18 octobre 2022 | International, Aérospatial

Lockheed expects flat sales in 2023, growth to return in 2024

Lockheed Martin also teased the release of more details on its drone wingman program in the next earnings call in January 2023.

https://www.defensenews.com/air/2022/10/18/lockheed-expects-flat-sales-in-2023-growth-to-return-in-2024/

Sur le même sujet

  • New Pentagon chief under scrutiny over perceived Boeing bias

    10 janvier 2019 | International, Aérospatial

    New Pentagon chief under scrutiny over perceived Boeing bias

    By ELIANA JOHNSON and DAVID BROWN Concerns about Patrick Shanahan's Boeing ties have re-emerged since President Donald Trump said he may be running the Pentagon ‘for a long time.' Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan's private remarks during his 18 months at the Pentagon have spurred accusations that he is boosting his former employer Boeing, people who have witnessed the exchanges told POLITICO — fueling questions about whether he harbors an unfair bias against other big military contractors. Shanahan, who spent 31 years at Boeing before joining the Pentagon in mid-2017, has signed an ethics agreement recusing him from weighing in on matters involving the mammoth defense contractor. But that hasn't stopped him from praising Boeing and trashing competitors such as Lockheed Martin during internal meetings, two former government officials who have heard him make the accusations told POLITICO. The remarks raise questions among ethics experts about whether Shanahan, intentionally or not, is putting his finger on the scale when it comes to Pentagon priorities. They also call new attention to a recent decision by the Pentagon to request new Boeing fighters that the Air Force has said it does not want — a request that Bloomberg has reported came after "prodding" from Shanahan. Concerns about Shanahan's ties to his former employer first surfaced during his confirmation hearing to be deputy secretary, but they have re-emerged since President Donald Trump said last month he may be running the Pentagon “for a long time.” In high-level Pentagon meetings, Shanahan has heavily criticized Lockheed Martin's handling of the production of the F-35 fighter jet, which is expected to cost more than $1 trillion over the life of the program, according to one of the two sources, a former senior Defense Department official who was present. Shanahan, this official said, called the plane “f---ed up” and argued that Lockheed — which edged out Boeing to win the competition to build the plane in October 2001 — “doesn't know how to run a program.” “If it had gone to Boeing, it would be done much better,” Shanahan said, according to the former official. As the Pentagon's No. 2, Shanahan repeatedly "dumped" on the F-35 in meetings, calling the program "unsustainable," and slammed Lockheed Martin's CEO, Marillyn Hewson, according to the second source, a former Trump administration official. "'The cost, the out-years, it's just too expensive, we're not gonna be able to sustain it,'" this person said, quoting Shanahan. The former Trump official said Shanahan "kind of went off" about the F-35 at a retreat for Republican lawmakers last year at the Greenbrier resort in West Virginia. This angered several members of the delegation who had home-district interests in the F-35 program, the former official said. "He would complain about Lockheed's timing and their inability to deliver, and from a Boeing point of view, say things like, 'We would never do that,'" this former official said. Shanahan is the first Pentagon chief to come purely from the private sector since the 1950s and has virtually no government or policy experience. He became the acting Defense secretary Jan. 1, following former Secretary Jim Mattis' resignation over Trump's abrupt decision to pull U.S. troops from Syria and begin drawing down from Afghanistan. He has signed an ethics agreement barring him from weighing in on any matters involving his former employer, the Pentagon's fifth-largest contractor in 2017. Shanahan's experience at Boeing is “his only reference point," the former Trump administration official said. "He doesn't have a lot of other experiences to draw on. He owns it in a powerful way because he doesn't have the military experience, he doesn't have the experience in government. So when he talks about those things, he's very forceful." His remarks about the F-35 stand in stark contrast to those of the president, who regularly praises the stealth fighter despite initially slamming its high costs. The F-35 program, while experiencing a number of setbacks, technical delays and groundings throughout the years, is generally considered to be on the mend. The Air Force and Marine Corps variants have been declared ready to deploy, and the Navy version is expected to reach that point as early as next month. And unit costs have come down for all three variants as the plane matures. Trump has praised Shanahan's ability to cut costs, calling him a “great buyer.” He is now among the candidates the president is considering as a permanent replacement for Mattis. Asked for comment, Shanahan's office released a statement saying he is committed to his agreement to stay out of matters involving Boeing. “Under his ethics agreement, Mr. Shanahan has recused himself for the duration of his service in the Department of Defense from participating personally and substantially in matters in which the Boeing Company is a party,” his office said. Full article: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/09/defense-patrick-shanahan-boeing-pentagon-1064203

  • Turkey’s removal from F-35 program to cause hike in engine price

    26 avril 2021 | International, Aérospatial

    Turkey’s removal from F-35 program to cause hike in engine price

    By the end of the year, Turkey will no longer supply parts for the F-35's engine.

  • Support growing for review of Ligado interference information

    14 mai 2020 | International, C4ISR

    Support growing for review of Ligado interference information

    Aaron Mehta As the Department of Defense and its allies attempt to stop Ligado from moving forward with plans the Pentagon says will harm the Global Positioning System, consensus is growing around the idea of an independent review of the testing the Department had completed for interference. The dispute stems from the Federal Communications Commission's decision to approve Ligado's request to use L-Band spectrum, first reported by C4ISRNET April 10. Now the question is whether Pentagon tests showing that Ligado's plan would interfere with GPS signals vital to military, commercial and civilian technologies are still relevant, given mitigation plans from the company. A May 6 Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on the issue underlined a fundamental disconnect between the two sides over technical testing of Ligado's capabilities, a he-said-he-said situation where both sides claim the data shows the other is comprehensively wrong. That disconnect is an issue for Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., the chairman of the SASC and a vocal supporter of the Pentagon's position. “What I took away from our hearing last week was that the results of DoD's testing just don't match up with the testing the FCC relied on to make their decision; in fact, I'm concerned they were looking at different things,” Inhofe told C4ISRNET this week. “It seems to me the FCC didn't really give DOD's analysis — which was done in conjunction with eight other federal departments — fair consideration,” Inhofe continued. “While I trust the Pentagon's conclusions, I think we'll all sleep better at night if we have more independent testing done to verify just how Ligado's plan will affect our GPS signals.” While not saying who should do the verification, Inhofe's comments match up with calls from a trio of non-defense trade groups that in the last few days have specifically called for the National Academy of Sciences — a non-profit, non-governmental research institute that can play a role as a neutral arbiter — to take a fresh look at the data gathered by both the Pentagon and Ligado and weigh in. On May 8, Securing America's Future Energy and the Intelligent Transportation Society of America tweeted that NAS should specifically lead a new round of testing, while Dana Goward, president of the non-profit Resilient Navigation and Timing Foundation, also supported the idea in a May 11 op-ed for C4ISRNET. “Congress must select a technically competent and impartial entity such as the National Academy of Sciences to fill this role. This entity must review the work that has been done and conduct any further analysis needed to inform policy makers,” Goward wrote. “The technologies involved are mature. Testing methodologies are well established. This will not be an onerous task.” Pausing the FCC's decision while launching a review of the testing data would likely require approval from the Commerce committees. House Energy and Commerce Committee ranking member Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., suggested further work would be redundant. “We must ensure that this decision maintains our national and economic security, which is why this technology was tested, modified, and tested again, several times before the FCC reached its decision,” Walden said in a statement to C4ISRNET. The Pentagon, thus far, has been reluctant to agree to further technical testing, with Dana Deasy, the department's Chief Information Officers, shooting down the idea in a May 6 call with reporters. However, Defense leaders are now open to an independent review of existing test data, according to Lt. Col. Robert Carver, a department spokesman. He said in a statement the Pentagon would “support an impartial third party, one with demonstrated expertise in GPS testing, conducting a thorough examination of all data collected during the preceding decade of testing. “We emphasize any such examination must be conducted by a party with unquestioned capability, capacity and experience in this arena. We believe a painstaking examination of existing test data will confirm the results of all previous tests, including the limited tests funded by Ligado, that Ligado's proposal will result in interference to GPS even at the one-decibel level,” Carver said. “Any testing, or evaluation of prior testing, must address protection of the GPS service, the frequency band assigned to it, and all receivers intending to use that service." A Ligado spokesperson declined to comment. In the meantime, the department continues to push through the formal process to request the FCC change its mind. That would be a tough path forward for any vote that passed unanimously with five votes, as it would require three members of the commission to change their mind. It may be even more difficult given the comments from Deasy, Inhofe and others indicating the FCC purposefully kept DoD out of the loop as it was making its decision. In a statement after the hearing, an FCC spokesman blasted “all of the untrue statements” made by officials, called claims of unanimous opposition in the government “blatantly false,” and saying assertions that DoD was blindsided are “preposterous.” “The bottom line here is that the FCC made a unanimous, bipartisan decision based on sound engineering principles,” the spokesman said. “We stand by that decision 100% and will not be dissuaded by baseless fearmongering." Joe Gould in Washington contributed to this report https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/2020/05/13/support-growing-for-review-of-ligado-interference-information/

Toutes les nouvelles