Lockheed Gets Interim Payment for First Multiyear F-35 Contract: Pentagon

Sur le même sujet

• 

  16 octobre 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité, Autre défense

  Contract Awards by US Department of Defense – October 15, 2020

  AIR FORCE Raytheon Missiles and Defense, Tucson, Arizona, has been awarded a $239,113,565 definitization modification (PZ0001) to contract FA8672-20-C-0005 for StormBreaker (SDBII, GBU-53/B) production Lot 6. Work will be performed in Tucson, Arizona, and is expected to be completed Nov. 28, 2023. The current action relates to classified Foreign Military Sales (FMS), and 6.3% of contract value supports FMS. Fiscal 2020 production funding in the amount of $265,281,689 is being obligated at the time of award. Total cumulative face value of the contract is $271,894,434. The Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, is the contracting activity. JOINT ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE CENTER Redhorse Corp., San Diego, California (FA701420A0020); Cyber Point International LLC, Baltimore, Maryland (FA701420A0021); Elder Research Inc., Charlottesville, Virginia (FA701420A0019); Barbaricum LLC, Washington, D.C. (FA701420A0018); and Enterprise Resource Performance Inc., Fairfax, Virginia (FA701420A0022), were awarded five-year competitive blanket purchase agreements (BPAs), each with a $100,000,000 ceiling, to provide services to the Department of Defense Joint Artificial Intelligence Center Missions Directorate. The services include software development, machine learning, cognitive and systems engineering, operations research, and user experience design. Work on the contract will occur in Arlington, Virginia. The ordering period is from Sept. 25, 2020, through Sept. 24, 2025. The contracting activity is the Air Force District Washington, Joint Base Andrews, Maryland. ARMY Construction Outfitters International Inc., Boerne, Texas (W9128F-21-D-0001); Fluor Federal Services LLC, Reston, Virginia (W9128F-21-D-0002); Weston Solutions Inc., West Chester, Pennsylvania (W9128F-21-D-0003); Greenway Enterprises Inc., Helena, Montana (W9128F-21-D-0004); and Amentum Services Inc., Germantown, Maryland (W9128F-21-D-0005), will compete for each order of the $95,000,000 firm-fixed-price contract for facility renovations and repair requirements for Defense Intelligence Agency defense attache offices in U.S. diplomatic facilities worldwide. Bids were solicited via the internet with nine received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Oct. 14, 2027. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha, Nebraska, is the contracting activity. Craig Technical Consulting Inc.,* Merritt Island, Florida, was awarded a $49,845,380 hybrid (cost-plus-fixed-fee, firm-fixed-price) contract to procure scientific and engineering support services for the Army Aberdeen Test Center. Bids were solicited via the internet with two received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Oct. 14, 2025. The U.S. Army Contracting Command, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, is the contracting activity (W91CRB-21-D-0002). Aegis Defense Services LLC, McLean, Virginia, was awarded a $15,974,994 firm-fixed-price contract to provide U.S. Forces Afghanistan with private security service protection. Bids were solicited via the internet with seven received. Work will be performed in Mazar-e Sharif, Afghanistan, with an estimated completion date of Oct. 29, 2023. Fiscal 2021 Afghanistan Security Forces Fund (Army) funds in the amount of $15,974,994 were obligated at the time of the award. The U.S. Army Contracting Command, Afghanistan, is the contracting activity (W91B4N-21-C-2000). DRS Network & Imaging Systems, Melbourne, Florida, was awarded a $10,425,596 firm-fixed-price contract for Direct Support Electrical System Test sets. Bids were solicited via the internet with one received. Work will be performed in Melbourne, Florida, with an estimated completion date of Jan. 31, 2022. Fiscal 2010 Foreign Military Sales (Kuwait) funds in the amount of $10,425,596 were obligated at the time of the award. The U.S. Army Contracting Command, Detroit Arsenal, Michigan, is the contracting activity (W56HZV-21-C-0055). NAVY AAR Aircraft Services Inc., Indianapolis, Indiana, is awarded a $67,262,091 modification (P00009) to previously awarded, firm-fixed-price, time and materials, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract N00019-18-D-0111. This modification exercises options to procure P-8A Poseidon aircraft depot scheduled and unscheduled maintenance, fulfillment of depot in-service repair/planner and estimator requirements, technical directive incorporation, airframe modifications, aircraft on ground support and removal and replacement of engines in support of the Navy, the government of Australia, and Foreign Military Sales customers. Work will be performed in Indianapolis, Indiana, and is expected to be completed in October 2021. No funds will be obligated at the time of award; funds will be obligated on individual orders as they are issued. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity. BAE Systems Technology Solutions and Services Inc., Rockville, Maryland, is awarded a $65,704,035 cost-plus-fixed-fee, cost-reimbursable, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract. This contract provides for air traffic control platform integration technical and engineering services, including systems production, development, test, evaluation and improvement; operational software development and maintenance; field change programs; test beds; overhaul and restoration; and fleet and supply support in support of the Air Traffic Control and Landing Systems Division systems and subsystems. Work will be performed St. Inigoes, Maryland (60%); and Lexington Park, Maryland (40%), and is expected to be completed in December 2025. No funds will be obligated at the time of award; funds will be obligated on individual orders as they are issued. This contract was competitively procured via an electronic request for proposal and two offers were received. The Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity (N00421-21-D-0002). The Boeing Co., Seattle, Washington, is awarded a $61,554,305 modification (P00005) to previously awarded, firm-fixed-price, time and materials, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract N00019-18-D-0113. This modification exercises options to procure P-8A Poseidon CFM56-7B27A/3 and CFM56-7B27AE engine depot-level maintenance and repair in support of the Navy, the government of Australia, and Foreign Military Sales customers. Work will be performed in Atlanta, Georgia (97%); and Seattle, Washington (3%), and is expected to be completed in October 2021. No funds will be obligated at the time of award; funds will be obligated on individual orders as they are issued. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity. StandardAero Inc., San Antonio, Texas, is awarded a $46,003,699 modification (P00009) to previously awarded, firm-fixed-price, time and materials, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract N00019-18-D-0110. This modification exercises options to procure P-8A Poseidon CFM56-7B27A/3 and CFM56-7B27AE engine depot-level maintenance and repair in support of the Navy, the government of Australia, and Foreign Military Sales customers. Work will be performed in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada (86%); Cincinnati, Ohio (11%); and San Antonio, Texas (3%), and is expected to be completed in October 2021. No funds will be obligated at the time of award; funds will be obligated on individual orders as they are issued. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity. CH2M Hill Constructors Inc., Englewood, Colorado, is awarded an $8,388,171 firm-fixed-price modification to task order N69450-20-F-0078 under previously-awarded multiple-award construction contract N62470-19-D-8024 for Hurricane Sally recovery at Naval Air Station Pensacola. The work to be performed provides for immediate restoration/sustainment and clean-up recovery actions due to damage caused by Hurricane Sally. Specific elements of work include roofing/seal building envelope; rip-out/tear-out; mold remediation; vegetation/tree clearing/chipping; waste/debris collection, removal and disposal; traffic management; and security fencing. This award brings the total cumulative value to $22,635,705. Work will be performed in Pensacola, Florida, and is expected to be completed by November 2020. Fiscal 2021 operations and maintenance (Navy); and fiscal 2021 operations and maintenance (Air Force) funding in the amount of $8,388,171 will be obligated at time of award and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Southeast, Jacksonville, Florida, is the contracting activity. *Small business http://ttps://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contracts/Contract/Article/2383996/source/GovDelivery/

• 

  17 février 2021 | International, Terrestre

  Lockheed set to integrate base kit for US Army’s combat vehicle protection system

  By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — Under a recent contract award with a $30 million ceiling, Lockheed Martin will begin integrating and formally testing its open-architecture processor designed to control the U.S. Army's future combat vehicle protection system, the company announced Feb. 16. The Army is determining the specific plans and schedules for integration and testing of Lockheed's base kit for its Modular Active Protection System, or MAPS, that ties vehicle sensors and countermeasures into a common framework to detect, track and destroy rocket-propelled grenades and anti-tank guided missiles aimed at combat vehicles. Lockheed is supporting those activities starting later this year through 2023, David Rohall, program manager for advanced ground vehicle systems at Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control, told Defense News. The Army has not yet finalized dates for the formal testing. Lockheed received an initial award of $1.5 million through an other transaction authority agreement following a competitive process in December 2020, but has since received $3 million of additional incremental funding, according to Rohall. As part of the contract, Lockheed will develop the MAPS base kit hardware and software; perform platform integration; and run on-vehicle, live-fire demonstrations over a 36-month period. Funding will be incrementally issued throughout the period of performance, Rohall said. The base kit consists of the MAPS open-architecture controller, application software, user interface, power management distribution system and a network switch, Rohall explained. The software identifies incoming threats and deploys the most suitable countermeasure to defeat them, he added. “In an Army lab test, one MAPS-enabled active protection system actually responded faster to threats than its standalone version, thanks to the higher network speeds and greater processor power the MAPS controller offers,” Rohall said. The Army is working with other industry partners to bring in sensors and countermeasures that are compliant with the MAPS architecture. Lockheed has been working with the Army on solutions for a future vehicle protection system since 2014. The service initally awarded the MAPS software project to Raytheon and the hardware effort to Lockheed. But in 2017, the service transferred the software development to Lockheed. The Army, Lockheed and other industry partners have been working to prepare sensors and countermeasures controlled by the MAPS base kit for lab and live-fire demonstrations, including soft-kill systems like Northrop Grumman's MEOS, BAE Systems' Raven and Ariel Photonics' CLOUD, as well as hard-kill systems including Artis Corporation's Iron Curtain and Elbit System's Iron Fist. Sensors include Northrop's PICS IR sensor and Iron Curtain's L3 Mustang, as well as several laser warning systems. Lockheed will work with the Army for integration and testing on the Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle, the M1 Abrams tank, the Armored Multipurpose Vehicle and the Stryker combat vehicle ahead of a transition to the Vehicle Protection System program, Rohall said. “We continue to support development activities. We expect to be back in the field this year to support testing on multiple combat vehicles equipped with laser warning receivers that are new to the MAPS architecture,” Rohall said. The upcoming integration and testing is the last step for the base kit ahead of fielding the future Vehicle Protection System for ground combat vehicles. The effort will validate the Vehicle Protection System base kit capability for an initial production decision. The contract also covers developing capabilities beyond active protection, Lockheed said, to include underbelly blast protection. The Army has spent years developing a future Vehicle Protection System, and has had several attempts — one successful, others not — to field interim active protection systems onto current combat vehicles. The service has already fielded Rafael's Trophy active protection system on some Abrams tanks in Europe. The Army had also chosen IMI's Iron Fist for the Bradley but has struggled with technical issues and funding, and the program's future is delayed and uncertain. The service also had difficulty finding an interim candidate for its Stryker vehicle and hit a dead end with the effort in 2019. Iron Curtain was seen as the front-runner for Stryker, but due to system maturity, the service decided not proceed with its qualification efforts. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2021/02/16/lockheed-begins-integration-of-base-kit-for-us-armys-combat-vehicle-protection-system/

• 

  21 août 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

  The Pentagon can now buy US-made small drones from these five companies

  By: Charles V. Peña The first COVID-19 clusters appeared in Italy in late February, and by early March the Italian authorities issued a decree to install strict public health measures, including social distancing first in the affected regions and then nationwide. Soon afterward, Spain, France and many other European countries instituted similar public health measures. Without debating the efficacy of those measures, the important takeaway is that when faced with what was viewed as a clear and present danger, European countries acted in their own self-interest without having to depend on the U.S. to counter the threat posed by COVID-19. They need to take that same approach for their own security and responsibilities under NATO. It is not a question of resources or capabilities — it is largely a matter of political will. The low hanging fruit for our European NATO allies is to meet their pledge of spending 2 percent of their gross domestic product on defense. Currently nine countries meet that threshold: the United States (3.42 percent), Bulgaria (3.25 percent), Greece (2.28 percent), the United Kingdom (2.14 percent), Estonia (2.14 percent), Romania (2.04 percent), Lithuania (2.03 percent), Latvia (2.01 percent) and Poland (2 percent). Noticeably absent are Germany (1.38 percent), France (1.84 percent) and Italy (1.22 percent) — the fourth, seventh and eighth largest economies in the world. These are wealthy countries that can afford to make the necessary investment. Indeed, the combined GDP of NATO Europe is nearly on par with the U.S. — about $17.5 trillion versus about $20 trillion. Yet, the U.S. spends more than double on defense than our European NATO allies. Other than political will, there is no real reason that European NATO countries cannot spend 2 percent of their GDP for their own defense. Yet, even though Germany previously pledged to meet its 2 percent obligation, Berlin is proposing a new metric based on a country's defense needs — perhaps because U.S. President Donald Trump has stated that he wants European allies to spend 4 percent of their GDP on defense (a metric even the U.S. does not meet). Beyond spending, there is the question of what threat NATO should counter. Originally created in 1949, NATO was intended to counter the Soviet military threat and communist expansion. At the height of the Cold War, the Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact allies had some 4 million troops and 60,000 main battle tanks deployed against Western Europe — and threatened invasion via the North German Plain, Hof Corridor and Fulda Gap. But today's Russian Federation is not the Soviet Union. Nonetheless, NATO's European countries have the resources to counter a Russian military threat (although it's worth noting that NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg recently said: “We don't see any imminent threat against any NATO ally.”) NATO Europe's combined GDP is 10 times larger than Russia's — more than $17 trillion versus $1.7 trillion. And current defense spending is also in Europe's favor by more than 4-to-1 ($287 billion versus $65 billion). Again, there is no practical reason why NATO Europe cannot make the necessary investments to provide for its security. It is more a question of political will. Moreover, if NATO is concerned about Russia as a potential threat, it should think twice about continuing to expand the alliance eastward onto Russia's doorstep. Rather than providing increased security, it may do more to provoke the Russian bear. Part of the problem is that NATO has largely strayed from its original purpose of collective defense against the Soviet Union (and now Russia). According to the NATO website, the organization is “an active and leading contributor to peace and security on the international stage” that “promotes democratic values and is committed to the peaceful resolution of disputes” with “approximately 20,000 military personnel ... engaged in NATO operations and missions around the world.” If Russia is deemed a threat to Europe and NATO, then the European members of NATO need to take primary responsibility for defending themselves against that threat — and they should view that threat widely to include Russian cyberthreats as well as misinformation and disinformation campaigns meant to undermine elections. That doesn't mean a U.S. withdrawal from NATO. But it is long past the post-World War II era when European countries were struggling to regain their footing and needed America to be the bulwark of its defense. Europe as a whole is today an economic powerhouse — second only to the United States. NATO Europe can and should do more to provide for its own security rather than depending on the U.S. to act as the front line of its defense. All that needs to happen is for those countries to be as serious as they were with COVID-19 and take the same approach to national security as they did when the pandemic began. Charles V. Peña is a senior fellow with Defense Priorities. He has experience supporting the U.S. departments of Defense and Homeland Security. He previously served as the director of defense for policy studies at the Cato Institute, and he is author of “Winning the Un—War: A New Strategy for the War on Terrorism.” https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/08/20/money-and-missions-nato-should-learn-from-europes-pandemic-response/