News

By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — Lockheed Martin's F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is on the verge of full-rate production, with a decision slated for early 2021. But a congressional watchdog group is concerned that as the company ramps up F-35 production, its suppliers are falling behind. And those supply chain problems could get even worse as Turkish defense manufacturers are pushed out of the program, the Government Accountability Office said in a May 12 report. According to the GAO, the number of F-35 parts delivered late skyrocketed from less than 2,000 in August 2017 to upward of 10,000 in July 2019. The number of parts shortages per month also climbed from 875 in July 2018 to more than 8,000 in July 2019. More than 60 percent of that sum was concentrated among 20 suppliers, it said. “To mitigate late deliveries and parts shortages — and deliver more aircraft on time — the airframe contractor has utilized methods such as reconfiguring the assembly line and moving planned work between different stations along the assembly line,” the GAO said. “According to the program office, such steps can cause production to be less efficient, which, in turn, can increase the number of labor hours necessary to build each aircraft,” which then drives up cost, the GAO added. Those problems could be compounded by Turkey's expulsion from the F-35 program, which was announced last year after the country moved forward with buying the Russian S-400 air defense system. Although Turkey financially contributed to the development of the F-35 as a partner in the program, the U.S. Defense Department has maintained that Turkey cannot buy or operate the F-35 until it gives up the S-400. The Pentagon has also taken action to begin stripping Turkish industry from the aircraft's supply chain, a process that involves finding new companies to make 1,005 parts, some of which are sole-sourced by Turkish companies. Ellen Lord, the Pentagon's undersecretary for acquisition and sustainment, had hoped to stop contracting with Turkish suppliers by March 2020, but in January she said that some contracts would extend through the year, according to Defense One. While the Defense Department has found new suppliers to manufacture the parts currently made in Turkey, it is uncertain whether the price of those components will be more expensive. Furthermore, as of December 2019, the new production rates for 15 components were lagging behind that of the legacy Turkish producers. “According to program officials, some of these new parts suppliers will not be producing at the rate required until next year, as roughly 10 percent are new to the F-35 program,” the GAO said. “Airframe contractor representatives stated it would take over a year to stand up these new suppliers, with lead times dependent on several factors, such as part complexity, quantity, and the supplier's production maturity. In addition, these new suppliers are required to go through qualification and testing to ensure the design integrity for their parts.” The F-35 Joint Program Office disagreed with the GAO's recommendation to provide certain information to Congress ahead of the full-rate production decision, including an evaluation of production risks and a readiness assessment of the suppliers that are replacing Turkish companies. In its statement, the JPO said it is already providing an acceptable number of updates on the program's readiness for full-rate production. Hard times for the F-35's engine supplier Not all F-35 production trends reported by the GAO were bad for the aircraft. Since 2016, Lockheed has made progress in delivering a greater proportion of F-35s on schedule, with 117 of 134 F-35s delivered on time in 2019. However, one of the biggest subsystems of the F-35 — the F135 engine produced by Pratt & Whitney — drifted in the opposite direction, with a whopping 91 percent of engines delivered behind schedule. At one point in 2019, Pratt & Whitney stopped deliveries of the F135 for an unspecified period due to test failures, which also contributed to the reduction of on-time deliveries. According to the Defense Contracts Management Agency, “there have been 18 engine test failures in 2019, which is eight more than in 2018, each requiring disassembly and rework,” the GAO wrote. “To address this issue, the engine contractor has developed new tooling for the assembly line and has established a team to identify characteristics leading to the test failures. Plans are also in place for additional training for employees.” https://www.defensenews.com/air/2020/05/12/some-f-35-suppliers-are-having-trouble-delivering-parts-on-schedule-and-turkeys-departure-could-make-that-worse/

By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — The COVID-19 pandemic has not had an impact on the production and delivery of Apache helicopters, but Boeing is closely watching the international supply chain for signs of slowdown, a company official said Tuesday. The coronavirus impact going forward is difficult to predict, said T.J. Jamison, Boeing's director of vertical lift international sales. Still, he expressed a belief that the company should be able to stay on track with its plans to produce more than 100 Apache models in 2020. While production on the CH-47 Chinook and V-22 Osprey in the Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, area was stopped for two weeks in April, the Mesa, Arizona, Boeing plant that produces the Apache never had to stop work. However, there have been a number of individuals working remotely, primarily from the sales team; it will likely be a month or more before they are all back working at their desks, Jamison said. Some international customers have signaled that “we might need a potential slowdown in operations. But not one has said: ‘Hey, we need to cancel these orders because of the COVID-19 issue,' ” Jamison said. “There have been no cancellations, and there have been no significant requests for delay.” However, just like the Pentagon, the company is closely watching the international supply chain. For the Apache, that includes fuselage production in Hydrabad, India (managed by Tata) and in Sacheon, South Korea (managed by Korea Aerospace Industries). Boeing's decision to maintain two suppliers for that production has “served us very well” in the current situation, Jamison said, adding that while India has been hit hard by COVID-19 and is undergoing government-mandated shutdowns, the Korea Aerospace Industries plant is able to keep production on track. “We really do not like to have a single point of failure with any of our components that we receive through the supply chain,” he said. “There hasn't been a dramatic impact to the supply chain today. Again, I don't have that crystal ball and I can't tell you how this pandemic is going to play out. But right now, there hasn't been a dramatic impact.” https://www.defensenews.com/land/2020/05/13/no-covid-impacts-on-apache-production-supply-chain-says-boeing/

By: Robert DuPree For the past few months, the U.S. federal government has been, quite understandably, totally focused on addressing the enormous health care and economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. These efforts will necessarily continue to be front and center in the weeks and even months ahead, no matter how rapidly the curve flattens or declines, as different sectors and regions reopen. But to move the country forward, Congress must prepare to do its regular business for the year, which largely means tackling appropriations bills. Congressional staff have reportedly been doing the prep work to get spending bills ready for whenever the House and Senate can safely convene to work on them (or to do much of this work remotely). The American people — including federal contractors large and small, and our employees — are relying on Congress to check its partisan impulses and figure out how to do two things at once in the coming months: Continue to combat the COVID-19 crisis, and develop fiscal 2021 funding bills for all federal departments and agencies to meet our nation's needs. Unfortunately, there are some who are already taking a simplistic view, saying Congress will be so busy dealing with the pandemic that it will have to just give up and pass a continuing resolution to fund the government beyond the election into next year or even for a full year. On the contrary, the pandemic is exactly why Congress should be doing its work and completing updated appropriations bills on time. First of all, in these extraordinary times, the country doesn't need appropriations bills which merely extend the decisions made on spending last December, when Congress finally completed action (over two months late) on FY20 appropriations bills. The COVID-19 pandemic was just a blip on the horizon at that time. For FY21, the country needs updated spending legislation that more accurately reflects the greatly changed world we now face. Moreover, departments and agencies also need the flexibility to enter into new contracts to meet new needs, which is generally prohibited unless expressly provided under a continuing resolution. Further, Congress and the administration must come to grips with the elephant in the room — the strict annual spending caps imposed by the Budget Control Act of 2011, as amended. To mix metaphors, this law is no longer just an elephant, it's an emperor who has no clothes. Congress has modified the BCA's statutory spending caps a number of times over the past decade (thus, the above caveat “as amended”). Now we're about to face the final year of the law's spending caps, and what do we find? The caps are a joke. The caps were meant to limit discretionary spending each year, but Congress has repeatedly found ways around them. This has usually been done in one of two ways. The first is by including some amount of normal baseline defense spending under the category of overseas contingency operations, or OCO, which is “wartime” funding; this occurs even when unrelated to America's overseas/wartime military efforts. OCO spending is exempt from the BCA caps, so funding part of the base Defense Department budget this way enables the law's defense-spending cap to be technically met while also understating the Pentagon's non-wartime expenditures. The second way is by designating certain spending as “emergency” expenditures. Yes, these are almost always for valid, unforeseen emergencies, but it is still spending that would otherwise exceed the discretionary caps. Only Congress can wave a wand and say: “No, it doesn't exceed the cap — it's for an emergency.” To be honest, the caps painted an unrealistic picture of efforts to control federal spending anyway. By only being applied to discretionary spending, exempting massive entitlement expenditures and interest on the debt, the caps presented a partial picture of true federal-spending restraint to begin with. And now the COVID-19 crisis has resulted in multiple legislative packages being enacted, which the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates could add over $2.7 trillion to the current year's deficit. But because they are loans or designated as “emergency” spending, they don't violate the caps. They just add to the deficit. In reality, true federal spending has soared far past the stable level of spending that the caps were purported to achieve when the BCA was first enacted. Yet, the caps are still in place for next year, which will impact the congressional appropriations process by either preventing the spending needed to address current needs, or leading to further contortionist efforts by legislators to circumvent the caps. So let's quit pretending. Congress and the administration should agree to repeal the final year of the caps as part of the next COVID-19 legislative package so appropriators can be upfront about the spending needed without having to hide so much of that spending behind the “emergency spending” loophole. Be transparent, and admit the country is, like during World War II, spending a whole lot more than anticipated to meet the crisis. And most of all, get the job done by acting in a bipartisan fashion to pass appropriations bills by Oct. 1, 2020, that accurately reflect our real needs and expenditures. Admittedly, that may not be easy to do in an election year, but the nation and the federal contracting community are depending on Congress to be able to manage the COVID-19 crisis response, while simultaneously conducting its regular business. Robert DuPree is manager of government affairs at Telos Corporation. He focuses on political developments in Congress and the executive branch, including the federal budget, appropriations process, national defense and cybersecurity. He previously served as legislative director for a senior member of the U.S. House of Representatives. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/05/13/a-delicate-balancing-act-the-us-government-must-juggle-a-pandemic-and-the-fy21-budget/

NAVY The Boeing Co., St. Louis, Missouri, is awarded a $1,971,754,089 firm-fixed-price contract to provide non-recurring engineering associated with the Stand-off Land Attack Missile – Expanded Response (SLAM ER) obsolescence redesign effort as well as the production and delivery of 650 SLAM ER missiles in support of the government of Saudi Arabia. Work will be performed at St. Louis, Missouri (47%); Indianapolis, Indiana (37%); Pontiac, Michigan (9%); Melbourne, Florida (3%); Middletown, Connecticut (2%); and Black Mountain, North Carolina (2%). Work is expected to be complete by December 2028. Foreign Military Sales funds in the amount of $1,971,754,089 will be obligated at time of award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation 6.302-4. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity (N00019-20-C-0003). The Boeing Co., St. Louis, Missouri, is awarded a $656,981,421 modification (P00014) to a previously awarded firm-fixed-price contract (N00019-19-C-0016). This modification procures and delivers 467 Harpoon full rate production Lot 91 Block II missiles and support equipment for various Foreign Military Sales customers. Work will be performed at St. Louis, Missouri (30%); McKinney, Texas (28%); Toledo, Ohio (6%); Grove, Oklahoma (5%); Pontiac, Michigan (4%); Putnam, Connecticut (2%); Galena, Kansas (2%); Burnley, United Kingdom (2%); Lititz, Pennsylvania (1%); Minneapolis, Minnesota (1%); and various locations within the continental U.S. (19%). This modification procures four Block II missiles and support equipment for the government of Brazil, eight Block II missiles and support equipment for the government of Thailand, 53 Block II missiles and support equipment for the government of Qatar, 402 Block II missiles and support equipment for the government of Saudi Arabia, and support equipment for the governments of Japan, the Netherlands, India and Korea. Work is expected to be complete by December 2026. Foreign Military Sales funds in the amount of $656,981,421 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. Strategic Airborne Operations JV LLC,* Newport News, Virginia, is awarded a $146,834,175 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract. This contract acquires the High Endurance Electronic Warfare Jet (HEEWJ) capability. Work will be performed in Cherry Point, North Carolina (5%); and various locations within and outside the continental U.S. (95%) to be determined on individual orders. The HEEWJ capability is an offensive air support for training that provides regionally based, geographically distributed aviation with a variety of airborne threat simulation capabilities to train shipboard and aircraft weapon systems operators and aircrew to counter enemy electronic warfare and electronic attack operations in today's electronic combat environment in support of Department of the Navy, other Department of Defense (DOD) agencies, non-DOD government agencies and Foreign Military Sales customers. Work is expected to be completed in May 2024. No funds will be obligated at the time of award. Funds will be obligated on individual orders as they are issued. This contract was competitively procured via an electronic request for proposal, and two offers were received. The Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity (N00421-20-D-0108). Q.E.D. Systems Inc., Virginia Beach, Virginia, is awarded a $16,205,606 modification to previously awarded contract N00024-15-C-4400 for specification development and execution/procurement support services in support of Chief of Naval Operations availabilities, continuous maintenance availabilities (CMAVs), inactivation CMAVs, sustainment availabilities, phased modernization availabilities, re-commissioning availabilities, continuous maintenance and emergent maintenance window of opportunity for Navy surface combatant ship classes (CG 47/DDG 51). Work will be performed in Norfolk, Virginia (53%); San Diego, California (36%); and Everett, Washington (11%). Work is expected to be complete by October 2020. No funding will be obligated at time of award. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity. BAE Systems, Information and Electronic Systems Integration Inc., Greenlawn, New York, is awarded a $14,465,881 modification (P00010) to previously awarded, firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract N00019-17-D-0006. This modification adds the requirement to procure 46 AN/UPX-41(C) digital interrogators and 10 Mode 5 change kits for the Navy, Coast Guard, the government of Japan and various countries under the Foreign Military Sales program. Work will be performed in Greenlawn, New York (80%); Austin, Texas (10%); and Manassas, Virginia (10%), and is expected to be complete by May 2023. No funds are being obligated at time of award; funds will be obligated on individual orders as they are issued. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity. CACI Enterprise Solutions Inc., Chantilly, Virginia, is awarded a $13,904,377 cost-plus-fixed-fee task order modification in the four option years of the integrated business systems support services contract (N32205-19-F-1044 and P00008). Information technology services in this contract assist Military Sealift Command's business systems and ashore operations branch to manage, operate and maintain the command's business systems, as well as interfaces with the Navy Enterprise Defense Business Systems. Work under this modification will be performed in Norfolk, Virginia, and is expected to be complete by December 2023. This modification includes the remaining portion (eight months) of Option Year One as well as three 12-month options. If exercised, the cumulative value of this modification will be $13,598,409. The task order was competitively procured with proposals and four offers were received. The Naval Military Sealift Command, Norfolk, Virginia, is the contracting activity. Sikorsky Aircraft Corp., a Lockheed Martin Co., Stratford, Connecticut, is awarded an $8,954,062 modification (P00091) to previously awarded firm-fixed-price contract N00019-14-C-0050. This modification provides support for the integration and transition of Windows 10 and Server 16 into various VH-92A training devices. Work will be performed in Quantico, Virginia, and is expected to be complete by October 2022. Fiscal 2020 research, development, test and evaluation (Navy) funds in the amount of $4,667,720 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. ARMY Northrop Grumman, McLean, Virginia, was awarded a $176,471,668 modification (P00056) to contract W58RGZ-17-C-0014 to support Army special electronic mission aircraft fixed-wing life cycle services. Work will be performed in McLean, Virginia, with an estimated completion date of Aug. 31, 2020. Fiscal 2020 operations and maintenance (Army) funds in the amount of $176,471,668 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, is the contracting activity. DynCorp International LLC, Fort Worth, Texas, was awarded a $167,556,981 modification (P00057) to contract W58RGZ-17-C-0011 for support services for government-owned fixed-wing fleets performing transport aircraft missions. Work will be performed in Fort Worth, Texas, with an estimated completion date of May 31, 2021. Fiscal 2020 operations and maintenance (Army) funds in the amount of $167,556,981 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, is the contracting activity. Kiewit Infrastructure South Co., Sunrise, Florida, was awarded a $7,759,000 firm-fixed-price contract for Everglades restoration. Bids were solicited via the internet with three received. Work will be performed in Miami-Dade, Florida, with an estimated completion date of Nov. 16, 2021. Fiscal 2020 civil construction funds in the amount of $7,759,000 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville, Florida, is the contracting activity (W912EP-20-C-0004). Michels Corp., Brownsville, Wisconsin, was awarded a $7,066,242 firm-fixed-price contract to repair levee systems in the Missouri River Basin. Bids were solicited via the internet with four received. Work will be performed in Pender, Nebraska, with an estimated completion date of Oct. 30, 2020. Fiscal 2020 other procurement (Army) funds in the amount of $7,066,242 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha, Nebraska, is the contracting activity (W9128F-20-C-0026). Qualx Corp., Springfield, Virginia,* was awarded a $7,003,493 modification (P00010) to contract W91QF0-18-F-0047 for digitization of archival materials for the Army Heritage and Education Center. Work will be performed in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, with an estimated completion date of Sept. 25, 2021. Fiscal 2020 operations and maintenance (Army) funds in the amount of $7,003,493 were obligated at the time of the award. Mission and Installation Contracting Command, Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania, is the contracting activity. DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY NuStar Terminal Partner TX L.P., San Antonio, Texas, has been awarded a maximum $22,392,616 firm-fixed-price contract for contractor-owned, contract-operated services to receive, store and issue U.S. government-owned jet propellant thermally stable. This was a competitive acquisition with one response received. This is a four-year base contract with one five-year option period with a possible six-month extension. Location of performance is Texas, with a June 30, 2024, performance completion date. Using military service is Air Force. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2020 through 2024 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Energy, Fort Belvoir, Virginia (SPE603-20-C-5006). AIR FORCE CAE USA Inc., Tampa, Florida, has been awarded a $10,544,331 firm-fixed-price modification (P00158) to contract FA8223-10-C-0013 for support of the KC-135 Aircrew Training System. This modification provides for collective bargaining agreement wage adjustments resulting from Fair Labor Standards Act and Service Contract Act – Price Adjustment, and brings the total cumulative face value of the contract to $526,529,911. Work will be performed in Altus Air Force Base, Oklahoma; Grissom Air Reserve Base, Indiana; MacDill AFB, Florida; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Rickenbacker Air National Guard Base, Ohio; Scott AFB, Illinois; Fairchild AFB, Washington; Milwaukee Air National Guard Base, Wisconsin; March AFB, California; and Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Hawaii. Work is expected to be completed by Dec. 31, 2020. Fiscal 2020 operations and maintenance funds in the amount of $10,544,331 are being obligated at the time of award. Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, is the contracting activity. Honeywell International Inc., Phoenix, Arizona, has been award a $7,777,093 cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to research, develop, integrate, validate and demonstrate Consistent Logical Automated Reasoning for Integrated System Software Assurance (CLARISSA) for development and assessment of assurance cases. This contract provides for the research and development of technology to automate generation of assurance cases from curated evidence. Work will be performed in Phoenix, Arizona, and is expected to be completed by March 12, 2024. This award is the result of a competitive acquisition and two offers were received. Fiscal 2019 research, development, test and evaluation funds in the amount of $380,564 are being obligated at time of award. Air Force Research Laboratory, Rome, New York, is the contracting activity (FA8750-20-C-0512). (Awarded March 19, 2020) *Small business https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contracts/Contract/Article/2185990/source/GovDelivery/

And so what's really important to me is what the vendor brings to the table, in terms of their ability to integrate weapons onto a non-developmental platform," said SOCOM acquisition czar Jim Smith. By PAUL MCLEARY and THERESA HITCHENSon May 13, 2020 at 4:32 PM WASHINGTON: Like the rest of the Defense Department, Special Operations Command is preparing for flat to declining budgets in the coming years as the national debt spirals to $25 trillion and the economy flattens due to COVID-19 related shutdowns. At the moment, the command that trains, equips and sustains the nation's elite covert operators boasts a $13 billion budget, $7 billion of which goes directly into buying and repairing new gear, with another $800 million pumped into research and development. And that's the unclassified part of the budget. The command wants to protect those investments, Jim Smith, SOCOM's top acquisition executive, told reporters this morning. But fiscal realities being what they are, “right now, our planning assumptions are based on a flat budget out through the next seven years or so,” he said. “And then, if you take into account inflation, you might even have a slightly downward pressure on our overall budget.” Just recently, Defense Secretary Mark Esper suggested that the budget pressure might force his hand in cutting older, legacy systems earlier than planned to pull savings toward priority modernization programs like the $500 billion the DoD plans to spend on the refurbishment of the nuclear triad over the next decade. Earlier this month Esper declared, “we need to move away from the legacy, and we need to invest those dollars in the future. And we have a lot of legacy programs out there right now — I could pick dozens out from all branches of the services” that could be cut or curtailed. Asked by Breaking Defense if pressure on SOCOM budgets could lead to the command walking away from bigger and older systems, Smith said “SOF is a little different. There is a propensity for us to accept a near-[commercial] solution and get it into the fight very quickly. And for that reason, we tend not to sustain equipment or the 20-year, 30-year life cycles that you see in the services.” That's not to say “we don't have the same pressures,” as the services in finding savings, he added. “We're trying to divest in a force that you know likes to hold on to things. And so we have very rich dialogue at the command level, I can assure you, about trying to divest over some of our larger programs going on.” One area commanders want to grow is close air support and ISR in areas without large, improved landing strips via the Armed Overwatch program. Lt. Gen. Jim Slife, commander of Air Force Special Operations Command, said in February at the Air Force Association's annual meeting that the aircraft would replace AFSOC's U-28s — and focus more on plane's close air support, and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) missions. Smith today explained that effort is standing on the shoulders of the Air Force's defunct Light Attack Aircraft effort. “We are on the backs of the Air Force's effort. We're using the same program managers and engineers,” Smith said. “Everything that was learned by the Air Force in their light attack experiment is being leveraged into ours.” The Air Force's long-running light attack aircraft saga — that at one point was expected to involve procurement of up to 300 airplanes — began way back in 2011, when the Air Force initiated a program to procure what it then called “light air-support” aircraft for use in insurgencies. In 2017, the program morphed into what the service called the Light Attack Experiment, aimed at developing a concept of operations that involved US allies as well as fleshing out an overall acquisition strategy. In 2018, then-Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson said the service had set aside $2.4 billion in the fiscal year 2019 budget's five-year cycle to acquire agile, armed reconnaissance aircraft — once it had tested out its chosen competitors: Textron's AT-6 and the Sierra Nevada-Embraer team's A-29. In October 2019, facing a threat from Congress to strip the program from its control, the Air Force issued a request for proposal to Textron and Sierra Nevada to buy “two or three of both” companies' turboprops. Finally, in February this year, the Air Force threw up its collective hands and gave up the quest to buy light attack aircraft in quantity — purchasing only two each of the AT-6 Wolverine and A-29 Tucanos for continued experimentation. Several of the companies who originally fought it out way back in the day under the Air Force effort, as well as Textron and Sierra Nevada, are now throwing their hats in the SOCOM ring. Spokespeople for Air Tractor (which had formally protested the Air Force's contract award in the light attack competition), Sierra Nevada and Textron confirmed to Breaking Defense today that they are all in for the live-fly demonstration expected in November. The plan is for SOCOM to buy up to 75 of the aircraft over seven years, beginning with a $106 million request in the 2021 budget to kick things off. The Special Operations community is as interested in what it can put on one of these planes as it is in the aircraft itself. “At the end of the day, I'm going to deliver a weapon system,” Smith said. “And so what's really important to me is what the vendor brings to the table, in terms of their ability to integrate weapons onto a non-developmental platform. I think the Air Force, you know, there was a lot of focus on the actual platforms. I don't think you'll see that from SOCOM. We are far more interested in the integration capability of our eventual industry partners on the platform.” https://breakingdefense.com/2020/05/special-ops-budget-crunch-looms-but-new-aircraft-demo-coming

HASSAN MEDDAH INTERNATIONAL , ALLEMAGNE , AÉRONAUTIQUE , SPATIAL , DÉFENSE PUBLIÉ LE 13/05/2020 À 18H43 Les présidents du GIFAS et de son équivalent allemand le BDLI appellent de façon urgente à un plan de relance européen ambitieux et à accélérer les investissements dans le domaine de la défense et de l'espace. Face à la crise du coronavirus qui frappe lourdement le secteur aéronautique, industriels allemands et français ont décidé d'agir en concert. Le GIFAS (Groupement des industries françaises aéronautiques et spatiales) et son homologue allemand (german aerospace industries association) ont tenu en commun ce 13 mai le bureau de leur conseil d'administration par vidéoconférence. Dans la foulée, les deux présidents respectifs Eric Trapper - par ailleurs PDG de Dassault Aviation - et Dirk Hoke, président du BDLI et CEO d'Airbus Defence & Space ont profité d'une conférence de presse pour lancer un appel commun à un plan de relance européen ambitieux. Les industriels aéronautiques des deux pays auraient dû se voir en chair et en os à cette date... si le salon aéronautique de Berlin (Allemagne) n'avait pas été annulé à cause de la pandémie mondiale. "Ensemble, nous étions forts avant la crise et nous partageons l'idée qu'il faudra que nous soyons forts après la crise pour faire face à la concurrence mondiale", a souligné Eric Trappier, le patron de Dassault Aviation. Accélérer le programme d'avion de combat du futur Selon les deux groupements, les secteurs de la défense et de l'espace peuvent permettre d'amortir le trou d'air que traverse le secteur aéronautique. Ils appellent les deux gouvernements à renforcer leurs budgets de défense afin de conserver les capacités dans ce domaine stratégique. "Ce serait une grave erreur de réduire les dépenses du secteur de la défense. C'est un facteur de stabilité qui ne doit pas être sous-estimé", a précisé Dirk Hoke. Le GIFAS et le BDLI misent sur l'accélération des programmes en coopération. La France et l'Allemagne, rejointes par l'Espagne, ont lancé le programme SCAF (système de combat aérien du futur). Ce programme, à l'horizon 2040, permettra le remplacement des Rafale français et des Eurofighter allemands. "Ce programme est un défi et nous sommes convaincus qu'il faut le renforcer et ne pas prendre de retard. Les industriels ont commencé à travailler. Nous avons besoin d'une vision à long terme et de contrats pour atteindre la première échéance d'un démonstrateur en 2026", a exhorté Eric Trappier. Des deux côtés de la frontière, l'accélération de ce programme pourrait apporter une bouffée d'oxygène à tous les acteurs qui y participent : avionneurs, fabricants de moteurs, électroniciens et leurs sous-traitants. Cela permet également de faire d'une pierre deux coups, puisque la plupart des entreprises de l'aéronautique travaillent également pour le secteur de la défense. La manne du programme spatial européen Dirk Hoke a également évoqué l'importance du secteur spatial comme amortisseur à cette crise. Il a rappelé que l'agence spatiale européenne (ESA) avait approuvé en fin d'année dernière le lancement de nombreux programmes. En novembre 2019, lors de la réunion des ministres européens en charge du secteur spatial à Séville, l'ESA avait en effet dégagé un budget de 14,4 milliards d'euros pour les cinq prochaines années. La France et l'Allemagne étant les principales contributrices avec respectivement 3,3 milliards d'euros et 2,7 milliards. Les deux partenaires ont également sollicité l'aide de l'Europe. Ils craignent toutefois que le budget du fonds européen de défense soit la victime des ajustements budgétaires en cours de négociation. A l'origine, il devait atteindre 13 milliards d'euros sur la période 2021-2027. "Ce serait un mauvais signe si ce budget était coupé pour la construction et l'autonomie stratégique de l'Europe", a averti le patron du GIFAS. https://www.usinenouvelle.com/article/pourquoi-les-industriels-europeens-de-l-aeronautique-misent-sur-les-secteurs-de-la-defense-et-l-espace.N964041

La pandémie de Covid-19 chamboule le calendrier des offres pour les nouveaux avions de combat et du système de défense sol-air. Le Département fédéral de la défense (DDPS) a fixé mardi à novembre le nouveau délai pour les offres. Ce nouveau calendrier n'a aucune incidence sur la suite du processus d'acquisition, assure le département dans un communiqué. Les informations tirées des deuxièmes offres ainsi que des résultats des divers tests permettront d'identifier les points forts de chaque système. Le DDPS doit réagir au fait que les fabricants sont aussi touchés par les mesures visant à freiner l'épidémie. De plus, les impératifs de confidentialités interdisent les collaborateurs des entreprises sollicitées à traiter les offres en télétravail. Les entretiens en personne, nécessaires pour concrétiser les exigences relatives aux affaires compensatoires, ne sont pas possibles. Ils ne peuvent pas toujours être remplacés par des téléconférences en raison du degré de classification des sujets abordés. Quatre avions Armasuisse avait transmis une nouvelle demande d'offre aux autorités françaises, allemandes et américaines début janvier. Celles-ci étaient initialement attendues pour août. Quatre jets restent dans la course: le Rafale français (Dassault), l'Eurofighter allemand (Airbus), et côté américain, le successeur du FA-18, le Super Hornet de Boeing, et le F-35A de Lockheed-Martin. Pour le système de défense sol-air, seuls les Etats-Unis (Raytheon Patriot) et la France (Eurosam SAMP/T) sont encore en lice. La nouvelle flotte doit remplacer à la fois les Tiger et les F/A-18. Les exigences ont été précisées sur la base des premières offres remises. Les constructeurs sur les rangs devront toujours calculer le nombre d'avions requis pour accomplir les missions de l'armée de l'air, notamment faire voler quatre avions en permanence pendant quatre semaines et assurer la police aérienne 24 heures sur 24. Les nouvelles offres devront indiquer un prix correspondant à 36 et 40 engins, frais logistiques et engins guidés compris. La première offre exigeait un prix pour 30 et 40 avions. Le prix proposé sera un point de départ contraignant des négociations approfondies avec le candidat à l'issue du choix de l'appareil. https://www.rts.ch/info/suisse/11319075-les-appels-d-offres-pour-un-nouvel-avion-de-combat-prolonges-jusqu-en-novembre.html

By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — As the U.S. Space Force looks to expand the military's communications capabilities in the far north, it is facing a problem. The global pandemic has hit space startups exponentially hard, and OneWeb, one of the companies aiming to provide internet to Arctic locations, filed for bankruptcy in March. The Defense Department is considering taking action to help fortify OneWeb and other vulnerable space startups, said Lt. Gen. David Thompson, vice commander of Headquarters Space Force. “I will say with respect to OneWeb specifically and others, we continue to work,” he said during a May 12 event held by the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies. “We work with the White House and we'll be working with Congress, not just focused on OneWeb but all of the commercial space companies that face bankruptcy and face those concerns.” Thompson did not lay out options under consideration by the Pentagon to aid OneWeb, but he did say the department's Space Acquisition Council devised a list of proposed investments for space companies that need rapid, aggressive action. That capital is needed to ensure emerging space technologies remain available to the U.S. military but also so “that potential adversaries don't have the opportunity to acquire those capabilities,” he said. OneWeb is pursuing a sale of the business as part of bankruptcy proceedings, saying that “while the company was close to obtaining financing” through its own negotiations with investors, “the process did not progress because of the financial impact and market turbulence related to the spread of COVID-19.” So far, the company has launched 74 satellites, secured global spectrum and has half of its 44 ground terminals in development or complete — making it attractive to potential bidders such as Amazon or European satellite company Eutelsat. However, two unnamed Chinese firms have also submitted proposals, according to The Telegraph. That could raise major concerns among Defense Department officials, who have warned that adversary nations — particularly China — could use the financial instability caused by the coronavirus pandemic as an opportunity to increase investments in technology companies with national security applications. “The [defense-industrial base] is vulnerable to adversarial capital, so we need to ensure that companies can stay in business without losing their technology,” Ellen Lord, the Pentagon's top acquisition official, said in March. If OneWeb is sold to a Chinese owner, the Defense Department could lose access to one of the few suppliers of commercial broadband internet servicing the Arctic. While the Space Force operates two Enhanced Polar System satellites to provide secure, jam-resistant military communications, few commercial satellite providers extend their coverage to the far north. As a result, troops have limited communication options in the Arctic, and the Pentagon has long been concerned about a lack of resiliency. Companies like OneWeb and SpaceX, which intend to create a network of hundreds of small satellites in low-Earth orbit, could change that paradigm by providing low-cost commercial internet services that span the globe. In September, OneWeb announced it would begin to provide low-latency broadband service to the Arctic by the end of 2020, with full, 24-hour coverage expected in 2021. For its part, SpaceX stated that its Starlink constellation would begin providing broadband service this year. The military has expressed interest in working with both companies. U.S. Northern Command sought $130 million to explore OneWeb's and SpaceX's capabilities in order to provide reliable and potentially cost-effective internet in the Arctic, listing the effort on top of the unfunded priority list sent to Congress this spring. Nathan Strout in Washington contributed to this story. https://www.defensenews.com/smr/2020/05/12/a-bankrupt-oneweb-could-get-some-help-from-the-defense-department/