3 octobre 2018 | International, Aérospatial

Meggitt: $323m multi-year agreement with U.S. Defense Logistics Agency

Meggitt PLC, a leading international company specialising in high performance components and sub-systems for the aerospace, defence and energy markets, has been awarded a five year Indefinite Demand/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) agreement with U.S. Defence Logistics Agency to supply wheels, brakes and related spare parts.

The contract, worth $323m over the life of the award, covers the supply of depot-level spares for a number of defence platforms including F-16 Falcon, H-60 Blackhawk and CH-47 Chinook. The contract includes a further five year option period and replaces a prior five year IDIQ agreement which expired on 30 September 2018.

President of Meggitt's Aircraft Braking Systems, Luke Durudogan said: “This award demonstrates the trust and confidence that our customers have in our employee's expertise, products and services. We look forward to working in partnership with the U.S. Defence Logistics Agency.”

ENDS


Enquiries

Sarah Taylor

Communications Manager
Meggitt PLC
Tel: +44 (0) 7395 788 748
Email: press.office@meggitt.com

About Meggitt PLC

Headquartered in the United Kingdom, this international group operates in North America, Europe and Asia. Known for its specialised extreme environment engineering, Meggitt is a world leader in aerospace, defence and energy. Meggitt employs more than 11,000 people at over 40 manufacturing facilities and regional offices worldwide.

https://www.meggitt.com/news/meggitt-awarded-323-million-multi-year-agreement-with-u-s-defense-logistics-agency/

Sur le même sujet

  • With billions of dollars at stake, let’s responsibly and deliberately spend America’s funds

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

    With billions of dollars at stake, let’s responsibly and deliberately spend America’s funds

    By: Sen. Dick Durbin and Rep. Adam Smith This week we broke a record: In the second quarter of 2020, the U.S. economy fell at an annual rate of 33 percent. As the largest annualized drop in our history, this staggering statistic underscores the breadth and depth of the coronavirus' effect across all industries, including the defense industrial base. As Congress considers competing proposals for COVID-19 relief, we must ensure that any additional funds provided to the Department of Defense are targeted to protecting jobs and strengthening our industrial base. But we owe it to taxpayers to apply oversight and negotiate on their behalf. We cannot panic and hand out blank checks to defense contractors. To do so would set an irresponsible precedent for years to come. Congress has acknowledged that our industrial base needs help during this pandemic. In March, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act included a provision, Section 3610, to allow employees of federal contractors with critical skills to remain paid if the federal facilities where they work closed due to the pandemic. This additional flexibility would keep workers ready to return as soon as conditions allowed. Since then, Section 3610 has taken on a life of its own, with senior administration officials estimating that agencies across the federal government could be on the hook for billions of dollars to carry out this law. With debate on the next coronavirus supplemental bill upon us, the calls for new funding are growing louder. We must explain to American taxpayers and workers what is, and is not, at stake. The confusion stems from two separate issues: whether to use the generous funding already provided to the Department of Defense to pay contractors for the time they were locked out of their workplaces; and to what extent the pandemic and economic shock will make it more expensive to build weapons and perform research now and in the coming years. The Department of Defense has unofficially asked Congress for nearly $11 billion in emergency funds to cover these costs for this year alone, split between these two purposes. The lack of detail in this request raises serious questions. For example, why are other federal agencies finding money in their regular budget to pay for their 3610 contractor pay claims, but the Pentagon cannot? Americans should know that the CARES Act appropriated $10.5 billion for defense needs, with nearly unlimited flexibility for the Department of Defense to reprogram these funds to address urgent priorities. In addition to that infusion of money, the department has numerous other ways to support defense contractors. At the outset of the coronavirus, the department worked with states and localities to deem defense contractors as essential and therefore able to continue working. In April, the department issued a regulatory change on progress payments for existing contracts, increasing the cash flow to the defense industrial base and encouraging major contractors to advance cash to the supply chain, infusing billions of dollars in cash to companies that needed near-term cash flow. And this brings us to our real problem with the $11 billion set aside for contractor reimbursements in this latest emergency appropriations bill: We do not know what it is for, what problems it will and will not fix, and why other funding and tools are not working. We also suspect that the Pentagon has not done its homework on behalf of American taxpayers before asking for this money. The proposal appears to be based on contractor requests, in the midst of a rapidly changing situation, without asking tough questions about how the funds would be used to prevent American job loss and what the long-term budgeting and recovery strategy may be. Before Congress provides many billions of dollars to make up for the work that has been lost due to coronavirus closures, we should know which programs have been impacted, how much each program may need to recover and whether taxpayers will be on the hook for more money if the disruptions continue. The Department of Defense, in particular, has a weapons budget that exceeds the highest levels of the Reagan-era defense buildup — even when adjusted for inflation. Given the amount of base and supplemental funds already at the department's disposal, Congress needs more thorough justification for additional spending, both for Section 3610 and for other needs. Generally speaking, it might make sense to appropriate additional funds to make sure that a shipbuilding program or airplane is completed on time. In other cases, however, taxpayers may reasonably question whether it is worth paying more money in light of other priorities. We have before us a unique opportunity to think strategically about future readiness risks and make the defense industrial base more resilient. Hastily throwing money at the problem is simply not the solution to a complex problem. We appreciate the hard work of the hundreds of thousands of companies, of all sizes, that make up the defense industrial base. When the Pentagon spends CARES Act dollars, or any appropriations, we depend on senior leaders to negotiate hard with defense companies to get the best deal for the taxpayers. There is nothing wrong with tough negotiating when billions of dollars are at stake; as public servants, it is our duty. Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., is the Democratic whip and the ranking member on the Senate Appropriations Committee's Defense Subcommittee. Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., is the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/08/06/with-billions-of-dollars-at-stake-lets-responsibly-and-deliberately-spend-americas-funds/

  • German navy will lead drill to defend the Baltics from the sea

    30 août 2023 | International, Naval

    German navy will lead drill to defend the Baltics from the sea

    Exercise planners consider the scenario a real-world test of an attack against the NATO alliance.

  • US Army triggers design competition for future attack reconnaissance helicopter

    4 octobre 2018 | International, Aérospatial

    US Army triggers design competition for future attack reconnaissance helicopter

    By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — The U.S. Army has kicked off a major design competition for its Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft by releasing a request to industry on Oct. 3 to submit plans that could lead to a chance to build flyable prototypes in just a few years. The service, in June, released a draft solicitation that outlined its intention to get two different helicopter prototypes flying in 2023. The effort is part of the Army's larger move to procure a family of Future Vertical Lift, or FVL, aircraft in the early 2030s, if not sooner. The Army has been talking about procuring an FVL family of helicopters for the better part of a decade and has debated whether to prioritize the pursuit of a medium-lift helicopter to replace UH-60 Black Hawks and AH-64 Apache helicopters. Alternatively, the service was considering buying an armed reconnaissance helicopter to fill the gap left by the OH-58 Kiowa Warrior's 2014 retirement. With the advent of the Army Futures Command and its focus on six modernization priorities, of which FVL is third, progress is being made at lightning speed to make FVL a reality. The service, through an FVL Cross-Functional Team, led by Brig. Gen. Wally Rugen, has settled on going after both a long-range assault helicopter and a Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraftsomewhat back-to-back. But the FARA procurement plans are fast-paced and lead straight to a winner through a fly-off competition, which deviates from the way the Army has gone about its future medium-lift helicopter development. While the Army collected designs, reviewed them and selected two teams to build prototypes to fly in a Joint Multi-Role technology demonstration for a medium-lift aircraft, the results will simply inform requirements for the Army to move into a program of record where the service will make a determination on how it will compete, build and procure a long-range assault variant of FVL. With the FARA competition, the Army plans to award four to six initial design contracts in June of 2019, and then nine months later — to avoid camping out in the PowerPoint stage — the service will choose up to two designs to move forward in fiscal 2021 with a fly-off planned to start in the first quarter of 2023 (November 2022 to be specific, according to the solicitation). The Army will choose a winner and move forward into a milestone appropriate to advance the procurement of the helicopter, whether that is a technology development phase or engineering and manufacturing development or even a production phase, Rugen told a small group of reporters in an Oct. 3 media roundtable. It all depends on where the technology stands following the fly-off and what phase of the acquisition process the Army will enter once it chooses a winner, Dan Bailey, the Army's JMR-TD director, said in the interview. “The Army currently lacks the ability to conduct armed reconnaissance, light attack, and security with improved stand-off and lethal and non-lethal capabilities with a platform sized to hide in radar clutter and for the urban canyons and mega cities,” the solicitation states. The helicopter would be the “ ‘knife-fighter' of future Army Aviation capabilities” in a small package with “maximized performance,” it describes. The Army doesn't want to carve out requirements in granite, according to Rugen, and intends to be flexible as technology capability unfolds in the program, but the solicitation does state it wants a 40-foot maximum rotor diameter, and the fuselage should also not exceed 40 feet in width. By staying flexible, the Army hopes to steer clear of some of the mistakes it has made in the past attempting to acquire an armed reconnaissance helicopter. The Army failed three times to procure a new aircraft — the most memorable being the cancellation of the Comanche helicopter program in 2004 after two aircraft were built and $6.9 billion was spent. Rugen said the Army also wants to make sure affordability considerations are driven into the program and the designs from the beginning are a top requirement for industry to consider. The Army also wants the designs to incorporate the Improved Turbine Engine Program, or ITEP,engine that is being competitively developed to replace the engines in Black Hawks and Apaches. The Army is close to choosing a winner from two teams designing engines to move into the engineering and manufacturing development phase of the program within the next few months. The Army plans to spend approximately $15 million per industry participant in the initial design phase. Participants would receive $8.5 million in FY19 and $6.5 million in FY20. The two participants selected to continue into the prototype phase of the program would receive about $735 million each from FY20 to FY23. Rugen and Bailey said industry interest following the release of the draft solicitation in June has been higher than anticipated and included both industry partners that were not expected and all of those that were. Bailey said that, based on industry interest and participation so far, choosing six designs would be a competitive process because there are more than six possible entrants that have expressed interest in submitting designs. Tim Malia, Sikorsky's program director for FVL light development, told Defense News in a recent interview that the Lockheed Martin-owned company planned to use its X2 technology that is used in its S-97 Raider coaxial helicopter program as the centerpiece to its design offering for the FARA competition. The company is already scaling its X2 technology used in Raider up to a medium-lift aircraft — called the SB-1 Defiant that is participating in the JMR technology demonstration and expected to fly by the end of the year. Malia said it would not be difficult to scale the helicopter from the 34-foot main rotor diameter size of the Raider to the desired 40-foot diameter rotor blades envisioned for FARA. The company has also been working on designs to outfit Raider or any aircraft it builds with X2 technology with the ITEP engine. Sikorsky announced Oct. 3 that its Raider aircraft exceeded 200 knots in a flight test at its West Palm Beach, Florida, flight test center. Bell, which has been flying its V-280 Valor til-trotor helicopter as part of the JMR-TD effort for the better part of a year, continues to hold tight its plans for a design to submit to the FARA competition. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2018/10/03/us-army-triggers-design-competition-for-future-attack-reconnaissance-helicopter

Toutes les nouvelles