4 février 2019 | International, Aérospatial

General Electric wins $517 million contract to build engines for Army’s next generation helicopters

By:

WASHINGTON — General Electric Aviation beat the Advanced Turbine Engine Company — a Honeywell and Pratt & Whitney team — to win the $517 million award for the engineering, manufacturing and development phase of the Improved Turbine Engine Program, or ITEP.

“We are honored to be chosen by the Army to continue powering their Black Hawks and Apaches for decades to come,” said Tony Mathis, president and CEO of GE Aviation's military business. “We've invested the resources and infrastructure to execute immediately, and our team is ready to get to work on delivering the improved capabilities of the T901 to the warfighter.”

The fierce competition started more than a decade ago, and its outcome will influence Army rotorcraft for decades to come. GE's T901 engine is now set to replace the T700 used by the Army's legacy utility and attack helicopters, but could also potentially outfit the Army's next generation reconnaissance helicopter in the Future Vertical Lift family of systems.

“The requirements documents for the [Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft] specifiesTHE ITEP engine. It has got the FVL stamp of approval,” Jim Thomson, Jr., acting deputy director for the Army's future vertical lift cross functional team, told Defense News in a recent interview.

ITEP answers a number of problems that emerged as the Army operated Apaches and Black Hawks during combat in Afghanistan and Iraq. The AH-64 and UH-60 became heavier as the service added armor and other upgrades during wartime, and they flew in hotter conditions and higher altitudes than would normally be optimal.

“The helicopters were originally designed to work at 4,000 feet on a 95-degree day, and they were flying them much higher than that,” Mike Sousa, GE's business development leader for advanced turboshaft engines, told Defense News in December 2018. “When you do that, you just don't have as much power from the engine.”

The Army's requirements for ITEP were clear throughout the process: Design a 3,000 shaft horsepower engine that reduces fuel consumption by 25 percent and increases its service life by 20 percent compared to the T700, a 2,000 shaft horsepower engine.

Both companies were awarded risk reduction contracts in August 2016, with ATEC getting $154 million and GE Aviation getting $102 million to further refine their designs. Both companies had already spent years conceptualizing new engines and developing novel tech.

GE, the incumbent manufacturer of the T700, offered a single spool engine. Sousa said that configuration would help the company meet weight requirements while removing cost and complexity from the design.

“Our fundamental approach there was how do we keep this engine as affordable as possible and as low weight as possible,” he told Defense News in 2018.

“Helicopters are unique in that they fly into very dirty environments, very austere environments, unprepared landing strips, unprepared surfaces,” added Ron Hutter, GE's executive director of the T901 program. “They generate a lot of dust. You really want to look at the simplicity of the architecture in terms of maintainability. That's another aspect that drove us to stick with the single-spool configuration.”

GE estimates that it's spent $9 billion in testing technologies relevant to the T901.

ATEC had proposed a double spool engine it dubbed the T900.

“We were disappointed to learn that the U.S. Army did not select our offering,” said Craig Madden, president of ATEC. “We believe that we offered the most advanced, capable and lowest risk engine for ITEP for the Army to improve the overall performance of its Apache and Black Hawk fleets.”

https://www.defensenews.com/air/2019/02/02/general-electric-wins-517-million-contract-to-build-engines-for-armys-next-generation-helicopters

Sur le même sujet

  • GAO Chides DoD For Absence Of Cybersecurity Requirements

    8 juin 2020 | International, C4ISR, Sécurité

    GAO Chides DoD For Absence Of Cybersecurity Requirements

    Overall, costs of major DoD acquisition programs have grown by 54 percent over their lifetimes and schedule delays average two years, GAO's annual report finds. By THERESA HITCHENS WASHINGTON: Five years after the Pentagon demanded every weapon system include the requirement that it be able to fight through Russian and Chinese cyber attacks expected on future battlefields, DoD “does not often include cybersecurity” in key performance parameters (KPP) for major programs, says GAO in its annual defense acquisition review. Of the three services, the Air Force is the worst at fulfilling two of the three best cybersecurity practices, the report says. The congressional watchdog found “inconsistent implementation of leading software practices and cybersecurity measures” among high-dollar “major defense acquisition programs” (MDAPs) — 85 programs worth $1.80 trillion at the end of 2019. “This included longer-than-expected delivery times for software and delays completing cybersecurity assessments— outcomes disruptive to DOD's efforts to keep pace with warfighters' needs for enhanced, software-dependent capabilities and protect weapon systems from increasingly sophisticated cybersecurity threats,” GAO said in the June 3 report. Cybersecurity KPPs Left Out The GAO report explains that KPP “are considered the most critical requirements by the sponsor military organization, while key system attributes (KSA) and other performance attributes are considered essential for an effective military capability.” In 2015, DOD modified its main requirements policy—the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System Manual (JCIDS) rules on “survivability” requirements to include the ability to operate in a “degraded cyber environment.” Yet, GAO found that, at the end of 2019, 25 of the 42 major acquisition programs reviewed regarding cybersecurity practices failed to include cybersecurity as a parameter in their KPPs; “even more programs reported that their KSAs did not address cybersecurity.” GAO has targeted cybersecurity, software development and DoD-wide information technology (IT) improvement programs in its recent annual reviews because DoD weapon systems “are more networked than ever before — a change that while providing benefits for the warfighter also “has come at a cost” because “more weapon components can now be attacked using cybersecurity capabilities,” GAO explains. “Further, networks can be used as a pathway to attack other systems.” The watchdog has found consistently that failing to bake in cybersecurity requirements to system design and development ends up costing more money and time when program offices struggle to re-engineer systems once they hit production. This is a problem that affects most types of software development; and similarly trying to upgrade or replace software to improve cybersecurity often proves impossible. The 2019 report thus “looked at DOD's progress with developing: (1) strategies that help ensure that programs are planning for and documenting cybersecurity risk management efforts (cybersecurity strategies), (2) evaluations that allow testers to identify systems' weaknesses that are susceptible to cybersecurity attacks and that could potentially jeopardize mission execution (cybersecurity vulnerability evaluations), and (3) assessments that evaluate the ability of a unit equipped with a system to support assigned missions (cybersecurity assessments).” Most of the 38 MDAPs reviewed reported creation of cybersecurity strategies. However, of the 19 major programs that require cybersecurity vulnerability evaluations — under regulations set by the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment Ellen Lord — 11 have not completed them or failed to do so on time. Another three said they didn't have a schedule yet for doing so; and one — an unnamed Air Force program — told GAO it actually didn't know if it had undertaken the required evaluation. Indeed, the Air Force had the worst record on the evaluations, with none of its six programs having completed the evaluation processes. Of the 42 programs, 14 told GAO they had not finished their cybersecurity assessments. GAO also “found variation among the military departments in the rates they had completed these assessments. Specifically, among the three military departments, the Army reported the best rate for programs conducting cybersecurity assessments, while the Air Force had the lowest rate.” IT and Software Problems Plague Programs “Over the years, weapon acquisition program officials, through their responses to our questionnaires, have consistently acknowledged software development as a risk item in their efforts to develop and field capabilities to the warfighter, and this year is no different,” GAO reported somewhat wryly. GAO found that more than a quarter of the 42 MDAPs reviewed reported cost growth from software changes but admitted that “details are limited” in DoD reporting. Part of that uncertainty might be due to the fact that GAO found a number of major programs are transitioning to commercial approaches to software development, such as “agile development” that involves introducing incremental improvements over time. However, GAO found, “deliveries often lag behind industry standards.” Indeed, Air Force acquisition czar Will Roper told a webinar yesterday sponsored by Dcode, a tech innovation hub connecting commercial industry to government agencies, that while the Air Force can't go back and re-do old programs, “every new contract we do has to include DevSecOps.” “We are all in,” he added, “it's going to change the world.” DevSecOps stands for “development, security and operations,” and is a framework and tools for “designing in” software and cybersecurity. Roper long has been a key champion within DoD for moving to commercial practices and has repeatedly said he wants the Air Force to become a “software company.” GAO said that officials from 26 of the MDAPs regarding software development reported that software concerns had created risks at some point during their program's history. The biggest problem faced was — you guessed it — changes necessitated to ensure cybersecurity. The second biggest program was that the software development simply was “more difficult than expected.” Hardware design changes also played a big role in creating software problems, requiring subsequent changes in software configurations. Interestingly, while often bemoaned as a cause for program delays, requirements changes came in at the low of end of the reported issues troubling software development. Of the 15 major DoD IT programs reviewed, worth $15.1 million, 10 had delays in their original baseline schedules. But on the bright side, 11 showed decreased life cycle cost estimates. Further, all 15 have cybersecurity strategies as required by DoD regulations, and most reported having undertaken in 2019 at least one operational cybersecurity test. That said, “less than half reported conducting developmental cybersecurity testing,” GAO found. And according to DoD's own “Cybersecurity Testing and Evaluation Guidebook,” GAO scolds, “not conducting developmental cybersecurity testing puts programs at an increased risk of cost and schedule growth and poor program performance. Cost and Schedule Growth Stabilizes As it does every year, GAO also reviewed all 85 MDAPs for cost and schedule growth, and on that front the news is good: GAO found that the programs DoD Overview “have generally stabilized non-quantity related — (i.e. meaning not related to buy more stuff) — cost growth and schedule growth.” “Between 2018 and 2019, total acquisition cost estimates for DoD's 85 current MDAPs grew by a combined $64 billion (a 4 percent increase), growth that was driven by decisions to increase planned quantities of some weapon systems,” GAO found. “For example, DoD more than doubled in the past year the total number of missiles it plans to acquire through the Air Force's Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile program.” And some programs actually lowered their year-average costs. GAO found that 55 MDAPs (more than half) “had lower average procurement unit costs since last year. Examples of programs with lower unit costs include the Navy's Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (16 percent decrease) and the Air Force's F-22 Increment 3.2B Modernization (15 percent decrease).” “Also between 2018 and 2019, capability delivery schedules for MDAPs increased, on average, by just over 1 month (a 1 percent increase),” GAO said. However, the report cautioned that cost/schedule performance looks “less encouraging as measured against their original approved program baselines.” The report found that the major acquisition programs “have accumulated over $628 billion (or 54%) in total cost growth since program start, most of which is unrelated to the increase in quantities purchased. Additionally, over the same time period, time required to deliver initial capabilities has increased by 30%, resulting in an average delay of more than two years. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/06/major-dod-acquisition-programs-flounder-on-cybersecurity-gao

  • Russia launches live-fire Baltic naval drills on Europe’s doorstep

    2 août 2023 | International, Naval

    Russia launches live-fire Baltic naval drills on Europe’s doorstep

    Russia last carried out mass military exercises in the Baltic Sea in June, two months after Finland became NATO’s newest member.

  • BAE Systems to Sustain Air Traffic Control Systems Under $65.7M Navy Contract

    2 février 2021 | International, Naval, Terrestre

    BAE Systems to Sustain Air Traffic Control Systems Under $65.7M Navy Contract

    MCLEAN, Virginia – The U.S. Navy selected BAE Systems for a five-year $65.7 million single-award indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity contract for air traffic control (ATC) platform sustainment and engineering services, the company said in a Feb. 1 release. BAE Systems will continue to use its engineering, technical, and operational expertise to develop, produce, equip, test, evaluate, sustain, and update key expeditionary ATC aviation systems for the Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division's Webster Outlying Field. “With this win, BAE Systems will provide expeditionary forces with the capability to quickly establish an airfield with the radar and communications systems to safely recover and launch aircraft,” said Lisa Hand, vice president and general manager of BAE Systems' Integrated Defense Solutions business. “We serve as the automation expert and technical coordinator, responsible for development and improvement of real-time ATC computer systems. Our radar technicians deploy around the world to support the warfighter; their work is resulting in quicker turnover to the end user, improved hardware reliability, and more accurate installation and precision in the field.” This new contract continues BAE Systems' more than a decade of supporting critical work on key systems, including the Standard Terminal Automation Replacement System (STARS); Air Traffic Navigation, Integration, and Coordination System (ATNAVICS); Airfield Mobile Tactical Air Navigation System (AMTAC); and ATNAVICS Data Link System (ADLS). Under the contract, the company will develop and maintain operational software and supporting test beds, field change programs, and supplies for ATC systems. These systems are integral ATC tools that enhance platform flight safety, especially when end users are operating in new or rough terrain airfields with no existing military base. https://seapowermagazine.org/bae-systems-to-sustain-air-traffic-control-systems-under-65-7m-navy-contract

Toutes les nouvelles