make tough strategic choices to keep the United States strong in these challenging times. Secretary of Defense Mark Esper, his predecessor Jim Mattis and the bipartisan National Defense Strategy Commission all agree that annual increases in the defense budget on the order of 3-5 percent are required to implement the 2018 National Defense Strategy. Even absent the pandemic, the chances of getting such resources seemed uncertain at best. The Trump administration's own budget projections show the defense budget in the coming years as flat or declining. Now, a flat budget more and more appears to be the rosiest scenario. More worrisome, and increasingly likely, is the possibility of major cuts to the defense budget. Indeed, cuts on the order of 20-25 percent are not unthinkable. Merely pointing out that such a move would jeopardize U.S. security is unlikely to prevent it. Similarly, noting — correctly — that defense spending is one of the most stimulative forms of federal spending may prove insufficient to forestall cuts. How can the United States realize the greatest economic and military benefit from the defense budget in the coming years? Below are a half-dozen guidelines to help the United States get the maximum strategic benefit from defense spending in this challenging time: 1. Keep production lines going. Now is not the time to be cutting back on defense production. To the contrary, keeping existing weapons production lines active makes both military and economic sense. The U.S. military is in many ways still living off the Reagan-era defense buildup of the 1980s and is sorely in need of modernization. Keeping defense production going also makes good economic sense. In a period of rising unemployment, employing as many Americans as possible will help the United States weather the economic storm brought on by COVID-19. The government should also be flexible in administering the cost and schedule of contracts, given the pandemic's impact on the defense-industrial base. 2. Stock up. Now is also the time to increase orders of things we know that we need but have not purchased enough of, such as munitions. As the NDS Commission found in 2018, the United States has under-invested in precision munitions such as the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile-Extended Range and Long Range Anti-Ship Missile. Ramping up production of munitions and other expendables will not only boost employment but also help the United States better prepare for a future conflict where such munitions will be in high demand. 3. Be selective in divesting. The United States should also divest itself of aging capabilities but be thoughtful in doing so. It makes sense to retire old ships and aircraft because the cost of maintaining those systems goes up considerably as they age. It makes much less sense to divest relatively new systems that have plenty of life left in them. For example, the Air Force has proposed shutting down production of the MQ-9 Reaper and retiring more than two-thirds of its RQ-4 Global Hawk fleet. 4. Get the most out of what we have. Whereas economic conditions may have changed, the external threats that we face have not. As a result, there is an urgent need to develop new ways of war, particularly those that use more effective capabilities that we have. For example, as I have argued elsewhere, non-stealthy unmanned aerial systems such as the MQ-9 and RQ-4 offer a cost-effective way to deter opportunistic aggression by China in the Western Pacific or Russia in Eastern Europe. 5. Keep promoting innovation. A downturn in the defense budget should not become an excuse for conservatism. To the contrary, it should spur innovation. For example, fiscal austerity provides an opportunity to reform the military health care system and downsize basing infrastructure. Now is also the time to explore ways to make military training more effective and cost-efficient through the adoption of approaches such as live, virtual, constructive training. There are also opportunities to realize savings through greater outsourcing of maintenance and logistics. Whereas the defense primes employ the most workers, in a number of cases smaller companies have been the source of some of the most innovative approaches to defense in areas such as unmanned systems, expendable aircraft, space innovations, networked solutions and cyber. Supporting smaller, innovative companies should thus be a priority. The Defense Department and Congress should also take an active role in supporting key segments of the defense-industrial base. Areas such as hypersonics, directed energy and unmanned systems that hold the key to effectiveness tomorrow will need support today. 6. Share costs. Finally, the United States should take every opportunity to promote arms exports, which both create jobs and increase the security of our allies. Much more should be done to increase the speed and predictability of the arms export process. In addition, with few exceptions, U.S. weapons should be developed with export in mind. We should avoid a repetition of the case of the F-22 aircraft, which was designed from birth never to be exported. We need to learn from the past in developing the next generation of weapons. For example, in recent months, Australian defense analysts have discussed the attractiveness of the B-21 Raider stealth bomber for Australia's defense needs. Export of the B-21 to a close ally such as Australia, should Canberra so desire, should be given serious consideration. The current situation is challenging, with even more difficult times to come. If we are smart, however, we can both keep Americans at work and get what we need for national defense. Thomas G. Mahnken is president and CEO of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments think tank. He is also a senior research professor at the Philip Merrill Center for Strategic Studies at Johns Hopkins' School of Advanced International Studies. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/04/24/six-ways-the-us-can-maximize-its-strategic-benefit-from-defense-spending/

James Yeager This year is only four months old and it's already one for the history books — and not in a great way. As the defense community works in tandem with the broader government to keep citizens safe and healthy, cybersecurity threats are only becoming more aggressive. If we've learned anything about cyber adversaries, it's that they will seize on any opportunity to gain an advantage in targeting their victims, including exploiting the fears of the public during a global pandemic. As COVID-19 has moved from the East to the West, adversaries have followed suit, using lures that play into people's desperation for information on the disease. In “The Art of War,” Sun-Tzu said“In the midst of chaos, there is also opportunity.” The COVID-19 virus is infecting more than just people. The pandemic has created chaos and handed adversaries an irresistible opportunity to exploit the situation to gain entry into our networks, whether that's to steal intellectual property, disrupt operations, or gain a strategic advantage if they are a nation-state actor. Already, we are seeing an increase in phishing campaigns using COVID-19 as a hook to launch malware in emails disguised as alerts. Particularly vulnerable are the thousands of remote workers — government employees and contractors alike — who are using their own home networks, which are largely less sophisticated and secure than their work environments. The stakes are high, particularly for those in defense jobs, where an errant click can have devastating consequences. Coincidently, 2020 is the year when the DoD's Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification has grown teeth and will force more than 300,000 defense contractors to up their cybersecurity game or face bottom-line consequences. Now is not the time to make mistakes. In CrowdStrike's recent Global Threat Report, we captured and analyzed real-world inputs from observed trends in cyber-attacks on commercial and government enterprises. The following are some of the notable attack vectors and trends we observed across the public sector during 2019: An escalation in ransom demands, including ransomware attacks on defense supply chain providers, schools and local municipalities. Surpassing the volume of malware attacks are malware-free attacks that use code which executes from memory or stolen login credentials. Continued state-sponsored targeted intrusions aimed at the government and defense sector. In fact, we have witnessed adversaries exploiting fear around COVID-19 to socially engineer their way to user credentials and sensitive data. In the months ahead, I contend we'll see many more of the same tactics from the same bad actors: Russia, China and newer players on the block, such as Iran, which has leveraged U.S. social media platforms to develop information operations campaigns. Amidst massive change, periodic chaos and long-term disruption, the defense community — government and industry — must put a premium on speed. Speed to detect. Speed to investigate. Speed to mitigate. We recommend that agencies and companies implement cybersecurity practices that follow the 1-10-60 Rule: detect intrusions within 1 minute; investigate and gain a comprehensive understanding of the attack within 10 minutes; and contain and remove the threatening adversary from the network within 60 minutes. This benchmark will limit the damage caused by inevitable attacks. Yes, inevitable. Cyberattacks are a constant and while building a bigger, wider and thicker wall may help keep bad actors out, they are persistent and determined enough to eventually get in, and when they do, you're on the clock. This year will only get worse as the impacts of COVID-19 will be deep, damaging and long-lasting. We're all faced with loss and uncertainty as we attempt to recover from the global pandemic. For the defense community, there is no time to recover and regroup. You are already on the clock, as those who wish to do our nation harm are already hard at work. https://www.fifthdomain.com/opinion/2020/04/24/in-chaos-theres-opportunity-and-thats-bad-news/

DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY Sysco Raleigh, Selma, North Carolina, has been awarded a maximum $120,930,698 fixed-price with economic-price-adjustment, indefinite-quantity contract for full-line food distribution. This was a competitive acquisition with one response received. This is a two-year base contract with two 18-month option periods. Location of performance is North Carolina, with an April 19, 2022, performance completion date. Using military services are Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2020 through 2022 defense working capital funds. The contracting agency is Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (SPE300-20-D-3269). EFW Inc., Fort Worth, Texas, has been awarded a maximum $79,054,850 firm-fixed-price contract for hand stations, gunner hand stations and circuit cards for the Bradley fighting vehicle. 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 contract with no option periods. Location of performance is Texas, with an April 30, 2023, performance completion date. Using military service is Army. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2020 through 2023 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Land and Maritime, Warren, Michigan (SPRDL1-20-D-0019). Oshkosh Defense LLC, Oshkosh, Wisconsin, has been awarded a $57,989,530 firm-fixed-price contract for engines with containers. This is a two-year four-month contract with no option periods. This was a competitive acquisition with one response received. Location of performance is Wisconsin, with an Aug. 8, 2022, performance completion date. Using military service is Army. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2020 through 2022 Army working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Land and Maritime, Warren, Michigan (SPRDL1-20-C-0109). Thales Defense & Security Inc., Clarksburg, Maryland, has been awarded a maximum $19,317,824 firm-fixed-price contract for airborne low frequency sonar spare parts. 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 four-month contract with no option periods. Location of performance is Maryland, with an Aug. 30, 2023, performance completion date. Using military service is Navy. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2020 through 2023 Navy working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Aviation, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (SPRPA1-20-C-Y025). American Water Military Services LLC, Camden, New Jersey, has been awarded an $8,704,164 modification (P00014) to a 50-year contract (SP0600-18-C-8324), with no option periods, for water and wastewater utility services at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. This is a fixed-price with economic-price-adjustment contract increasing the obligated value from $18,232,817 to $19,190,974. Locations of performance are Missouri and New Jersey, with an April 30, 2069, performance completion date. Using military service is Army. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2019 through 2069 Army operations and maintenance funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Energy, Fort Belvoir, Virginia. Seiler Instrument and Manufacturing Co., Inc.,* St. Louis, Missouri, has been awarded a maximum $8,465,640 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for M119A1 light towed howitzer infinity collimators. This was a competitive acquisition with three responses received. This is a five-year contract with no option periods. Location of performance is Missouri, with a May 24, 2025, performance completion date. Using military service is Army. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2020 through 2025 Army working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Land and Maritime, Warren, Michigan (SPRDL1-20-D-0091). AIR FORCE Raytheon Corp., Marlborough, Massachusetts, has been awarded a $117,543,944 modification (P00110) to contract FA8705-14-C-0001 to exercise the production option contract line item numbers 0005, 0006, 0009, 0050AC and 0050AF for a global aircrew strategic network terminal. This modification brings the total cumulative value of the contract from $542,640,854 to $660,184,798. Work will be performed in Largo, Florida, and is expected to be completed by June 24, 2022. Fiscal 2020 other procurement funds in the amount of $117,543,944 are being obligated at time of award. Air Force Material Command, Hanscom Air Force Base, Massachusetts, is the contracting activity. Huntington Ingalls Industries, Fairfax, Virginia, and Des Moines, Iowa, has been awarded a $64,076,424 contract for Air National Guard operational training support. This contract provides for support of the Distributed Training Operations Center (DTOC). The primary mission of the DTOC is to provide expertise and staffing for the execution of Distributed Mission Operations (DMO) events and tests, and to provide technical and analytical expertise in support of networked operations. This effort includes technical and program management, scenario development, DMO mission execution, data collection, data reduction and analysis, technical and analytical support of networked operations, cybersecurity, test planning and reporting, requirements definition, system engineering, system software quality assurance/configuration control tasks and verification, validation and accreditation tasks. Work will be performed in Des Moines, Iowa, and is expected to be complete by April 30, 2025. This award is the result of a competitive acquisition under the Training Systems Acquisition III multiple award indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract where two offers were received in response to the Fair Opportunity Proposal Request. Fiscal 2020 operations and maintenance funds in the amount of $8,119,379 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 (FA8621-20-F-6258). NAVY The Boeing Co., St. Louis, Missouri, is awarded a $75,141,193 cost-plus-fixed-fee, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract in support of the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet fighter aircraft Service Life Assessment Program and Service Life Extension Program, Phase C follow-on effort. Work will be performed in St. Louis, Missouri (50%); and El Segundo, California (50%), and provides non-recurring engineering to assess the fatigue life of the aircraft as well as its subsystems and structures to extend the service life of the F/A-18E/F beyond the original design of the 6,000 flight hour service life. Work is expected to be complete by April 2025. 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 Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity (N00019-20-D-0051). Hydroid Inc., Pocasset, Massachusetts, is awarded a $39,414,560 modification to previously-awarded firm-fixed price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract (N00174-19-D-0010) to exercise Option Year One for production support for the MK-18 Family of Systems – Unmanned Underwater Vehicle systems. Work will be performed in Pocasset, Massachusetts, and is expected to be complete by April 2024. This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulations 6.302-1(a)(2), with only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements. No additional funds are being obligated at the time of this action. The Naval Surface Warfare Center, Indian Head, Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technology Division, Indian Head, Maryland, is the contracting activity. ARMY Lockheed Martin Corp., Orlando, Florida, was awarded a $67,647,172 modification (P00001) to Foreign Military Sales (India, Taiwan) contract (W52P1J-20-F-0225) for modernized target acquisition designation sight/pilot night vision sensors and its subcomponents on the Apache 64D/E helicopter. Bids were solicited via the internet with one received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of April 24, 2023. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois, is the contracting activity. Tabcon Inc.,* Queen Creek, Arizona, was awarded a $15,000,000 firm-fixed-price contract for roofing repair and replacement work on various buildings at Fort Riley, Kansas. Bids were solicited via the internet with four received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of April 24, 2025. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City, Kansas, is the contracting activity (W912DQ-20-D-4003). Cepheid, Sunny Vale, California, was awarded a $12,075,000 firm-fixed-price contract for swabs and test kits to support COVID-19. Bids were solicited via the internet with one received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of April 23, 2021. The U.S. Army Health Readiness Contracting Office, Joint Base San Antonio – Fort Sam Houston, Texas, is the contracting activity (W81K04-20-D-0008). (Awarded April 23, 2020) BAE Systems Ordnance Systems Inc., Kingsport, Tennessee, was awarded an $8,118,623 modification (P00712) to contract DAAA09-98-E-0006 to design a flashing furnace type treatment technology, including the necessary air-pollution control systems and support building(s) for the purpose of thermal treatment of appropriate waste streams. Work will be performed in Kingsport, Tennessee, with an estimated completion date of Oct. 31, 2021. Fiscal 2020 procurement of ammunition, Army funds in the amount of $8,118,623 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois, is the contracting activity. Luhr Bros Inc., Columbia, Illinois, was awarded a $7,633,000 firm-fixed-price contract to provide stone subaqueous paving grade stone B at six locations. These sites are considered emergency work locations where bank degradation is threatening the integrity of the levee system. Bids were solicited via the internet with three received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of July 17, 2020. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana, is the contracting activity (W912P8-20-F-0116). Alstom Renewable US LLC, Greenwood Village, Colorado, was awarded a $7,009,487 modification (P00005) to contract W912EF-17-C-0024 for design, fabrication and delivery of a new upper bearing bracket for the Little Goose Dam. Work will be performed in Dayton, Washington, with an estimated completion date of Jan. 25, 2022. Fiscal 2017 and 2021 blanket purchase agreement funds in the amount of $7,009,487 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla, Washington, is the contracting activity. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE EDUCATION ACTIVITY Global Connections to Employment Inc., Pensacola, Florida (HE1254-20-C-1001), is being awarded a fixed-price contract for custodial services and labor support in the amount of $14,376,570. The place of performance will be Fort Campbell, Kentucky. The period of performance is one 12-month base period and four 12-month option years. Fiscal 2020 operations and maintenance funding in the amount of $2,844,568 will be obligated on this award. This contract was awarded as a mandatory source through the AbilityOne program in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation Subpart 8.7 (Acquisition from Nonprofit Agencies Employing People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled). The contracting activity is the Department of Defense Education Activity, Alexandria, Virginia. *Small business https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contracts/Contract/Article/2164680/source/GovDelivery/

After a failed attempt to replace the current missile killers, the Pentagon wants to hurry and get the new technology online. By PAUL MCLEARY WASHINGTON: The Missile Defense Agency issued a long-awaited request for proposal today for its next-generation missile interceptor, eight months after the surprise cancellation of its multi-billion dollar attempt to replace the current, aging system. The Next Generation Interceptor program will replace the Redesigned Kill Vehicle effort, the Boeing and Raytheon project that failed to get off the ground. The new competition calls for contractors to submit bids by July 31, though it will be years before anything can be built and tested. MDA chief Vice Adm. Jon Hill said last month that he wants to field the new system as soon as possible, and a timeline of 2030, is “unacceptable from a warfighter view” and “unacceptable to me as a program manager.” But it's unclear when a system will be ready for testing. “We want to deliver the first round as soon as possible,” Hill continued. “That also means we can't take shortcuts in the design or in the requirements or in the flight testing regime, because if you want to go save time that is what most programs will do, so we can't afford that, but I will tell you that timeline will be driven by who we award to.” The RKV program was part of an ambitious technology effort helmed by Boeing — though Raytheon was building the Kill Vehicles — to replace the current Exo-Atmospheric Kill Vehicle. Both are ground-based interceptors designed to defend the US against long-range ballistic missile attacks. The companies won't have to pay back any of the billion-plus dollars the government awarded them to do the work, as Pentagon officials have said some of the effort can be salvaged and used on the new program. Problems had been mounting in the program's development for years. The Missile Defense Agency said back in 2016 it expected the first RKV flight test by 2019, with fielding in 2020. The last estimate, released with the fiscal 2020 budget request, pushed the fielding date back to 2025. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/04/dod-tries-again-on-multi-billion-missile-interceptor/

“We want to deliver hypersonics at scale,” said R&D director Mark Lewis, from air-breathing cruise missiles to rocket-boosted gliders that fly through space. By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR. WASHINGTON: The Pentagon has created a “war room” to ramp up production of hypersonic weapons from a handful of prototypes over the last decade to “hundreds of weapons” in the near future, a senior official said Wednesday. Those weapons will range from huge rocket-powered boost-glide missiles, fired from Army trucks and Navy submarines at more than Mach 10, to more compact and affordable air-breathing cruise missiles, fired from aircraft at a relatively modest Mach 5-plus. “It isn't an either-or,” said Mark Lewis, modernization director for Pentagon R&D chief Mike Griffin. “It isn't rocket-boost or air-breathing, we actually want both, because those systems do different things.” Right now, however, US combat units have neither. Inconsistent focus and funding over the years means that “we had a number of programs in the department that were very solid technology development programs, but at the end of those programs, we would have prototypes and we'd have weapons in the single-digit counts,” Lewis said during a webcast with the Air Force Association's Mitchell Institute. “If you've got a program that delivers eight missiles and then stops, well, which of the thousand targets in our target set are we going to use those eight missiles against?” With hypersonics now a top priority for both Undersecretary Griffin and Defense Secretary Mark Esper, the Pentagon is trying to improve that stop-and-go track record with a new “hypersonic acceleration plan” – no pun intended, Lewis said. Griffin likes to compare the effort to the Cold War, when the US had a massive nuclear weapons infrastructure capable of building complex components by the tens of thousands. “We want to deliver hypersonics at scale,” Lewis said. “That means hundreds of weapons in a short period of time in the hands of the warfighter.” Mass-production, in turn, requires production facilities – but today hypersonic prototypes are basically hand-crafted by R&D labs like Sandia. Lewis and his counterpart in the Pentagon's acquisition & sustainment directorate, Kevin Fahey, are “co-chairing what we're were calling a war room ... looking at the hypersonic industrial base,” he said. “That's not just the primes, but the entire industrial base” down to small, specialized suppliers. Controlling cost is both essential to large-scale production and a huge challenge, Lewis acknowledged. “We don't know what these things cost yet,” he said. “We've asked the primes to consider costs as they're developing.” Which hypersonic weapons the Pentagon buys also makes a major difference. “There are some technology choices we can make that lead us to more cost-effective systems,” he said. “I'm especially enthusiastic about hypersonic weapons that come off the wings of airplanes and come out of bomb bays, [because] I think those are some of the keys to delivering hypersonic capabilities at scale and moderate cost.” Likewise, “[there's] larger investment now in the rocket boost systems,” Lewis said, “[but] one of the reasons I'm so enthusiastic about scramjet-powered systems, air-breathing systems is I think that, fundamentally, they can be lower-cost than their rocket-boosted alternatives.” Why is that? Understanding the policy, it turns out, requires a basic understanding of the physics. Breaking Defense graphic from DoD data Four Types of Hypersonics “Hypersonics isn't a single thing,” Lewis said. “It's a range of applications, a range of attributes, [defined by] the combination of speed and maneuverability and trajectory.” To put it in simple terms – and I'll beg the forgiveness of any aerospace engineers reading this – there are two kinds of hypersonic projectile, based on how they fly: one is an air-breathing engine flying through the atmosphere, like a jet plane or cruise missile; the other is a rocket booster arcing to the edge of space, like an ICBM. There are also two kinds of platform you can launch from: an aircraft in flight high and fast above the earth, or a relatively slow-moving vehicle on or below the surface, like an Army truck, Navy warship or submarine. Combine these and you get four types. Lewis thinks all four could be worth pursuing, although the Pentagon currently has programs – that we know about – for only three: Air-launched boost-glide: Air Force ARRW (Air-launched Rapid Response Weapon). The Air Force also had another program in this category, HCSW (Hypersonic Conventional Strike Weapon), but they canceled it to focus on ARRW, which the service considers more innovative and promising. Surface-launched boost-glide: Army LRHW (Long Range Hypersonic Weapon) and Navy CPS (Conventional Prompt Strike). Both weapons share the same rocket booster, built by the Navy, and the same Common Hypersonic Glide Body, built by the Army, but one tailors the package to launch from a wheeled vehicle and the other from a submarine. Air-launched air-breathing: HAWC (Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapons Concept) and HSW-ab (Hypersonic Strike Weapon-air breathing). Arguably the most challenging and cutting-edge technology, these programs are both currently run by DARPA, which specializes in high-risk, high-return research, but they'll be handed over to the Air Force when they mature. Surface-launched air-breathing: This is the one category not in development – at least not in the unclassified world. But Lewis said, “eventually, you could see some ground-launched air breathers as well. I personally think those are very promising.” Each of these has its own advantages and disadvantages, Lewis explained. Rocket boosters are proven technology, offering tremendous speed and range. The Minuteman III ICBM, introduced in 1970, can travel over 6,000 miles at Mach 23. Their one drawback is that ICBMs can't steer. Once launched, they follow a predictable course like a cannon ball, which is why they're called ballistic missiles. The big innovation of boost-glide weaponry is that it replaces the traditional warhead with an agile glider. Once the rocket booster burns out, the glide body detaches and coasts the rest of the way, skipping nimbly across the upper layers of the atmosphere like a stone across the pond. But boost-glide has some big limitations. First, once the rocket booster detaches, the glide body has no engine of its own so it just coasts, losing speed throughout its flight. Second, precisely because the rocket launch is so powerful, it puts tremendous strain on the weapon, whose delicate electronics must be hardened against shock and heat. Third, the booster is big, because a rocket not only has to carry fuel, it has to carry tanks of oxygen to burn the fuel. Breaking Defense graphic from DoD data An air-breathing engine, by contrast, can be significantly smaller. It just has to carry the fuel, because it can scoop up all the oxygen it needs from the atmosphere. That means the whole weapon can be smaller, making it much easier to fit on an aircraft, and that it can accelerate freely during flight instead of just coasting, making it more maneuverable. But while conventional jet engines are well-proven technology, they don't function at hypersonic speeds, because the airflow pours their intakes far too fast. So you need a sophisticated alternative such as a scramjet, a complex, costly technology so far found only on experimental vehicles, like the Air Force's revolutionary Boeing X-51. Even with a scramjet, you can't fly too high because the air doesn't provide the needed oxygen. That means air-breathing weapons can't reach the same near-space altitudes as boost-glide missiles. They also can't fly nearly as fast. Lewis expects air-breathers will probably top out around Mach 7, half or less the peak speed of a boost-glide weapon. (That said, remember the glider will have slowed down somewhat by the time it reaches the target). Sandia National Laboratories glide vehicle, the ancestor of the Army-built Common Hypersonic Glide Body The platform you launch from also has a major impact on performance. Warships, submarines, and long-bodied heavy trucks can carry bigger weapons than aircraft, but the weapons they carry need to be bigger because they have to start from low altitude and low speed and go all the way to high-altitude hypersonic flight. By contrast, an air-launched weapon doesn't need to be as big, because it's already flying high and fast even before it turns on its motor. All these factors suggest that the big boost-glide weapons are probably best launched from land or sea, the smaller air-breathing ones from aircraft in flight. But since boost-gliders go farther and faster than air-breathers, you still want them as an option for your bombers for certain targets. On the flipside, while a naval vessel or ground vehicle has plenty of room to carry boost-glide weapons for ultra-long-range strikes, it can also use the same space to carry a larger number of the smaller air-breathers for closer targets. “We're interested in basically the full range,” Lewis said. “We've got some ideas of things we want to put into play quickly, but we're also extremely open-minded about future applications, future technologies.” https://breakingdefense.com/2020/04/hypersonics-dod-wants-hundreds-of-weapons-asap/

By: The Associated Press CHICAGO — Boeing announced Saturday it terminated an agreement to join forces with Embraer, prompting an angry response from the Brazilian jet maker, which threatened to seek damages. The pair had planned to work together on Embraer's commercial aviation business and to develop new markets for its C-390 Millennium aircraft. They had been working toward an agreement for two years. Boeing said it ended the agreement after Embraer did not meet conditions laid out by the deal, in which Boeing would have held majority ownership. Over the past few months, the companies had “productive but ultimately unsuccessful negotiations” about the unsatisfied conditions, which was “deeply disappointing,” Marc Allen, Boeing's president of Embraer partnership and group operations, said in a news release. Embraer issued a statement saying it “believes strongly that Boeing has wrongfully terminated” the mutual transaction agreement and “that it has manufactured false claims as a pretext to seek to avoid its commitments to close the transaction and pay Embraer the US$4.2 billion purchase price.” “We believe Boeing has engaged in a systematic pattern of delay and repeated violations of the MTA (master transaction agreement), because of its unwillingness to complete the transaction in light of its own financial condition and 737 Max and other business and reputational problems,” it added. “Embraer will pursue all remedies against Boeing for the damages incurred by Embraer as a result of Boeing's wrongful termination and violation of the MTA,” the company said. The collapse marked the latest mishap for Boeing. The company's best-selling plane, the 737 Max, has been grounded for more than a year after two deadly crashes that led to federal investigations. Those problems, combined with deflated demand for flights due to the pandemic, sharply reduced the company's cash. https://www.defensenews.com/air/2020/04/26/boeing-ends-deal-angering-brazilian-jet-maker-embraer/