6 juillet 2020 | International, Aérospatial

GE Gets Contract for First Batch of F-15EX Engines

July 1, 2020 | By John A. Tirpak

General Electric received a $101.4 million contract for the first batch of engines to power the F-15EX fighter being acquired by the Air Force, according to a June 30 notice from the Pentagon.

The sole-source contract buys and installs F110-GE-129s plus spares, but USAF didn't specify how many engines are being acquired in the action. The engines are to be delivered by Nov. 30, 2022.

This first batch of F-15EX engines is being procured sole-source because of “an unusual and compelling urgency acquisition,” according to the announcement. The GE engine is the only one certified for the F-15Q, which the F-15EX is based, and competition was waived on this batch in order to expedite testing of the F-15EX.

Subsequent buys of F-15EX engines, however, will be open to competition, the Air Force said in May. In February, Pratt & Whitney—now part of Raytheon Technologies—protested an early decision to just buy the F110 powerplant for the whole F-15EX fleet, and the Air Force in March dropped its plan to use the GE engine exclusively.

The service will need up to 461 new engines to power as many as 144 F-15EX fighters. Pratt is planning to offer its F100-229 engine, but would have to certify the engine for the “Advanced F-15” at its own cost. The Air Force said testing can take place “concurrently” with production.

No obstacles are seen to integration of the Pratt engine. The company noted it is the “exclusive propulsion system for USAF's entire fleet of operational F-15s.” The service wants up to six competed engines to be delivered per month, with the first deliveries in 2023.

https://www.airforcemag.com/ge-gets-contract-for-first-batch-of-f-15ex-engines

Sur le même sujet

  • These three companies got money to prototype new ground-based radars for the US Air Force

    12 mai 2020 | International, Aérospatial

    These three companies got money to prototype new ground-based radars for the US Air Force

    Valerie Insinna Months after the Air Force gave Raytheon the axe on the Three-Dimensional Expeditionary Long-Range Radar (3DELRR) program, the service has tapped three new companies to work on next-generation ground-based radars. Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and Australian firm CEA Technologies were each awarded $500,000 on May 8 for a 3DELRR rapid prototyping effort known as “SpeedDealer,” the Air Force announced Monday. 3DELRR will replace the legacy AN/TPS-75 radar used to detect and track aerial targets flying at long distances. Raytheon had beaten Northrop and Lockheed for the contract in 2017 after a protracted competition that included multiple protests over the award. After schedule delays and technical challenges mounted, the Air Force announced in January that it was concluding its work with Raytheon on the program. Instead, the service would seek out off-the-shelf options from industry that could be fielded faster. “Each award provides $500,000 for the companies to demonstrate their radar system's capabilities, maintenance concepts and radar performance against operationally-relevant targets and conditions, no later than the end of September,” the Air Force said in a statement. The service would then determine whether a prototype is ready for integration or production, with additional contracts potentially awarded by the end of 2020. Initial operational capability of a production-ready radar could occur as early as fiscal year 2024, the service said. Despite a global pandemic, the program is already moving at a fast pace. After holding an industry day in February, the Air Force released a solicitation for the 3DELRR program on March 2, said Lt. Col. Matthew Judge, materiel leader. The three companies were selected less than a month from when industry proposals were due on April 15. “We are not starting over; this is not a new development contract,” said Col. Michael Harm, 3DELRR's senior materiel leader. “Through the information presented during our industry day and received in the companies' response to the solicitation, we were able to confirm that production-ready systems can be demonstrated this year.” Judge added: “We are excited to see what these three systems can do.” Lockheed and Northrop's work will be funded under a contracting mechanism known as an “other transaction authority,” which is typically used for prototype projects. As a foreign company, CEA has been granted a Foreign Comparative Test project award, the service said in a statement. Northrop Grumman will demonstrate its solution this summer, said Mike Meaney, the company's vice president for land and maritime sensors. “We are confident that our solution meets the Air Force's needs and is the most affordable, low-risk, and validated system available,” he said. “With successful completion of test demonstrations, a hot full-rate production line and opportunities for capability growth, we are confident that the Northrop Grumman solution is uniquely positioned to fulfill the Air Force 3DELRR mission need." https://www.c4isrnet.com/industry/2020/05/11/these-three-companies-got-money-to-prototype-new-ground-based-radars-for-the-us-air-force/

  • Is the US Navy winning the war on maintenance delays?

    22 septembre 2020 | International, Naval

    Is the US Navy winning the war on maintenance delays?

    David B. Larter WASHINGTON — The U.S. Navy, beset by maintenance delays, is making progress on getting its ships out of the shipyards on time, fleet officials say. Over the past three years, the Navy is on track to more than double the percentage of ships getting out of maintenance on time, key to the service's efforts to make deployments more sustainable for its ships and sailors, Capt. Dave Wroe, U.S. Fleet Forces Command's deputy fleet readiness officer told Defense News in an email. “On-time ship maintenance availability completion rates in private shipyards improved from 24% in FY18 to 37% in FY19,” Wroe said. “Current performance trends in FY20 are projected to be 65%.” The improvement is a sign that the Navy may be turning the corner on a fight to restore readiness from its nadir in the early part of the last decade, when the Navy was running ragged filling unsustainable requirements for forces around the globe. Getting ships through their maintenance cycles on time is the linchpin of what the Navy calls its “optimized fleet response plan,” which is the system through which the Navy generates deployable ships that are maintained, manned and trained. Late last year and again in January, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Michael Gilday told audiences that repeated delays in the shipyards was undermining the Navy's Optimized Fleet Response Plan, and turning that around was vital. “We are getting 35 to 40 percent of our ships out of maintenance on time: that's unacceptable,” Gilday said at the USNI Defense Forum in December. “I can't sustain the fleet I have with that kind of track record.” A recent Government Accountability Office report found that between 2015 and 2019, only 25 percent of the Navy's maintenance periods for ships and submarines. Improvements Getting out of that hole has been difficult for a number of reasons: High operational demand for Navy forces makes planning maintenance difficult, and inevitably when the ships go into maintenance after years of hard use, workers discover more work that needs to be done, creating delays. And those delays make executing OFRP difficult, Wroe said. “OFRP provides the construct to best assess and optimize readiness production — down to a unit level — taking into account all the various competing factors to produced Navy readiness,” Wroe said. “Bottom line: OFRP helps mitigate fundamental points of friction, such as shipyard capacity and manning gaps at sea — but in itself doesn't solve key degraders like depot level maintenance delays and extensions.” But some key factors in the delays have been identified and the Navy is working to mitigate them, Fleet Forces Commander Adm. Chris Grady said this week at this week's Fleet Maintenance and Modernization Symposium. One area that has a tendency to drive delays is when workers discover things that need to be fixed, the fix may not cost much but the adjustment must go through an approval process that slows everything down. Those kinds of changes add up to about 70 percent of the so-called “growth work.” Part of it is anticipating and building in ways to deal with growth work into every maintenance period, and the other part is making it easier to address small changes to the scope of the work, Grady said. “When we began this initiative, cycle time for the small value changes averaged about 30 days,” he said “We're now at six and aim to bring it down further to only two days.” Other things that have helped the problem has been bundling maintenance periods for ships, meaning that contractors bid on multiple ships to fix, and can plan hiring further out, Grady said. Additionally, improving base access for contractors has helped, as well. “Last year, we averaged 110 days delayed per ship in private avails,” Grady said, using the short-hand term for “maintenance availability.” “Things much better this year — even with COVID-19,” he continued. “We go from about one-third avails finishing on-time to two-thirds. That is great. But, again, each delay has real impact on our readiness, and we need to keep working together to do better.” What happened? Because the U.S. Navy is set up to meet standing presence requirements and missions around the world, it must cycle its ships through a system of tiered readiness. That means ships go on deployment fully manned, trained and equipped. Then the ships come home, and after a period of sustained readiness where the ship can be redeployed, it goes into a reduced readiness status while undergoing maintenance. Following maintenance, the ship and crew goes into a training cycle for another deployment as an individual unit, then as a group, then returns to deployment. The whole cycle takes 36 months: Rinse and repeat. OFRP was designed in the 2013-2014 time-frame when the Navy was deploying well beyond its means, with carrier strike groups and amphibious ready groups going out for nine-to-10 months at a time. The excess use wore hard on the ships and sailors who manned them and put more wear on the hulls than they were designed to sustain. That meant that when ships went in for maintenance they were more broken than they were supposed to be, and funding to fix them was hampered by spending cuts. For nuclear ships — submarines and aircraft carriers — the funding cuts were a double whammy of work stoppages and furloughs that contributed to a wave of retirements in the yards, meaning the public yards were understaffed and had to hire and train new workers. Work took longer, throwing a wrench into an already complicated system of generating readiness. All that added up to significant delays in getting ships through their maintenance cycles and contributed to astonishing delays in attack submarine maintenance especially. What OFRP was meant to do was create a system whereby the Navy could meet combatant commander demands but not break the system. That meant that the Navy would generate as much readiness as it possibly could but that the demand would have to be limited to what the Navy could reasonably maintain, man, train and equip. But getting to that system has been immensely difficult because of the deep hole the Navy dug meeting requirements that well outstripped funding and supply. For example, there was a two year period when the service was forced to supply two carrier strike groups to the Arabian Gulf at all times, a requirement only canceled when automatic across-the-board spending cuts in 2013 made it impossible for the Navy to fund the two-carrier requirement. Adding to the difficulty: some of OFRP's founding requirements were nigh impossible to pull off. One was that the all the ships in group would go into and come out of their maintenance availabilities on time and together. Another was that a group would go into the first phase of their training, the so-called basic phase right after coming out of maintenance, fully manned. Both have been immensely difficult to pull off. But Fleet Forces, headed then by OFRP architect Adm. Phil Davidson, was given ample warning that those assumptions would be difficult to achieve. Then-NAVSEA head Vice Adm. William Hilarides told USNI News in January 2015 that getting ships to come out of the yards simultaneously would be hard. “The challenge to me is, let's say you want four destroyers in a battle group, all to come out at the same time in one port? That's a real challenge,” Hilarides told USNI News. The current head of NAVSEA, who at the time was in charge of the Regional Maintenance Center enterprise, backed up his boss to USNI News, saying it would be particularly challenging in places with less infrastructure. “Your big rub there is, the challenge of OFRP is ... all those ships [in a carrier strike group], they go through maintenance together, they go through training together and they deploy together,” said then-Rear Adm. William Galinis. "So, what our challenge is, is to be able to take all that work from all those ships and try to schedule it for roughly about the same time, and to get all that work done on time. So that's our challenge. “Now, in a port like Norfolk or San Diego, we have big shipyards, a lot of people, a lot of ships. You can kind of absorb that type of workload. When you go to Mayport, they've got like 10 ships down there [and typically cannot work on more than one or two destroyers at a time.],” he told USNI. Galinis said that Fleet Forces would have to be responsive to the shipyards because at least that way they could plan for delays. “They know if they give us all this work at one time, it's going to go long anyway,” he told USNI. “So they'd rather be able to plan that and at least know when they're getting the ship back, as opposed to, ‘nope, we're not going to talk to you, you've got to go do it,' and then the ships go long because we don't have enough people to do the work.” Fleet Forces Command has been reviewing its assumptions this year and is preparing to release a revised OFRP instruction, but the core is likely to remain the same. In any case, Wroe said in the email, it was always going to take a long time to dig out of the hole the Navy found itself in when OFRP was implemented fully in 2015. “It was clear at the inception of OFRP, and remains clear today, that it will take the entire 2015-2025 period to recover readiness and establish stable readiness production,” Wroe said. “That makes sense when readiness production is planned over 9-years and large blocks of time have already been scheduled for depot maintenance periods.” Ultimately, if the process of OFRP is funded correctly and ships can get out of maintenance on time, it's a sound way of moving forward, Fleet Forces Commander Grady told the audience this week. “My bottom line here is that, as a process, OFRP works,” he said. “If we are looking where to improve upon it, each of these studies came to the same conclusion: the biggest inhibitor to fleet readiness is maintenance and modernization performance in the shipyards. We simply must get better, and I know you share my concern.” https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2020/09/19/is-the-us-navy-winning-the-war-on-maintenance/

  • Serbia looks to acquire Chinese drones and the technological know-how

    11 octobre 2018 | International, Aérospatial

    Serbia looks to acquire Chinese drones and the technological know-how

    By: Jaroslaw Adamowski WARSAW, Poland — Serbia's acting assistant defense minister has announced the ministry is negotiating with a number of Chinese drone manufacturers to acquire UAVs for the Serbian military. Nenad Miloradovic said Serbia aims to buy Chinese drones for its armed forces as well as the technology that will allow the country's defense industry to produce UAVs in the long term. "This package deal, under which we plan to purchase, but also produce reconnaissance drones for the Serbian military, should be implemented shortly," Miloradovic said, as reported by local daily Blic. The official said that Serbia is positioning itself as a military-neutral country, and its government aims to procure weapons and military gear for the country's armed forces from various suppliers. "We don't have ideological prejudices in what concerns buying weapons," Miloradovic said. In a sign of strengthened military cooperation with Russia, Serbia's government earlier this year approved the purchase of six Mil Mi-17 helicopters, complementing acquisitions of other aircraft and weapons from Moscow. In contrast, Serbia signed a deal in 2016 to buy nine H145M helicopters from Dutch-French company Airbus. The value of the planned UAV deal was not disclosed by the Serbian official. https://www.defensenews.com/unmanned/2018/09/20/serbia-looks-to-acquire-chinese-drones-and-the-technological-know-how

Toutes les nouvelles