AeroVironment Introduces Extended Range Antenna, Expanding UAS Command and Control up to 40 Kilometers in a Lightweight, Portable Form Factor

Sur le même sujet

• 

  14 janvier 2021 | International, Aérospatial

  Drone maker to pay $25M over military gear parts

  By: The Associated Press PORTLAND, Ore. — Aerial drone manufacturer Insitu will pay $25 million to settle allegations that its military drones were outfitted with used components instead of new ones. U.S. attorney Brian Moran said cases such as this one should be seen as a warning to defense contractors that false claims have no place in military purchasing. Moran announced the settlement Tuesday, The Oregonian/OregonLive reported. The allegations originated with a former Insitu manager, D R O'Hara, who filed a whistleblower complaint in federal court and will receive $4.6 million of the settlement. Investigators, who took over the case under provisions of the whistleblower law, allege that Insitu billed the military for new parts and components but actually used less expensive recycled and refurbished parts. Insitu said it cooperated with the investigation and that its disclosures to the government met all requirements. “At all times, Insitu provided superior ISR services to the Navy and Special Operations Command, a fact the government does not dispute,” the company said in a statement. “Insitu continues to provide mission-ready systems and supports the nation's warfighters by providing world-class service.” Owned by Boeing, Insitu is based in the town of Bingen, Washington, along the Columbia River. It employs about 1,500 people with two-thirds of them in the Bingen and Hood River, Oregon, area. https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2021/01/13/drone-maker-to-pay-25m-over-military-gear-parts/

• 

  24 janvier 2020 | International, Terrestre

  Bradley Replacement: Did Army Ask For ‘Unobtainium’?

  By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR. WASHINGTON: For the third time in 11 years, the Army's attempt to replace the 1980s-vintage M2 Bradley ran afoul of the age-old tradeoff between armor and mobility, several knowledgeable sources tell Breaking Defense. The General Dynamics prototype for the Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle – the only competitor left after other companies bowed out or were disqualified – was too heavy to meet the Army's requirement that a single Air Force C-17 cargo jet could carry two complete OMFVs to a war zone, we're told. But the vehicle had to be that heavy, GD's defenders say, to meet the Army's requirement for armor protection. Now, the Army hasn't officially said why it cancelled the current OMFV contract. Senior leaders – Chief of Staff, Gen. James McConville; the four-star chief of Army Futures Command, Gen. Mike Murray; and the civilian Army Acquisition Executive, Assistant Secretary Bruce Jette – have all publicly acknowledged that the requirements and timeline were “aggressive.” (Yes, all three men used the same word). Jette was the most specific, telling reporters that one vendor – which, from the context of his remark, could only be GD – did not meet all the requirements, but he wouldn't say which requirements weren't met. So, while we generally avoid writing a story based solely on anonymous sources, in this case we decided their track records (which we can't tell you about) were so good and the subject was so important that it was worth going ahead. “Industry told the Army the schedule was ‘unobtainium,' but they elected to proceed anyway,” one source told us: That's why the other potential competitors dropped out, seeing the requirements as too hard to meet. In particular, the source said, “industry needs more time to evaluate the trade [offs] associated with achieving the weight requirement.” With more time, industry might have been able to refine the design further to reduce weight, redesign major components to be lighter, or possibly – and this one is a stretch – even invent new stronger, lighter materials. But on the schedule the Army demanded, another source told us, reaching the minimum allowable protection without exceeding the maximum allowable weight was physically impossible. Why This Keeps Happening The Army's been down this road before and stalled out in similar ways. The Ground Combat Vehicle was too heavy, the Future Combat Systems vehicles were too light; “just right” still seems elusive. In 2009, Defense Secretary Bob Gates cancelled the Future Combat Systems program, whose BAE-designed Manned Ground Vehicles – including a Bradley replacement – had been designed to such strict weight limits that they lacked adequate armor. The Army had initially asked for the FCS vehicles to come in under 20 tons so one could fit aboard an Air Force C-130 turboprop transport. After that figure proved unfeasible, and the Air Force pointed out a C-130 couldn't actually carry 20 tons any tactically useful distance, the weight crept up to 26 tons, but the added armor wasn't enough to satisfy Gates' concerns about roadside bombs, then taking a devastating toll on US soldiers in Iraq. Four years later, amidst tightening budgets, the Army itself gave up on the Ground Combat Vehicle, another Bradley replacement, after strict requirements for armor protection drove both competing designs – from General Dynamics and BAE Systems – into the 56-70 ton range, depending on the level of modular add-on armor bolted onto the basic chassis. (A much-publicized Governmental Accountability Office study claimed GCV could reach 84 tons, but that was a projection for future growth, not an actual design). Not quite nine months ago, after getting initial feedback from industry on the Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle, the Army made the tough call to reduce its protection requirements somewhat to make it possible to fit two OMFVs on a C-17. If our sources are correct, however, it didn't reduce the armor requirement enough for General Dynamics to achieve the weight goal. One source says that two of the General Dynamics vehicles would fit on a C-17 if you removed its modular armor. The add-on armor kit could then be shipped to the war zone on a separate flight and installed, or simply left off if intelligence was sure the enemy lacked heavy weapons. But the requirements didn't allow for that compromise, and the Army wasn't willing to waive them, the source said, because officers feared a vehicle in the less-armored configuration could get troops killed. Other Options Now, there are ways to protect a vehicle besides heavy passive armor. Some IEDs in Iraq were big enough to cripple a 70-ton M1 Abrams. Russian tanks get by with much lighter passive armor covered by a layer of so-called reactive armor, which explodes outwards when hit, blasting incoming warheads before they can penetrate. Both Russia and Israel have fielded, and the US Army is urgently acquiring, Active Protection Systems that shoot down incoming projectiles. The problem with both reactive armor and active protection is that they're only proven effective against explosive warheads, like those found on anti-tank missiles. They're much less useful against solid shells, and while no missile ever fielded can use those, a tank's main gun can fling solid shot with such force that it penetrates armor through sheer concentrated kinetic energy. (Protecting against roadside bombs and land mines is yet another design issue, because they explode from underneath, but it's no longer the all-consuming question it once ways. Advances in suspension, blast-deflecting hull shapes, and shock absorption for the crew have made even the four-wheeled Joint Light Tactical Vehicle remarkably IED-resistant and pretty comfortable). If the Army were willing to take the risk of relying more on active protection systems, or give industry more time to improve active protection technology, it could reduce its requirements for heavy passive armor. Or the Army could remove the soldiers from its combat vehicles entirely and operate them with a mix of automation and remote control, which would make crew protection a moot point. In fact, the service is investing in lightly-armored and relatively expendable Robotic Combat Vehicles – but it still sees those unmanned machines as adjuncts to humans, not replacements. As long as the Army puts soldiers on the battlefield, it will want the vehicles that carry them to be well-protected. Alternatively, the Army could drop its air transport requirements and accept a much heavier vehicle. Israel has already done this with its Namer troop carrier, a modified Merkava heavy tank, but then the Israel army doesn't plan to fight anywhere far away. The US, by contrast, routinely intervenes overseas and has dismantled many of its Cold War bases around the world. Air transport is a limited commodity anyway, and war plans assume most heavy equipment will either arrive by sea or be pre-positioned in warehouses on allied territory. But the Army really wants to have the option to send at least some armored vehicles by air in a crisis. If the Army won't give ground on either protection or transportability, then it faces a different dilemma: They need to either give industry more time to invent something revolutionary, or accept a merely evolutionary improvement. “We're going to reset the requirements, we're going to reset the acquisition strategy and timeline,” Gen. McConville said about OMFV on Tuesday. But, when he discussed Army modernization overall, he repeatedly emphasized that “we need transformational change, not incremental improvements. “Transformational change is how we get overmatch and how we get dominance in the future,” the Chief of Staff said. “We aren't looking for longer cords for our phones or faster horses for our cavalry.” https://breakingdefense.com/2020/01/bradley-replacement-did-army-ask-for-unobtainium

• 

  10 mars 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

  Contract Awards by US Department of Defense - March 09, 2020

  AIR FORCE Digitized Schematic Solutions LLC, Warren, Michigan, has been awarded a $260,000,000 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for technical data support services. This contract provides for the sustainment of Air Force Materiel Command technical data by standardizing roles, processes and methodology. Work will be performed at Robins Air Force Base, Georgia; Hill Air Force Base, Utah; Tinker Air Force Base, Oklahoma; and Peterson Air Force Base, Colorado. Work is expected to be complete by March 2025. This award is the result of a competitive acquisition and 11 offers were received. Fiscal 2020 funds in the amount of $2,000 are being obligated at time of award. Air Force Sustainment Center, Robins Enterprise Contracting, Warner Robins, Georgia, is the contracting activity (FA8530-20-D-0002). The New Jersey Department of Human Services, Trenton, New Jersey, has been awarded a $57,806,700 firm-fixed-price contract for food service. This contract provides for full food service to the dining facilities on the Dix area of Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst (JB MDL), New Jersey. Work will be performed at JB MDL, New Jersey, and is expected to be complete by April 30, 2021. This award was the result of a competitive acquisition and the award was made under the priority afforded under the Randolph-Sheppard Act. Fiscal 2020 operations and maintenance and overseas contingency funds will be obligated by individual task orders. The 87th Contracting Squadron, JB MDL, New Jersey, is the contracting activity (FA4484-20-D-0011). C. W. Roberts Contracting Inc., Tallahassee, Florida, has been awarded a not-to-exceed $49,000,000 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract. This contract provides for resurfacing, painting, removing, replacing/reinstallation, modifying, full depth reconstruction and new full depth construction of pavements (e.g. airfield, roadways, parking lots, sidewalks, etc.); ramp-downs; foundation walls and footings; curbing; parking bumpers; and traffic control devices. Work will be performed at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida; and Duke Field, Florida, and is expected to be complete by March 31, 2025. This award is the result of a competitive acquisition and two offers were received. Fiscal 2020 operations and maintenance funds in the amount of $1,000 are being obligated at the time of award. The Air Force Test Center, Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, is the contracting activity (FA2823-20-D-0003). Valiant Global Defense Services Inc., doing business as Valiant Integrated Services, San Diego, California, has been awarded a $30,000,000 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for research and development. This contract provides for the research, development, testing and evaluation of joint and coalition requirements for tools and technologies that allow for joint and combined planning and data interchange with U.S. coalition partners in multiple theaters of operation to maximize interoperability and mission effectiveness when combatting chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear threats. Work will be performed at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, Camp H.M. Smith, Hawaii; and the Undersea Warfare Development Center, San Diego, California, and is expected to be complete by Sept. 6, 2027. This award is the result of a competitive acquisition and one offer was received. Fiscal 2019 research, development, test and evaluation funds in the amount of $1,577,055 are being obligated on the initial task order; and fiscal 2020 research, development, test and evaluation funds in the amount of $1,734,995 are being obligated on the second task order, at the time of award. Air Force Research Laboratory, Wright Research Site, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, is the contracting activity (FA8650-20-D-6058). Raytheon Corp., Marlborough, Massachusetts, has been awarded a $26,148,084 modification (P00092), to previously awarded contract FA8705-14-C-0001. This modification provides for delta pricing B-Tables for added and deleted work for contract line item numbers 0004, 0005 and 0006 for Global Aircrew Strategic Network Terminal. Work will be performed in Largo, Florida, and is expected to be complete by October 2021. Fiscal 2019 procurement funds in the amount of $16,533,066 are being obligated at the time of award. This modification brings the total cumulative value of the contract to $366,523,499. Air Force Material Command, Hanscom Air Force Base, Massachusetts, is the contracting activity. ARMY The Boeing Co., Mesa, Arizona, was awarded a $191,858,915 cost-no-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee, firm-fixed-price contract for post-production support services and warehouse management services for the United Kingdom AH-64E Apache helicopter fleet of 50 aircraft and three Longbow crew trainers. Bids were solicited via the internet with one received. Work will be performed in Mesa, Arizona, with an estimated completion date of Dec. 31, 2024. Fiscal 2020 Foreign Military Sales (United Kingdom) funds in the amount of $191,858,915 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, is the contracting activity (W58RGZ-20-C-0014). Manhattan Construction Co., Arlington, Virginia, was awarded an $85,407,155 firm-fixed-price contract for construction of a new four-story, 201,000 square-foot general instruction building to support the U.S. Army War College. Bids were solicited via the internet with six received. Work will be performed in Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania, with an estimated completion date of March 29, 2023. Fiscal 2020 military construction, Army funds in the amount of $85,407,155 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore, Maryland, is the contracting activity (W912DR-20-C-0007). NAVY Lockheed Martin Corp. and Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co., Fort Worth, Texas, are awarded a not-to-exceed $173,164,400 modification to a previously awarded, fixed-price-incentive-firm-target advance acquisition contract (N00019-20-C-0009). Work will be performed in Fort Worth, Texas (30%); El Segundo, California (25%); Warton, United Kingdom (20%); Orlando, Florida (10%); Nashua, New Hampshire (5%); Cameri, Italy (5%); and Baltimore, Maryland (5%). This modification procures long lead materials, parts, components and support necessary to maintain on-time production and delivery of Lot 15 F-35 aircraft for the Navy, Marine Corps and government of Italy. Work is expected to be complete by December 2023. Fiscal 2020 aircraft procurement (Navy) funds in the amount of $53,064,400; and non-Department of Defense participant funds in the amount of $120,100,000 will be obligated at time of award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity. Lockheed Martin Corp. Rotary and Mission Systems, Baltimore, Maryland, is awarded a $25,449,876 firm-fixed-price contract for Launch Sequencer (LSEQ) Mark (MK) 5 Mod production in support of the Vertical Launch System (VLS). The LSEQs are used in support of the VLS, which provides area and self-defense, anti-air warfare capabilities, counter-air and land attack cruise missile defense and surface and subsurface warfare capabilities. This contract involves Foreign Military Sales (FMS) to South Korea and Finland. Work will be performed in Oldsmar, Florida, and is expected to be completed by March 2021. This contract will provide for the manufacture, assembly, test and delivery of VLS LSEQ MK 5 Mod 2, Part Number 7104340-29. This contract includes options, which if exercised, will bring the cumulative value of this contract to $74,415,030. If all options are exercised, work will continue through March 2022. Fiscal 2017 and 2018 shipbuilding and conversion (Navy); fiscal 2020 procurement defense wide (Navy); and fiscal 2020 FMS funding in the amount of $25,449,876 will be obligated at time of award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured via the Federal Business Opportunities website, with three offers received. The Naval Surface Warfare Center, Port Hueneme Division, Port Hueneme, California, is the contracting activity (N63394-20-C-0004). Lockheed Martin Corp., Baltimore, Maryland, is awarded a $22,436,852 letter contract for the integration, demonstration, testing and operation of the Layered Laser Defense (LLD) weapon system prototype onboard a Navy littoral combat ship while that vessel is underway. Work will be performed in Moorestown, New Jersey (30%); Baltimore, Maryland (25%); Sunnyvale, California (12%); Woodinville, Washington (10%); Manassas, Virginia (5%); Dallas, Texas (15%); San Diego, California (2%); and Santa Cruz, California (1%). Key areas of work to be performed include development of a prototype structure and enclosure to protect the LLD from ships motion and maritime environment in a mission module format; system integration and test with government-furnished equipment; platform integration and system operational verification and test; systems engineering; test planning; data collection and analysis support; and operational demonstration. Work is expected to be complete by July 2021. The total cumulative value of this contract is $22,436,852. The base period is $22,436,852 and no options are proposed. The action will be incrementally funded with an initial obligation of $11,218,426 utilizing fiscal 2019 research, development, and test and evaluation (Defense-wide) funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured under N00014-20-S-B001, “Long Range Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) for Navy and Marine Corps Science & Technology.” Since proposals are received throughout the year under the long range BAA, the number of proposals received in response to the solicitation is unknown. The Office of Naval Research, Arlington, Virginia, is the contracting activity (N00014-20-C-1003). DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY General Dynamics Information Technology, Fairfax, Virginia, was awarded a firm-fixed-price task order, HC1013-20-F-0073, to support the Air Force Air Defense Communication Services (ADCS). The face value of this action is $7,171,537, funded by fiscal 2020 operations and maintenance funds. The total cumulative value of the order is $14,486,526. This task order was awarded under the competitively awarded, single-award blanket purchase agreement (HC1013-15-A-0004) against General Services Administration's Information Technology Schedule 70 contract for ADCS. The place of performance is throughout the continental U.S., as well as Alaska, Hawaii and Guam. The period of performance for this action is April 1, 2020, to March 31, 2021. There are two, six-month option periods from April 1, 2021, to March 31, 2022. The Defense Information Technology Contracting Organization, Scott Air Force Base, Illinois, is the contracting activity. https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contracts/Contract/Article/2106160/source/GovDelivery/