Northrop Grumman to Create Constellation of Connectivity for Air Force Research Laboratory

Sur le même sujet

• 

  30 septembre 2019 | International, Aérospatial

  A220 : les fournisseurs d’Airbus toujours sous pression pour réduire leurs coûts de 20 %

  Par Maxime Bertrand Airbus vise toujours une réduction de 20 % des coûts de la part de ses fournisseurs afin d'assurer la rentabilité de l'A220. C'est ce qu'ont déclaré les pdg d'Airbus et d'Airbus Canada, Guillaume Faury et Philippe Balducchi, lors d'une rencontre avec la presse montréalaise jeudi. Nous avons progressé, mais le processus n'est pas terminé, a déclaré Philippe Balducchi, pdg d'Airbus Canada L'A220 a vraiment besoin d'une accélération, d'un renforcement du programme de réduction des coûts, a renchéri Guillaume Faury, pdg d'Airbus. Le géant européen a pris les commandes du programme né de la C Series de Bombardier – renommé A220 depuis – en juin 2018. Pas plus tard qu'en octobre 2018, le pdg d'Airbus affirmait qu'il lui faudrait « des années » avant que l'A220 devienne une réussite économique. En entrevue avec la presse montréalaise, les deux dirigeants ont soutenu jeudi qu'il était normal que l'effort demandé soit plus important pour l'A220 que pour les autres appareils de la flotte d'Airbus, car le programme en est à ses débuts et qu'il faut repositionner l'appareil, accélérer la cadence de production et entrer dans une zone de rentabilité. Selon la direction de l'avionneur, tous les appareils en début de production doivent relever ce genre de défi. Airbus se donne trois ans pour terminer le processus entamé il y a une quinzaine de mois et parvenir à une réduction des coûts de 20 %. La démarche ne s'arrêtera pas là, préviennent les dirigeants, car les baisses des coûts devront également s'inscrire dans le temps. À la fin de mai dernier, le carnet de commandes d'Airbus comptait 536 appareils A220. Au salon aéronautique du Bourget, en juin, l'entreprise a annoncé de 70 appareils A220. Dossier des avions de chasse Dans le dossier des avions de chasse, la direction d'Airbus a dit s'être retirée avec beaucoup de regret de l'appel d'offres du gouvernement canadien. Elle croit que sa présence au Canada gr'ce à l'A220 permettra d'accroître sa visibilité et de saisir les occasions futures qui se présenteront. Différend commercial entre l'Europe et les États-Unis Par ailleurs, la direction d'Airbus a réagi à la décision de l'Organisation mondiale du commerce (OMC) d'autoriser les États-Unis à imposer des droits de douane annuels de 7,5 milliards de dollars sur les produits européens dans le cadre du conflit sur les subventions dans le domaine de la construction aéronautique. Il s'agit d'un différend de 15 ans entre Boeing et Airbus, donc entre les États-Unis et l'Europe, qui s'accusent mutuellement de consentir des aides illégales à leurs avionneurs. Nous croyons que tout le monde sort perdant d'une guerre commerciale, a déclaré Guillaume Faury. Si des droits sont imposés par les deux parties, cela entraînera une hausse des coûts de déplacement et nous rendra moins concurrentiels. Nous croyons que les parties finiront par s'entendre et que la voix de la sagesse sera la plus forte. Nous continuons à militer en faveur d'une entente, nous croyons qu'il est possible d'y parvenir. https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1319890/a220-avion-reduction-couts-programme-airbus

• 

  19 mai 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

  Citing TransDigm, DoD seeks new acquisition powers, and trade groups oppose

  By: Joe Gould WASHINGTON ― Four defense industry trade associations “strongly oppose" a handful of Pentagon-backed procurement reform proposals that they say would harm the defense industrial base, and they're asking Congress to reject them. Two of the proposals aim at controversial pricing practices used by TransDigm by requiring contractors to submit cost information for commercial items and by requiring contracting officers to conduct a commercial item determination for every procurement. Others would set a preference for performance-based contract payments and authorize the Defense Department to release or disclose detailed manufacturing or process data. The May 6 protest letter came from the Acquisition Reform Working Group — made up of the National Defense Industrial Association, American Council of Engineering Companies, the Computing Technology Industry Association and the Information Technology Industry Council — to the the House and Senate armed services committees. It comes as the panels were readying their drafts of the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act. The Pentagon has worked to monitor its network of suppliers from the economic shocks associated with the coronavirus pandemic and to protect suppliers by using emergency funding from Congress to speed payments and improve cash flow along the supply chain. The trade groups noted they represent “thousands of small, mid-sized, and large companies in addition to hundreds of thousands of employees that provide goods, services, and personnel to the Department of Defense,” and said the four proposals a “could have significant consequences for the defense industrial base.” Congress focused ire at TransDigm last year after the Defense Department's Inspector General found for $26.2 million in parts the military bought from TransDigm, it earned $16.1 million in excess profit. Transdigm was the only manufacturer of the majority of the parts, which let it set the market prices even for competitively awarded parts. Though DoD has argued its contractors need new latitude to make commercial item determinations and obtain cost or pricing information to prevent the excessive pricing TransDigm was accused of, the trade groups argue the TransDigm's actions weren't facilitated by an inappropriate reliance on improper commercial item determinations, or insufficient access to pricing data. “As illustrated by the TransDigm Group, Inc's pricing practices, generally once a conversion to a commercial product or commercial service is made, it is common for prices to increase and subsequent contracting officers find it difficult to obtain data necessary to determine price reasonableness and negotiate fair and reasonable prices on behalf of the taxpayer,” the department said in its proposal. Another proposal would require a contractor to submit uncertified cost information for commercial item proposals or contracts less than $2 million. The idea behind the reform is DoD wants to be able to get more insight into the costs of sole-source items and put itself in a more favorable position to negotiate with sole-source companies. Congressional hearings on TransDigm's excessive pricing showed Defense leaders need the authority to obtain the data “to the extent necessary to determine price reasonableness is paramount in ensuring that such excessive pricing practices are curtailed.” But the trade groups argue that levying the new regulations would “add a significant barrier to commercial item acquisition, reduce information sharing, further burden the system, and impede—rather than enable—the delivery of capabilities to the warfighter at the ‘speed of relevance'—all with little to no added protection for the government or the taxpayer." The trade associations also opposed DoD's legislation to set a preference for performance-based contract payments. The groups said a DoD proposal to “recouple” total performance-based payments to total cost incurred would reverse Congress's previous work to emphasize performance over cost and contradict a spate of defense acquisitions rules. DoD's argument is that it shouldn't be reimbursing a contractor more than its actual costs, or it “would result in negative levels of contractor investment,” and create a disincentive for contractors to deliver. Another disputed proposal would let DoD release detailed manufacturing or process data, or DPMD, pertaining to privately funded commercial or noncommercial items outside of the government to third parties seeking to compete against the original equipment manufacturer. It's the latest episode in a running game of tug-of-war between industry and DoD over intellectual property. While Congress has in recent years prodded DoD to set intellectual property strategies early in acquisition programs and negotiate for IP rights on a case-by-case basis, the trade groups argue the proposal would give DoD “an automatic default authority” and “eliminate the possibility of a negotiated solution.” https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/05/15/citing-transdigm-dod-seeks-new-acquisition-powers-and-trade-groups-oppose/

• 

  29 avril 2019 | International, Aérospatial

  Italy to buy drones to keep company alive, but the Air Force doesn’t want them

  By: Tom Kington ROME — The Italian government said it will purchase the troubled P.1HH drone from Italy-based Piaggio Aerospace as it seeks to keep the firm afloat, despite an apparent lack of interest in the platform from the Italian Air Force. The Ministry of Economic Development announced April 24 the acquisition of four drones, which are unmanned variants of the firm's P180 business aircraft. Confirming the purchase, the Defence Ministry said the purchase would serve the “operational needs” of the Italian armed forces and protect the “strategic value” of the company, while strengthening Italy's credentials as a partner in the pan-European EuroMALE drone program. The Ministry of Economic Development added that future purchases would follow, with an industrial source telling Defense News another four drones would be bought. Piaggio Aerospace was placed in receivership late last year by then-owner Mubadala, an investment fund based in the United Arab Emirates, which also canceled its planned order of eight Piaggio P.1HH drones. One reported reason for Mubadala's decision was its impatience as Italy dragged its heels on promises to buy an enhanced version of the drone, preferred by the Italian Air Force and known at the P.2HH. As Italy's parliamentary defense commission dragged its heels on approving the P.2HH order last year, Mubadala pulled the plug on the firm, even as work on its order of P.1HH drones was nearing completion. The decision put hundreds of jobs at Piaggio in jeopardy and left the firm with incomplete P.1HH drones. In March, Italian Air Force chief Gen. Alberto Rosso told Italy's parliament he was not interested in buying them, adding to speculation the drone program was dead. But he appears to be have been overruled, as Italy's government seeks to save jobs at the company. The industrial source said the four drones set to be purchased by Italy for the Air Force, plus the further four to be bought in the future, would be those originally destined for the UAE. One drone that had already been delivered to the UAE could now be returned for delivery to the Italian Air Force. The source said €70 million (U.S. $78 million) will be spent by the Italian Defence Ministry to achieve flight certification for the drones, which is expected to take between 12 and 18 months. Maintenance work and construction of the P180 will also now continue. The deal will allow a revived Piaggio to avoid layoffs and to find an “industrial partner,” the Ministry of Economic Development said. That could be Italy's Leonardo, although CEO Alessandro Profumo this month told Defense News he was only interested in Piaggio's engine maintenance activity. https://www.defensenews.com/unmanned/2019/04/26/italy-to-buy-drones-to-keep-company-alive-but-the-air-force-doesnt-want-them