Navy awards $732M contract for satellite ground systems

Sur le même sujet

• 

  3 septembre 2019 | International, Naval

  Navy to Update 2 Dry Docks to Accommodate Ford-Class Carriers

  By: Ben Werner Only one of the Navy's 18 dry docks used for maintaining the nuclear-powered carrier fleet can support a Ford-class carrier, Navy officials told USNI News. Dry Dock 8 at the Norfolk Naval Shipyard can handle a Ford-class carrier, but only after a temporary cooling water systems is set up. A permanent cooling water system and other upgrades to Dry Dock 8 are scheduled to occur before USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) enters its first planned dry dock availability, Anna Taylor, a Naval Sea Systems Command spokeswoman, told USNI News in an email. The Navy also plans to upgrade a West Coast dry dock to handle the future USS John F. Kennedy (CVN-79), Taylor added. Mike Petters, chief executive of Huntington Ingalls Industries, whose Newport News Shipbuilding yard is the sole builder of aircraft carriers for the U.S. Navy, said in a conference call with analysts earlier this month that the fixes required were not complicated. The hull size of the new class is roughly the same as the Nimitz-class carriers that make up the rest of the fleet, so Petters said the shipyards do not need to do many physical changes to piers and docks. “There are clearly differences between Ford and Nimitz,” Petters said of the carrier classes. “The power requirements, those kinds of things. I think those are all things that can be addressed and will be addressed by the government shipyards, so I don't really see a major fundamental change in the way the Ford-class is going to be supported from the industry.” The Navy is also planning improvements to the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and Intermediate Maintenance Facility's dry dock infrastructure before the future USS Kennedy (CVN-79) is expected to enter its first availability, Taylor said. Doing so will give the Navy two dry docks – one on each coast – capable of supporting Ford-class carriers. Kennedy is expected to be christened later this year and is still years away from joining the fleet. The need to upgrade dry docks to support the new class of carriers comes amid both a push to modernize and optimize the four public shipyards that work on carriers and submarines, as well as a realization that the need for maintenance facilities is far greater than what's available at public and private yards. The Navy's long-range ship maintenance and modernization plan, released in March, details the mismatch and suggests some strategies to fix the problem. The Navy's Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program (SIOP) is a 20-year, $21-billion program to modernize the Navy's four public shipyards and is a major part of the solution laid out in the long-range plan, Taylor said. With a renewed focus on readiness, there's an opportunity for private shipyards willing to make investments in their facilities, too, to pick up some more Navy maintenance business, Petters told analysts during the conference call. The Navy's long-range ship maintenance and modernization plan also states that the Navy needs private sector help. “Sustaining the 355-ship fleet will require changes to both public and private industrial capability and capacity. Current infrastructure will require update and refurbishment to support modern classes of ships and repair. Likewise, additional dry docks will be needed to address the growing fleet size,” the plan states. Petters cited the Navy's work improving readiness among its aviation community as a good sign the Navy can translate this experience to the ship repair business. However, the Navy needs private shipyards to address its backlog of repair and maintenance work. “The Navy has taken a hard turn on how do you do readiness in a more efficient way, and that's being led from the secretary's office,” Petters said. “We've talked about readiness in my career for a long time. This is a no-kidding effort to go get it sorted out.” Predictability in contracting, though, is critical if the private sector is going to invest in upgrading its yards, Petters said. “I think we're on the front end of that to see whether we can actually create more efficiency there,” Petters said. “We certainly want to participate in that, and so far we've kind of got our toe in the water with the Virginia-class (submarine maintenance) support. And we'll see what other opportunities it presents. So little early for us to try to predict how that's all going to shake out.” https://news.usni.org/2019/08/30/navy-to-update-2-dry-docks-to-accommodate-ford-class-carriers

• 

  29 mai 2020 | International, Aérospatial

  Comparative SWOT & Program Strategy Assessment of the World's Top 6 Western Combat Aircraft (4/4.5 Gen) Programs - Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Dassault, Eurofighter and SAAB - ResearchAndMarkets.com

  Combat jets have formed the core of the force structure of Air Forces globally since their advent in the piston engine powered form on to the battlefields during the World War I with technological evolution having heralded the age of jet powered combat aircrafts by the end of World War II with the usage of turbojet powered combat aircrafts by both sides towards the later part of the war. The radical shift in the prevailing, traditional rule based world order with the rapid build-up of military capabilities by China and resurgence of Russia on the world horizon having already propped up defense spending across most regions & parts of the world. Additionally, ongoing conflicts & unrest across some parts of the world, especially, the Middle East has also led to a spurt in defense spending over the recent years driving demand for western origin military hardware by most nations. The global defense spending reached the $1.9 trillion level for 2019, growing by over 3% year on year to reach its highest level since the Cold war era, accounting for around 2.2% of the world GDP for 2019. Fighter jets have remained a core focus area for nations around the world with their significant role & capabilities in aerial combat, interdiction, penetration of enemy air defenses, ground attack and air dominance/superiority roles. The 21st century has marked the mainstream shift towards the 5th generation aircrafts with the U.S. maintaining the lead as always, with its F-22 Raptor program in late 1990s and with the F-35 Lightning II in the 21st century, while similar 5th generation programs are being developed and produced by Russia, China & South Korea. The quest towards the development of 6th generation aircrafts, poised to enter service in the 2030s, has also begun, led by the European FCAS & the British Tempest programs. This report, however, focuses on the key fighter jet program from the perspective of competition for pursuit of international exports opportunities, which has mostly been led by 4 or 4.5 generation aircrafts so far with the same mostly aimed at capabilities expansion or fleet replacement. The study, thus, takes a close look at the Top 6 4/4.5 generation fighter jet programs currently in production from the international markets perspective with focus on comparative assessment of respective programs along with a comparative SWOT analysis on these programs which have on multiple occasions have come to face off each other in multiple international competitions over the recent years. The report provides a comprehensive, comparative analysis of the Strengths & Weaknesses of these combat jet programs relative to each other while scanning out environmental opportunities & threats for these in a rapidly evolving post COVID-19 world scenario (which is likely to see pressures on defense spending across most parts of the world over near term) which further enhances the relevance & usefulness of this report. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20200527005384/en/Comparative-SWOT-Program-Strategy-Assessment-Worlds-Top

• 

  7 juin 2019 | International, Naval

  Developing the Royal Navy’s autonomous underwater capability: commercial clarification

  Please be advised that, in respect to the Defence and Security Accelerator competition: developing the Royal Navy's autonomous underwater capability, Dstl Commercial Services have offered a commercial clarification in respect to industry queries around the agreement of a Limitation of a Contractor's Liability to the proposed Framework Agreement: It is not possible to request a Limit of a Contractor's Liability (LoCL) under a Framework Agreement because it is impossible to calculate an appropriate LoCL amount with such a broad scope of work. Requests for a LoCL to the overarching framework agreement will be turned down, and proposals that include such requests will be deemed to be commercially non-compliant and excluded from the competition. However, in the event of placement of any Framework Agreement as a result of this Themed Competition, under the Tasking element of the aforementioned Framework Agreement (Item 2 of the proposed Framework Agreement only) on a Task by Task basis we will consider the risks associated with that Task and may consider it appropriate to agree a LoCL against that specific task only. This does not apply to Item 1 of the proposed Framework Agreement. Requests for a LoCL against Item 1 of the Framework Agreement will not be considered and proposals that include them excluded from the competition. Please be advised that this clarification explicitly applies to the Defence and Security Accelerator competition: developing the Royal Navy's autonomous underwater capability only. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/developing-the-royal-navys-autonomous-underwater-capability-commercial-clarification