News

BY MERCEDES STEPHENSON AND KERRI BREEN Canada has been officially called out by the United States over how much it spends on the military, Global News has learned. A “blunt” letter from the U.S. government was delivered to the Department of National Defence that criticized Canadian defence spending levels and repeated American demands that Canada meet NATO targets. Global News has not seen the letter — said to have a frustrated, critical tone — but multiple sources have confirmed it was sent and received. U.S. President Donald Trump has long called for members of the 29-nation military alliance to beef up their budgets for defence. His national security adviser Robert O'Brien, who spoke Saturday at the Halifax International Security Forum, said getting NATO members to meet the established target — two per cent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) — is an urgent priority. “There are very serious threats to our freedom and our security and if NATO is going to be effective, and if we want to put our money where our talk is, we got to spend that money to defend ourselves,” he said. Nations including Canada agreed at the 2014 NATO summit in Wales​ to move towards the military spending target within a decade, he noted. “We expect our friends and our colleagues to live up to their commitments and their promises,” he said. He also praised Canada's plan to build and deploy Arctic patrol vessels. The North, he said, is going to be the new “frontline” of defence, as Russia and China have made it clear they are going to militarize the Arctic. One Canadian source told Global News that the U.S. is concerned that Canada does not take the threat from those countries in the Arctic seriously and wants the country to boost its contributions in that area. Just seven countries — including the U.S. and the U.K. — have met NATO's two per cent of GDP spending goal, according to figures released in June. NATO's estimates show Canada is expected to spend 1.27 per cent of its GDP on the military this year, up from about one per cent in 2014. Canada does fare better when you look at its defence budget in dollars and cents, said Dave Perry, vice president of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. The country spends the sixth highest amount overall among NATO members on its military. As for meeting the percentage of GDP target, Perry's not optimistic despite planned increases in the defence budget. “Canada is not on a path to live up to the commitments that we were signing up for in 2014 in Wales,” he said. Last year, Canada spent about $22.9 billion on the Department of National Defence. But Ottawa intends to dramatically boost military spending in the coming years. In 2017, the government released a plan to increase the budget to almost $33 billion annually within a decade. Asked about the letter from the U.S., Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan touted this plan to strengthen spending. Discussions around “burden sharing” within the bloc have been happening for some time, he said. He noted that under the government's plan, the defence budget would see an increase of 70 per cent, a “significant amount.” “The relationship with Canada and the U.S., the defence relationship, I think, is even stronger now, because they see a tangible plan that we have created,” he said on an episode of The West Block that aired Sunday. “It's working, actually, extremely well.” The U.S. sending such a letter is an unusual, formal means of relaying a message, and it represents an escalation from previous attempts to get Canada to spend more on its military. That pressure has been increasing in recent weeks ahead of the NATO summit in London starting on Dec. 3. In fact, the same message has been conveyed in multiple ways to the federal government, a diplomatic source said, and NATO itself also wants to see more military spending from Canada. In July, however, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg suggested publicly he was happy with improvements in Canadian defence spending. “Under your leadership,” he said to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, ​​”Canada has stepped up its contributions to our NATO alliance including with forces for NATO missions and operations and increased spending.” But one former defence minister said the letter from the U.S. — NATO's leader in defence spending in relation to its GDP — was not a good sign. Peter MacKay said such a letter amounts to “a very serious diplomatic slap — not on the wrist, but in the face.” During his time in government, the former Nova Scotia Conservative MP said he had talks with defence secretaries regarding Canadian military spending and the country's goal of reaching two per cent. “Those discussions can be forceful and frank but they took place face to face,” said MacKay, who was defence minister for six years under former prime minister Stephen Harper. “Sending a démarche (diplomatic letter) is really ratcheting it up a notch.” https://globalnews.ca/news/6210623/canada-defence-spending-nato/

Ahead of the Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation, and Education Conference (I/ITSEC), the world's largest military training and simulation event to be held next week in Orlando, Fla., CAE announced it has completed major upgrades to the CT-156 Harvard (T-6) and CT-155 Hawk flight training devices (FTDs) used as part of the NATO Flying Training in Canada (NFTC) program at 15 Wing Moose Jaw, Sask. The upgrades were done on three CT-156 Harvard FTDs and one CT-155 Hawk FTD that are used extensively for ground-based training elements of the NFTC pilot training syllabus. CAE replaced computing hardware on the simulators, added new visual display systems, updated the instructor operator stations, and upgraded the image generators to the latest CAE Medallion series. CAE will now begin upgrading the CT-155 Hawk FTD located at 4 Wing Cold Lake, Alta., which is used as part of phase IV fighter lead-in training under the NFTC program. “The ground-based training system and use of simulators has become increasingly important for military pilot training,” said France Hébert, vice-president and general manager, CAE Canada. “With the upgraded flight training devices used for NATO Flying Training in Canada, we will now be able to deliver ground-based training that is more immersive and realistic, which in turn contributes to the more effective and efficient delivery of live flying training.” The effectiveness of the upgraded CT-156 Harvard and CT-155 Hawk FTDs is already benefiting student pilots. The new visual systems provide more realism in the synthetic environment and have enabled training tasks such as formation flying and tactical scenarios to be rehearsed in the simulators, thus enhancing the efficiency of performing these tasks during live flying training. As the prime contractor for the NFTC program, CAE operates the NFTC base facilities, delivers the ground-school classroom and simulator training, and supports the live flying training on a fleet of Beechcraft T-6 (CT-156 Harvard) and BAE Systems Hawk (CT-155 Hawk) aircraft. CAE operates the NFTC program out of 15 Wing Moose Jaw and 4 Wing Cold Lake, and the program is designed and delivered in cooperation with the Government of Canada to support pilot training for the Royal Canadian Air Force and allied militaries. The NFTC program combines basic, advanced, and lead-in fighter training as part of the comprehensive military pilot training program. https://www.skiesmag.com/press-releases/cae-upgrades-trainers-at-15-wing-moose-jaw

The U.S. government is pushing into hypersonic weapons in a big way, with at least five different weapons programs currently in development. Nanotechnology is shaping up to be a key tech that will enable delivery systems to survive traveling through the atmosphere at Mach 5 and above, with carbon nanotubes showing promise as strong, lightweight material that rapidly sheds heat. Hypersonic weapons are weapons that travel at incredible speeds through the atmosphere. Hypersonics start at Mach 5 (3,836 miles an hour), or five times the speed of sound. Pushing an object through the air at really, really fast speeds creates a unique problem: as speed increases, the friction from the object passing through air also increases. This friction generates heat. The skin of the SR-71 Blackbird strategic reconnaissance jet and the fasted manned airplane ever built regularly warmed to up to 500 degrees Fahrenheit at Mach 3. The X-15 rocket plane, flown during the 1960s, reached temperatures of 1200 Fahrenheit as it flew to Mach 6. At Mach 10, the friction is enough to “melt the toughest steel,” while at Mach 20, the temperature reaches an astounding 17,000 Fahrenheit. Eventually, hypersonic weapons could reach Mach 24. Scientists and engineers understand how to handle traditional air friction problems thanks to the technical challenges of spacecraft and nuclear warheads re-entering the atmosphere. But a missile warhead de-orbiting over an enemy target is only exposed to heat for a handful of minutes, as it transitions from space to the atmosphere and finally smashes into its target. A hypersonic weapon, on the other hand, spends its entire flight within the atmosphere and is exposed to high heat the entire time. An article at DefenseOne describes how scientists are working with carbon nanotubes to solve the heat issue. Scientists at Florida State University's High-Performance Materials Institute are looking into using carbon nanotubes as a construction material for hypersonic weapons. Carbon nanotubes are a synthetic material consisting of carbon tubes with a diameter as small as one nanometer. Carbon nanotubes are stronger than steel and insulate against heat. Now, researchers have discovered that soaking carbon nanotubes in phenol can increase their ability to disperse heat by one-sixth, allowing less nanomaterials to be used for the same job. What does this mean for hypersonic weapons? It means that materials that can stand the heat and stresses of hypersonic, atmospheric travel are on the way, and that hypersonic weapon designers could even safely achieve higher speeds by using thicker layers of the stuff. https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/research/a29847271/us-military-nanotech/

Defence Construction Canada (DCC) has issued an Advance Procurement Notice (APN) for Solicitation No. APN-DC-2527 for construction programs for the Future Fighter Capability Project (FFCP). If contracts are awarded, the work will occur between 2020 and 2030. SECRET personnel, document safeguarding and facility security clearances will be required for all projects for contractors and consultants. Information management system clearance to the level of SECRET may be required, but will only be approved post-contract award. Potential bidders who do not currently meet these requirements can apply to the Industrial Security Program (ISP) for clearances. DCC is an approved sponsor under the ISP. Requests for security clearances must be received prior to January 7, 2020. Advance Procurement Notice, Future Fighter Capability Project (FFCP), Canada (APN-DC-2527) Project Infrastructure is required at the Main Operating Bases in Cold Lake and Bagotville, with potential for work at various Deployed Operating Bases; Forward Operating Locations[1] and Combined Air Operations Centres in support of Future Fighter Capability (FFC). ISP Backgrounder Government of Canada information is subject to data and information protection requirements. The ISP is responsible for granting the necessary security clearances to contractors and their subcontractors for access to Government of Canada information designated as PROTECTED or higher. Key requirements include: individual and facility security clearances must be received in advanceof any access to government information; individual and facility security clearance must match the level of security assigned to the information being accessed; security clearances cannot be extended, transferred or assigned between organizations; site-specific Document Safeguarding Capability (DSC) security clearance is required for organizations that handle government information or assets at their facilities; IT systems that will receive, store and process government information must be approved in advance; foreign-based employees accessing government information at Canadian facilities must obtain a visitor screening approval in advance; foreign-based employees accessing government information from locations outside of Canada require security clearances, as does the facility within which they are working; subcontractors who will receive, process, store or access government information are subject to all of the same assessments and requirements as are the prime contractors (those holding the contract with the Canadian government) and must possess a valid security clearance for each contract; and prime contractors remains solely responsible (and liable) for the subcontractors compliance with the ISP. Compliance with the Industrial Security Program is a material requirement for any government contract having a security requirement. Failure to comply with the ISP can result in suspension or termination of security clearances. The termination of security clearances is considered to be a breach of contract, which entitles the government to terminate the contract for default. The requirements for SECRET clearances are extensive, necessitating advance planning to gather the significant and necessary information that is required. Whether you are currently registered in the ISP or seeking to do so, understanding the requirements of the ISP is critical to your ability to successfully bid for federal government work. To view all formatting for this article (eg, tables, footnotes), please access the original here. https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=8a031226-d61b-424e-ac7b-ccc8b7df104b

The U.S. Department of Defense announced on Thursday that Boeing Co. has been awarded a new contract for support F/A-18 Super Hornet aircraft. U.S. aerospace giant has won a contract valued at as much as $43 million to build, test and delivery of 48 Trailing Edge Flap retrofit redesign kits in support of the F/A-18E/F aircraft. Work will be performed in St. Louis, Missouri (72%); Lucerne, Switzerland (20%); Paramount, California (5%); and Hot Springs, Arkansas (3%), and is expected to be completed in June 2022. Production of the flaps involves the use of new manufacturing methods including advanced composites and high-speed machining, which were not used in the manufacture of flaps for the earlier Hornets. The Super Hornet is the most advanced addition to the combat-proven family of F/A-18 Hornets. Both the single-seat E and two-seat F models offer longer range, greater endurance, more payload-carrying ability, more powerful engines, increased carrier bringback capability, enhanced survivability and the growth potential to incorporate future systems and technologies to meet emerging threats. Although it is 25 percent larger than the Hornet, the Super Hornet has 42 percent fewer parts. The company's website said the Super Hornet is the backbone of the U.S. Navy carrier air wing now and for decades to come. The combat-proven Super Hornet delivers cutting-edge, next-generation multi-role strike fighter capability, outdistancing current and emerging threats well into the future. The Super Hornet has the capability, flexibility and performance necessary to modernize the air or naval aviation forces of any country. Two versions of the Super Hornet – E model and F model – are able to perform virtually every mission in the tactical spectrum, including air superiority, day/night strike with precision-guided weapons, fighter escort, close air support, suppression of enemy air defenses, maritime strike, reconnaissance, forward air control and tanker missions. https://defence-blog.com/news/u-s-navy-orders-48-retrofit-redesign-kits-in-support-of-super-hornet-aircraft.html The U.S. Department of Defense announced on Thursday that Boeing Co. has been awarded a new contract for support F/A-18 Super Hornet aircraft. U.S. aerospace giant has won a contract valued at as much as $43 million to build, test and delivery of 48 Trailing Edge Flap retrofit redesign kits in support of the F/A-18E/F aircraft. Work will be performed in St. Louis, Missouri (72%); Lucerne, Switzerland (20%); Paramount, California (5%); and Hot Springs, Arkansas (3%), and is expected to be completed in June 2022. Production of the flaps involves the use of new manufacturing methods including advanced composites and high-speed machining, which were not used in the manufacture of flaps for the earlier Hornets. The Super Hornet is the most advanced addition to the combat-proven family of F/A-18 Hornets. Both the single-seat E and two-seat F models offer longer range, greater endurance, more payload-carrying ability, more powerful engines, increased carrier bringback capability, enhanced survivability and the growth potential to incorporate future systems and technologies to meet emerging threats. Although it is 25 percent larger than the Hornet, the Super Hornet has 42 percent fewer parts. The company's website said the Super Hornet is the backbone of the U.S. Navy carrier air wing now and for decades to come. The combat-proven Super Hornet delivers cutting-edge, next-generation multi-role strike fighter capability, outdistancing current and emerging threats well into the future. The Super Hornet has the capability, flexibility and performance necessary to modernize the air or naval aviation forces of any country. Two versions of the Super Hornet – E model and F model – are able to perform virtually every mission in the tactical spectrum, including air superiority, day/night strike with precision-guided weapons, fighter escort, close air support, suppression of enemy air defenses, maritime strike, reconnaissance, forward air control and tanker missions. https://defence-blog.com/news/u-s-navy-orders-48-retrofit-redesign-kits-in-support-of-super-hornet-aircraft.html

Effective Jan. 30, 2020, air traffic controllers will once again be working at Montreal International (Mirabel) Airport (CYMX). Following the completion of a recent aeronautical study, Nav Canada has decided to reinstate air traffic control (ATC) services at the airport for 16 hours a day, from 1100 to 0300 Coordinated Universal Time (1000 to 0200 UTC during daylight savings time) using the current mandatory frequency 119.1 MHz. While the tower is in operation, the control zone and terminal control area will become Class C airspace. When ATC is closed, the Flight Service Station (FSS) will operate and the airspace will revert to Class E and transponder airspace. Nav Canada said ground control service during ATC operating hours and ground advisory service during FSS operating hours will be provided on VHF frequency 121.8 MHz. Mirabel saw over 69,000 movements in 2017 and exceeded 75,000 in 2018. https://www.skiesmag.com/news/atc-returning-to-mirabel-in-january/

By James Careless How well is Canada's defence procurement actually working, and are industry-boosters like ITBs paying off? These and other questions were tackled at the ‘Defence in the 43rd Parliament' one-day conference on November 20, 2019. It was staged by the Canadian Global Affairs Institute (CGAI) at the Chateau Laurier hotel, before a full house in the Adam Room. During the opening session, ‘Canadian Defence Procurement – The State of the Union', DND Associate Deputy Minister Claude Rochette was cautiously upbeat about the state of Canadian defence procurements. In the last year, DND has signed about 12,000 contracts and spent about $6 billion on procurements, he said. Most of these contracts were on time and on budget. 2019's defence procurement spending is up from $4.9 billion spent by DND in 2016, Rochette noted. In addition, this year DND will “close out its budget” by spending its allocated funds, he said. Despite some criticisms that Canadian defence procurements are not moving fast enough, “we are doing pretty well,” said Claude Rochette. But the process isn't perfect, he admitted. “We have more work to do.” Rochette's positive assessment was echoed by PSPC Associate Deputy Minister Michael Vandergrift. 2019 “has been a very busy time” in Canadian defence procurement, he said, During the past year, the federal government issued an RfP for the Future Fighter Capability project; sole-sourced Light Armoured Vehicles from General Dynamics Land Systems-Canada; and selected Lockheed Martin to built 15 Canadian Surface Combatant ships. Asked which defence procurements are going well and which are posing challenges, Rochette replied that smaller projects that fall within DND's $5 million spending authority are easy to manage. Where issues crop up is in large multi-million dollar projects with long time lines: Trying to cost them accurately and manage them effectively is akin to asking, “I want to have a car and buy it next year, so tell me how much I'll pay for it (right now),” he said. In a later morning session entitled, ‘Offsets – Is the ITB Policy Delivering?', the panel considered the impact of procurement bidders ‘overcommitting' to ITBs (promising financial benefits worth more than the contracts they are bidding for) on the Canadian defence industry. Such ITB overcommittments, which can be worth 300% or more than the contract being sought, are “introducing unnecessary risk” in the Canadian defence industry, said Rich Foster, Vice President of L3 Harris Technologies - Canada. The result of overcommitting is that contractors are “now focussed more on quantity than quality” in making their procurement decisions, he said. The real victims of ITB overcommittments are SMEs, which lack the resources available to large companies to pay for these big ITBs. The choice facing these SMEs is to directly/indirectly seek such contracts – which can run 20-40 years – “or you go out of business,” said Brian Botting, Director of Strategic Offsets at General Dynamics Missions Systems. “It is a terrible dilemma for them to be in.” The CGAI procurement conference ended with the panel discussion, ‘Defence Procurement Canada'. This is the name of the integrated procurement agency the Liberals proposed during the October 2019 election, to replace the multiple ministries currently sharing this responsibility. The common sense reason for having a single defence procurement agency comes down to human nature: “If you ask two of your kids to take out the garbage, it won't get done,” quipped Alan Williams, President of The Williams Group. “If you ask one of your kids, maybe it will get taken out.” He explained that sharing procurement among ministries causes requires agreement between multiple ministers and deputy ministers – which wastes time -- and that Canada's military allies manage their procurements through single agencies. Creating a separate Defence Procurement Canada (DPC) agency would not be easy, said Jim Mitchell, Research Associate with the University of Ottawa's Graduate School of Public and International Affairs. Speaking from his own government experience, Mitchell observed that such changes are “disruptive, costly, difficult, hard on people, and hurt efficiency and effectiveness for a few years.” Mitchell added that creating DPC would not prevent Treasury Board and other ministries from having a role in defence procurement afterwards. CGAI Fellow Gavin Liddy was just as pessimistic about the value of creating DPC when so many defence procurements are underway. If the government wants “to do one single thing to delay the procurement agenda in the next five to seven years,” then they should instruct defence bureaucrats to create the DPC, Liddy concluded. “Nothing would divert their attention more than doing that.” http://www.canadiandefencereview.com/news?news/2765

Steve Trimble, Lee Hudson and Michael Bruno An ongoing legal dispute between the U.S. government and Lockheed Martin over intellectual property (IP) rights in the F-35 program has emerged as the source of a 2.5-year delay in activating a key system required to complete initial operational testing and the full-rate production decision. Involving the Pentagon's largest single weapons program ever—and with full-rate production critical to Lockheed's long-term profitability—the dispute has waylaid progress for both sides. But not only is the matter holding up the program, it may set a precedent for the military's increasing reliance on software and the government's desire to reap data-based rewards. “We still do have concerns,” says U.S. Air Force Lt. Gen. Eric Fick, F-35 program executive officer. “We don't need all the data, but the data that we need, it's important that we pursue it.” “We also have fundamental standards that we need to set down so that it is very, very clear,” adds Ellen Lord, undersecretary of defense for acquisition and sustainment. The military's open-air test ranges lack the capacity to fully test the F-35's advanced capabilities, so the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) office is relying on the activation of the Joint Simulation Environment (JSE). The JSE creates a synthetic world that allows operational testers to gauge the F-35's performance in theater-level scenarios, with multiple aircraft flying against an adversary's full arsenal of fighters, missiles and electronic warfare capabilities. The JSE was supposed to be activated in late 2017 but now is scheduled to achieve the first-use milestone in July 2020, Robert Behler, the head of DOT&E, told lawmakers Nov. 13 during a House Armed Services subcommittee hearing on F-35 readiness. The DOT&E has completed 91% of open-air missions during the Initial Operational Test & Evaluation phase required to qualify the F-35 for a full-rate production decision, but the testers still need to use the JSE to complete all of the testing. According to Fick's testimony, the IP dispute has delayed activation of the JSE. The JSE requires Lockheed to supply the software to enable a function nicknamed “F-35 in a Box,” he says. This is a software module that allows the JSE to virtually replicate each of the F-35's sensor subsystems, along with the sensor fusion brain embedded in the operational flight program. The government would then add software modules to replicate various threats, including aircraft, weapons and sensors of various adversaries. A dispute arose because Lockheed asserted an IP claim over nine specific algorithms that were included in the “F-35 in a Box” software package, the general says. The program office responded by bringing in the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) to review Lockheed's records. The DCAA's auditors determined they could not find the proof in Lockheed's records that the nine algorithms had been developed solely at Lockheed's expense. Since Lockheed failed to prove its claim, the DCAA determined the nine algorithms belonged to the government. Lockheed has appealed the DCAA's decision to the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals, where it is still being adjudicated, the general told lawmakers. The dispute over the JSE feeds into a larger source of tension between the government and contractors over IP rights. Lord testified that her office is in the final stages of approving a new, Pentagon-wide policy on preserving the government's rights to IP in acquisition contracts. The policy will be modeled on an approach adopted late last year by the Army, which requires program managers to establish the government's IP rights on specific systems up front, rather than treat the issue as an afterthought. “Before we put together an acquisition strategy, you have to think about what information is critical to a program, particularly in terms of sustainability, so that you're not always held hostage to the prime on that through the life of the contract and [so] that you can find better cost solutions through a variety of different providers,” she said. Still, the new approach could challenge the business models of prime contractors and suppliers, who traditionally have eaten costs up front or bid low to win weapons contracts, with the intent of making money in the two-thirds of the life cycle of the program that includes sustainment. At an Aviation Week defense conference years ago, defense executives were asked to address the idea of giving up IP rights to the government and were determined to resist. “No!” yelled one executive in the closed-door gathering. Indeed, the new policy—which will not require explicit congressional blessing, as it is internal rulemaking—still faces questions by industry lobbying groups, including the Aerospace Industries Association (AIA). John Luddy, AIA's vice president for national security policy, said IP policymaking is “probably the most important” issue currently between his trade lobby group and defense leaders. Industry is not yet behind the emerging Pentagon policy, he indicated during the ComDef 2019 conference in October, because it does not strike the proper “balance,” in industry's view, to allow it to reap profits while letting the government contract to sustain weapon systems more affordably. “We think [it] is headed toward the right kind of balance, but I would just encourage that to continue—we're engaged quite a bit with the department on that,” Luddy said. “We have to find that balance.” Diana Maurer, director of defense capabilities and management at the Government Accountability Office, noted that her auditing office flagged the IP issue in 2014 and is happy to see the Pentagon make progress on the issue. But the changing nature of warfare systems means the issue will likely only grow. “Weapon systems today are essentially flying or sailing or moving pieces of software, and the intellectual property is an important piece of that.” https://aviationweek.com/defense/lockheed-and-pentagon-joust-over-lucrative-f-35-data-rights

ByChristen McCurdy Nov. 22 (UPI) -- United Technologies has received a $762.5 million contract modification to deliver F135 propulsion systems for the Air Force and Marine Corps. The new deal, announced Thursday by the Department of Defense, funds Lot 14 production and delivery of 48 F135-PW-100 propulsion systems for the Air Force and 10 F135-PW-600 propulsion systems for the Marine Corps. The Pratt & Whitney F135 is a turbofan engine for the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II, fifth generation single-engine stealth fighters used the Air Force, Marines and Navy plan to replace much of their fleets with in future years. In October, Lockheed finalized a $34 billion deal with the Pentagon to deliver 478 F-35 fighter planes in production Lots 12, 13 and 14 at a cost below $80 million each. It's the largest contract in military history, and the lowest per-plane cost for the F-35 series yet. That deal came after pressure from the Pentagon to lower the per-plane cost of the aircraft, which has also faced scrutiny for production and safety issues. The new contract funds production of 48 F135-PW-100 engines for the US Air Force. The F135-PW-100 powers the Air Force's F-35A aircraft. Per the October deal, the Pentagon's expected cost per plane for the F-35A in Lot 14 in $77.9 million. The deal also funds 10 F135-PW-600 engines for the Marine Corps' F-35B. Lot 14 production F-35Bs are projected to cost $101.3 million per plane. The Pentagon has obligated fiscal 2020 aircraft procurement funds in the amount of $762 million -- it covers $521.5 million in purchases for the Air Force and $240.9 in Marine Corps. The bulk of work will be performed in East Hartford, Connecticut, with some work taking place in Indianapolis and Bristol, England. https://www.upi.com/Defense-News/2019/11/22/United-Technologies-awarded-7625M-for-Air-Force-Marine-Corps-F-35-engines