Lockheed Martin Delivers First KC-130J Super Hercules Tanker To U.S. Marine Corps Reserve Squadron At Stewart ANGB, New York

Sur le même sujet

• 

  31 juillet 2020 | International, Aérospatial

  Pratt and Whitney and JetBlue sign long-term service agreement for 230 V2500® engines

  East Hartford, Conn., July 30, 2020 /PRNewswire/ -- JetBlue Airways ("JetBlue") and Pratt & Whitney, a Raytheon Technologies business (NYSE: RTX), through its affiliate, IAE International Aero Engines AG ("IAE"), announced that the airline has signed a 13-year EngineWise® fixed-price agreement for 230 V2500® engines that power the airline's A320ceo family fleet. "The V2500 engine has been the workhorse of the JetBlue fleet since the airline's inception," said Steve Priest, Chief Financial Officer at JetBlue. "This agreement provides predictable maintenance and supports efficient operations needed to serve our customers for many years to come." The highly reliable and fuel efficient V2500 engine is offered through IAE, a multinational aero engine consortium whose shareholders comprise Pratt & Whitney, Pratt & Whitney Aero Engines International GmbH, Japanese Aero Engines Corporation and MTU Aero Engines. JetBlue operates a fleet of 193 Airbus A320ceo family aircraft powered by the V2500 engine. The airline has also ordered 85 GTF-powered Airbus A320neo family aircraft, of which 10 have already been delivered. In addition, JetBlue has 70 GTF-powered Airbus A220 aircraft on order, with deliveries scheduled to begin later this year. "We truly appreciate our long-standing and successful relationship with JetBlue," said Rick Deurloo, chief commercial officer at Pratt & Whitney. "We are committed to partnering with the airline on V2500 engine maintenance to optimize fleet performance well into the future." The V2500 engine is backed by an established global network of 18 facilities for maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO), including nine IAE partner facilities, of which three are managed by Pratt & Whitney and its joint ventures: the Turkish Engine Center in Istanbul, the Shanghai Engine Center in China and the Christchurch Engine Center in New Zealand. Pratt & Whitney's EngineWise service portfolio provides engine operators with a variety of aftermarket services to maximize engine performance and fleet availability. Visit http://www.EngineWise.com for more information About Pratt & Whitney Pratt & Whitney, a unit of Raytheon Technologies (NYSE:RTX) is a world leader in the design, manufacture and service of aircraft and helicopter engines, and auxiliary power units. Raytheon Technologies Corporation is an aerospace and defense company that provides advanced systems and services for commercial, military and government customers worldwide. To learn more about RTX, visit its website at www.rtx.com To receive press releases and other news directly, please sign up here. About Raytheon Technologies Raytheon Technologies Corporation is an aerospace and defense company that provides advanced systems and services for commercial, military and government customers worldwide. With 195,000 employees and four industry-leading businesses ― Collins Aerospace Systems, Pratt & Whitney, Raytheon Intelligence & Space and Raytheon Missiles & Defense ― the company delivers solutions that push the boundaries in avionics, cybersecurity, directed energy, electric propulsion, hypersonics, and quantum physics. The company, formed in 2020 through the combination of Raytheon Company and the United Technologies Corporation aerospace businesses, is headquartered in Waltham, Massachusetts. Media Contact Jenny Dervin O: (860).557.1918 C: 860.308.50645630 Jennifer.Dervin@prattwhitney.com View source version on Pratt & Whitney: https://newsroom.prattwhitney.com/2020-07-30-Pratt-Whitney-and-JetBlue-sign-long-term-service-agreement-for-230-V2500-R-engines#assets_all

• 

  13 février 2020 | International, C4ISR

  Space Force awards $253.6M contract for protected comms

  By: Nathan Strout The Space Force awarded Northrop Grumman a $253.6 million contract to develop a payload that would provide a higher level of protection to war fighters relying on satellite communications on the battlefield. The contract is for the Protected Tactical SATCOM payload, the service announced Feb. 12. Protected Tactical SATCOM (PTS) is the Space Force's planned next generation anti-jamming satellite system, which will provide tactical communications for war fighters all over the world — including the polar regions — using the Protected Tactical Waveform. As PTS is developed, the Space Force plans to begin offering Protected Tactical Waveform communications over the Wideband Global SATCOM system and later commercial satellites systems. The Space Force said in a statement it will award up to four payload development contracts. According to the FY 2021 Space Force budget request, the service is employing a spiral development strategy that will incrementally deploy prototypes progressively demonstrating new anti-jamming technologies. The payloads will be designed to potentially be hosted on other satellites as a cost saving measure. The contract was awarded through the Space Enterprise Consortium. “We are excited to partner with Northrop Grumman to enable the rapid development of a protected communications prototype payload,” said Col. Dennis O. Bythewood, program executive officer for the Space and Missile Systems Center's Development Corps. “The technology maturation and prototyping effort conducted under the SpEC (Space Enterprise Consortium) Other Transaction Agreement will allow SMC to harness the innovation of partnerships between traditional defense and non-traditional/small business contractors with a projected on-orbit capability three years earlier than a traditional acquisition.” https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/space/2020/02/13/space-force-awards-2536m-protected-tactical-satcom-contract

• 

  7 mai 2020 | International, Naval

  5 things you should know about the US Navy’s new frigate

  By: David B. Larter WASHINGTON — The U.S. Navy selected Fincantieri's FREMM design for its next-generation frigate, but as with most new platforms it will be a long time before the first ship hits the fleet. The contract, awarded May 30, is for up to 10 hulls constructed at Fincantieri's Marinette Marine shipyard in Wisconsin. The Navy intends to buy at least 20 frigates. Here's what we know about what the years ahead will hold: 1) The price tag. According to Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development and Acquisition James Geurts, the first hull will cost $1.281 billion, which includes the design money for both the ship and for the work needed at the shipyard to set up a production line. It also includes all the government-furnished equipment, including things such as Raytheon's AN/SPY-6-derivative radar and Lockheed Martin's Aegis Combat System. Of that $1.281 billion, $795 million will go to the shipyard. The next hulls in the buy should cost significantly less. The Navy is aiming for a price tag of $800 million in 2018 dollars, with the threshold at $950 million. But Geurts thinks he can beat both numbers. An independent cost estimate found the follow-on hulls should cost about $781 million if all 20 are built. “The study shows this ship as selected and the program as designed delivering underneath our objective cost per platform,” Geurts said on a May 30 phone call with reporters. 2) The timeline. Detailed design of the future frigate, known as FFG(X), starts right away, Geurts said, and construction will begin no later than April 2022. The first ship should be delivered in 2026 and should be operational by 2030, with final operational capability declared by 2032, Geurts said. The contract should be wrapped up — all 10 hulls — by 2035. The intention is to buy 20 hulls, though it's unclear whether Marinette will build all 20 or if the Navy will identify a second source. 3) What could go wrong? The Navy feels like it did a lot to get this ship deal right, which could be argued was important given a not-so-hot track record with programs lately. Improving the Navy's performance on lead ships, in the wake of the Ford-class debacle, has been a focus of Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Jim Inhofe, R-Okla. Among the steps the Navy took to retire risk with FFG(X) was to adapt many of the mature systems being designed for the Flight III destroyer program, including the latest version of the Aegis Combat System and a scaled-down version of the AN/SPY-6 radar destined for Flight III. “Some of those efforts are still maturing, such as SPY-6, but from my standpoint I'm very comfortable with how that's proceeding,” said Rear Adm. Casey Moton, program executive officer of unmanned and small combatants. Bringing industry in on the process earlier will also help reduce risk in the lead ship, Moton said. “In general, even before the solicitation went out, the fact that we had industry involved in the conceptual design phase, they were there with us in the requirements; they understood the specifications; we worked with them on cost reduction. Many of the things that tend to trip up lead ships, we took proactive steps to reduce the risk there.” 4) Room to grow. The Navy considered the ability to add new, energy intensive systems on to the ship later in its calculus in selecting FREMM as the FFG(X), according to service officials. During the competition, Fincantieri highlighted that it could fairly easily grow the electrical capacity of the ship, and that all the major computer and engine gear could be swapped out without cutting a hole in the ship, as is often necessary with current classes in the U.S. Navy's inventory. Rick Hunt, a retired Navy three-star admiral who is now a senior Fincantieri executive, told reporters that the company's bid was designed to meet the cost specifications while giving the Navy room to upgrade. “Be flexible in what you do right now, surge to more capacity as soon as we get that [requirement] and be able to grow the ship in lot changes should you need something even greater in the future,” Hunt said. Vice Adm. Jim Kilby, the Navy's top requirements officer, said growth will be important in Navy designs as the service seeks to move away from combating missiles with other missiles. “Understanding how fast the threat is advancing made the service-life allowance so important for us,” Kilby said May 30. “We didn't want [to] define discretely where we are going in the future, so having some margin to include things like directed energy and other systems, that's why it was so important. “We have an extensive laser [science and technology] program in the Navy, we have lasers on some of our ships now. We definitely view it as a requirement for the future as we move into a realm where our launchers are reserved for offensive weapons and our point defense systems are these rechargeable magazines that we can sustain for long periods of time.” 5) Lessons learned. The Navy acquisitions boss feels good about the process that produced the FFG(X) award and thinks it can be a model for other programs. “FFG(X) represents an evolution in the Navy's requirements and acquisition approach, which allowed the acquisition planning, requirements and technical communities along with the shipbuilders to develop requirements for the platform ahead of the release of the detailed design and construction request for proposal," Geurts said. “By integrating the requirements, acquisition planning and design phases, we were able to reduce the span time by nearly six years as compared to traditional platforms. All this was done with an intense focus on cost, acquisition and technical rigor so we got the best value for the war fighter and the taxpayer. It's the best I've seen in the Navy thus far in integrating all the teams together, and it's a model we're building on for future programs.” But it's unclear if a similar approach would work on a clean-sheet, new design the same way it worked for FFG(X), which uses already-developed technologies and a parent design. “Having all the folks in the room early in the process helped move the process along and move it along faster,” said Bryan McGrath, a retired destroyer captain who is now a consultant with The Ferrybridge Group. “The question comes when you consider how applicable duplicating such an effort would be if you were trying to do a clean-sheet design that was incorporating revolutionary technologies, untested technologies, perhaps even undeveloped technologies. That's a different story.” The FFG(X) will be a considerable step forward for the Navy in terms of capability, but isn't exactly a revolutionary platform that may require a different process to arrive at a solution, McGrath said. https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2020/05/05/5-things-you-should-know-about-the-us-navys-new-frigate/