Contract Awards by US Department of Defense – October 27, 2020

Sur le même sujet

• 

  3 juillet 2019 | International, Aérospatial

  These 4 technologies are big problems for US military space

  By: Nathan Strout A recent report highlights the fact that the commercial space sector is an increasingly important part of the military's efforts in space, but there are places where industry falls short. The national security space arena is a niche market, characterized by low production runs paired with a need for high-quality products. That combination makes it a difficult area for the commercial sector. While national security space increasingly relies on industry to provide components for space vehicles, the fact remains that in some key areas there are no domestic suppliers for critical technologies, leaving the United States dependent on foreign suppliers. Here are four such technologies singled out in a recent report on the United States military's industrial base: Solar cells According to the report, the commercial sector is not investing in the research and development needed to improve solar cells, which are used to power satellites. Businesses have maxed out the capacity for triple-junction solar cells, but do not appear capable of pushing forward to four- or five-junction solar cell technology. The Pentagon also wants solar cells that are able to withstand more radiation for longer than current products on the market. Improving solar cells to get the same or more power out of even slightly smaller panels could have a major impact when it comes to launching a satellite into space, meaning that reducing solar panel size is highly valuable. Tube amplifiers Starting in the 1990s, the domestic supplier market share for traveling-wave tube amplifiers — electronic devices used to amplify radio frequency signals to high power — dropped from 50 percent to just 12 percent. While that market has shown a slight recovery, the presence of heavily subsidized companies like Thales in France make it difficult for American companies to compete. Gyroscopes Precision gyroscopes are used in spacecraft to determine altitude and are essential to providing inertial navigation systems. According to the Department of Defense, there is only one domestic supplier of hemispherical resonating gyroscopes, resulting in long lead times — the report claims that the company can only produce one to two units per month. Fiber optic gyroscopes fair better with three domestic suppliers currently manufacturing them, but those companies are themselves vulnerable to overseas supply issues with their subcomponents. Infrared detectors Just one foreign manufacturer produces the substrates necessary for space infrared detectors, and the Pentagon warns that a disruption of any more than a few months of production of the substrates could negatively impact the quality and completion of American satellites. Because of this, the U.S. government has used a Defense Production Act of 1950 provision that allows it to offer economic incentives to either develop, sustain or expand domestic production of technology critical to national defense, and an Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment program is in the works to support the remaining two American foundries for one type of substrate. https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/space/2019/07/02/these-4-technologies-are-big-problems-for-us-military-space/

• 

  11 décembre 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Terrestre

  Army preps for competition limited to Bell and Sikorsky for long-range assault helicopter

  By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — The Army is taking its final steps before starting a competition to acquire a Future Long Range Assault Aircraft, and has done so by issuing an intent to solicit bids using means “other than full and open competition,” according to a Dec. 9 post on on the government contracts website Beta.Sam.Gov. This step means that unless a surprise vendor can meet all of the Army's technical and production requirements for FLRAA in the next two weeks, the future aircraft will be supplied by either Bell or Lockheed Martin's Sikorsky. Bell and a Sikorsky-Boeing team have been pitted against one another for years to build and fly technology demonstrators to inform requirements ahead of the FLRAA competition and both are part of a competitive demonstration and risk reduction phase. Bell's V-280 Valor tiltrotor had it's first flight nearly three years ago and Sikorsky and Boeing's SB-1 Defiant coaxial helicopter flew for the first time in March 2019. The draft request for proposals is expected to be released by the end of the year with a final solicitations expected in fiscal 2021. Modernizing its vertical lift fleet is the Army's third highest priority behind Long-Range Precision Fires and Next-Generation Combat Vehicle development. The Army intends to field both a FLRAA and Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft by roughly FY30. Bell and Lockheed Martin are also competing against each other in the FARA competition. Bell's offering is the 360 Invictus and Lockheed's entry is the Raider X. In the case of FLRAA, the winner must build eight production aircraft for the first unit equipped by FY30. The plan is to award a contract to a winner in FY22. The winner will proceed to deliver a preliminary design review roughly eight months following the award. According to the pre-solicitation, “the Army has determined through extensive market research, including a July 2020 sources sought, that only two sources exist in the market space that have the capability and capacity of developing, manufacturing, testing and delivering both prototype and initial production FLRAA in the time allocated to achieve the Army's goal of an FUE in FY 2030.” The Army stated that Bell and Sikorsky are those two sources, but notes that “any other responsible, qualified sources, ... that can develop and produce the FLRAA weapon system to achieve First Unit Equipped (FUE) no later than 2030 are encouraged to full identify their interest and capabilities in accordance with the requirements,” within 15 days after publication of the pre-solicitation. Such a vendor would need to deliver a preliminary design review in FY22, start building prototype aircraft in the third quarter of FY23 and eight production aircraft by 2030. Vendors must also prove they are able to build 24 aircraft per year at full-rate production. Those aircraft must be able to fly at 2,000 feet pressure altitude in 85 degree heat with a full payload that consists of 12 troops at 290 lbs each and four crew at 281 lbs each. When the draft RFP drops, it is likely to contain a schedule to deliver air vehicle prototypes and mission systems. The Army was debating between two schedule options to deliver prototypes by roughly mid-2026. The FLRAA program has strong support from Congress. This year's annual defense policy bill authorized $5 million in increased investment in FLRAA advanced component development and prototyping on top of the Army's nearly $648 million request. The FY21 spending bill has yet to go through conference committee, but both the House and Senate proposed additional funding for FLRAA. The House Appropriations Committee proposed a $20 million increase while the Senate Appropriations Defense Subcommittee proposed a $79 million addition. Lawmakers added $76 million in funding to FLRAA's top line in FY20 to drive down technical risk and speed up delivery through the competitive demonstration and risk reduction effort. In FY20, Congress cut $34 million from the Army's other future vertical lift effort — the FARA program — which threatened the service's ability to provide some of its government-furnished equipment to competitors chosen to build and fly prototypes. The Army is supplying its new Improved Turbine Engine Program engine, a 20mm gun, an integrated munitions launcher and its modular open-systems architecture. The Army has since shored up that funding, according to service aviation leadership. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2020/12/10/army-preps-for-competition-limited-to-bell-and-sikorsky-for-long-range-assault-helicopter/

• 

  30 juillet 2020 | International, Aérospatial

  What Countries Lead In Developing Next-Gen Combat Aircraft?

  Tony Osborne July 29, 2020 Aviation Week's July 16 webinar on the future of combat aircraft mentioned British, French-German and Japanese fifth- and sixth-generation developments. Are there any others on the radar, such as Turkey or South Korea? Will these quieter players be able to pull the rabbit from the hat as the Turks have done with UAVs in Libya and Syria? London Bureau Chief Tony Osborne responds: Had we had more time during the webinar, we would have talked more about developments from Turkey and South Korea—in particular, the Turkish Aerospace Industries TF-X and Korea Aerospace Industries' KF-X. Taiwan and Pakistan are also making investments in fighter technologies, although their progress is not as mature. Turkey benefits from having a capable partner in BAE Systems to support the design process, and I believe they could produce a combat aircraft in the next 5-10 years. The Turkish electronics industry is well advanced, and Turkish Aerospace is growing its capabilities fairly rapidly. The biggest question is around development of engine technologies: Turkey wants an indigenous 25,000-30,000-lb. engine to power the TF-X. Although Turkey is not starting from scratch—given its experience on General Electric engines for the F-16—it has a long way to go before it can produce a reliable, locally developed powerplant. Without that, Turkey will have difficulty exporting such an aircraft. Surety of supply for a foreign engine, especially from the U.S., is doubtful given the political strains between the two countries. In South Korea, it is a slightly different story. Its platform will use a U.S.-supplied engine, and given the close relationship between South Korea and the U.S., there is that surety of supply. Time will tell whether that will change when it comes to exporting the KF-X. With assembly of the first prototype well underway, South Korea appears to be making strong progress. We are still waiting for metal to be cut. https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/aircraft-propulsion/what-countries-lead-developing-next-gen-combat-aircraft