The Finnish Defence Forces purchase pilot training services from Patria

Sur le même sujet

• 

  10 septembre 2020 | International, Aérospatial

  GBSD, B-21 Spending Could Top $10B In 2027: Cowen Group

  B-21 production costs, the Cowen analysis finds, will ramp up fast, from $202 million in 2022 to $4 billion in 2027. By THERESA HITCHENSon September 09, 2020 at 6:05 PM WASHINGTON: The Air Force's combined spending on the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD) and the B-21 bomber is likely to triple by 2027 to some $10.2 billion annually, as production begins to ramp up under both programs, the Cowen Washington Research Group estimates. The $13.3 billion GBSD contract, announced yesterday by the Air Force, covers engineering, manufacturing and development (EMD) of the new ICBMs through 2029. The Cowen analysis, out today, notes that while the contract announcement does not explain whether LRIP is included, it can be assumed. This is because Air Force budget justification documents detail plans for “five option years” under the contract to include “early production and deployment,” author Roman Schweizer explains. GBSD, which will replace the aging LGM-30G Minuteman III missiles that first became operational in 1970, represents one third of DoD's top priority nuclear modernization effort. The third leg of the modernization program is the Navy's planned buy of 12 new Columbia-class nuke-launching submarines, which the Pentagon's 2021 budget documents estimate to cost $110 billion to buy. The Congressional Budget Office in 2019 estimated the price tag for the total DoD triad modernization effort at $234 billion through 2028. This ginormous price tag does not include spending by the Energy Department to build the nuclear warheads that would be carried by DoD's ICBMs, bombers and subs. Northrop Grumman was the sole bidder for the GBSD program following Boeing's decision last year to drop out over concerns about Northrop's acquisition of one of the two makers of solid rocket motors in the country, Orbital ATK. Cowen estimates that research and development spending for GBSD will jump from $1.5 billion in 2021, peaking at $3.07 billion in 2024, and decreasing to $1.9 billion in 2027. Production, the analysis says, will begin in 2027 with a budget of $2 billion. The Air Force's press release yesterday says that it expects to begin deploying GBSD in late 2020. For the B-21, the analysis estimates that R&D spending will steadily decline from the $2.8 billion in the Air Force's 2021 request to $1.2 billion in 2027. But production costs, the analysis finds, will ramp up: from $202 million in 2022 to $4 billion in 2027. The analysis is largely based on Air Force budget estimates through 2025, and Schweizer's own projections. Of course, this means the numbers are squishy. That's especially true for the B-21, whose program is highly classified. Indeed, the number of B-21 bombers the Air Force intends to buy, originally set at 100, remains unclear. As Breaking D readers know, senior service officials have been hinting loudly that they need more. In addition, unit costs for the stealth bomber's production are also classified. Way back in 2015, when the Air Force awarded Northrop Grumman the B-21 contract, it put a cap on the Average Production Unit Cost per aircraft of $550 million in 2010 dollars. “The APUC from the independent estimate supporting today's award is $511 million per aircraft, again in 2010 dollars,” the release added. No updated assessments have been released. Several high officials have said the program is on budget and on schedule, without providing any details. Finally, the production schedule and the count of how many are to be built each year, is classified, along with the planned annual procurement costs. That said, our colleagues at Bloomberg reported in February that internal Air Force budget documents show procurement starting in 2022 budgeted at $193 million. That jumps to $4.3 billion in 2025. Schweizer said in an email that his estimates are based on those numbers, and that the projections for 2026 and 2027 are his own. Cowen's analysis notes that Congress is by and large supportive of both efforts. While some have fretted that presidential candidate Joe Biden might reconsider building the GBSD, the document says that is not likely. After all, the Obama administration, during which Biden served as Veep, actually started the program. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/09/gbsd-b-21-spending-could-top-10b-in-2027-cowen-group

• 

  21 juin 2018 | International, Terrestre

  Australia seeks industry input on infantry fighting vehicle project

  Jon Grevatt Key Points Australian DoD seeks industry advice on tender timeline for Land 400 Phase 3 procurement project Industry feedback intended to support better planning and to reduce the cost of tendering The Australian Department of Defence (DoD) is looking to engage with local industry on the schedule to issue a tender in support of a multi-billion dollar programme to procure close combat capability under Project Land 400 Phase 3. The DoD said on 20 June that it is inviting local companies to review and comment on the timeline for project through which it will replace the Australian Army's M113AS4 armoured personnel carriers (APCs) with up to 450 modern infantry fighting vehicles and 17 manoeuvre support vehicles. A draft request for tender (RFT) document for the programme has also been issued as part of the engagement. According to the DoD's 2016 Integrated Investment Program, which identifies defence investments in the decade to 2026, the Land 400 Phase 3 acquisition is worth between AUD10-AUD15 billion (USD7.4-USD11 billion). The DoD issued a request for information (RFI) for the project in November 2015, while government gave ‘first pass' or preliminary approval for the procurement in March 2018. Commenting on the decision to seek industry's advice on the tender schedule, Australia's Minister for Defence Industry Christopher Pyne said that it would lead to a better informed tender process and reduce the cost of tendering for local industry. “The proposed tender timeline identifies key milestones in the tender evaluation,” said Pyne. “We welcome industry's feedback on the timeline to better enable both industry and [the DoD] to plan for this significant boost to capability.” The DoD indicated that the move to seek industry advice on the Land 400 Phase 3 tender timeline was requested by local companies during the programme to acquire more than 200 combat reconnaissance vehicles under Land 400 Phase 2. http://www.janes.com/article/81187/australia-seeks-industry-input-on-infantry-fighting-vehicle-project

• 

  2 septembre 2020 | International, Aérospatial

  F-35 program costs are evolving, and these savings matter

  By: Steven P. Bucci Last month, Congress held an oversight and accountability hearing regarding the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter's burdensome logistical IT system. The Department of Defense Office of Inspector General reported earlier this year that millions of additional dollars were spent in the form of labor hours by military personnel who manually tracked the plane's spare parts since its electronic logistical system didn't. The congressional review was undoubtedly warranted, especially as the F-35 program office phases in a newer system over the next two years to replace its legacy IT platform. But noticeably absent from this testimony, was a more fulsome discussion (and understanding) about the affordability of the program and how both acquisition costs and the price to fly the aircraft are significantly trending downward at a time that matters most. In an era of increased military competition against peer adversaries and during a period of tremendous budgetary constraints in the United States, incremental savings across a large enterprise such as the F-35 program matter. The Defense Department understands this well. It has smartly leveraged its buying power, driving down the cost of each F-35A to approximately $80 million one year earlier than planned — now costing taxpayers less than some of the less capable fourth-generation aircraft, and on a par with others. The F-15EX, for example, costs nearly $88 million, and gives our forces no help in a fifth-gen fight. Why spend more for less? This is critical because over the next five years, the number of F-35s purchased will more than double to approximately 1,200 aircraft. That translates to increased capacity and capability for the United States and its allies as they operate in the Indo-Pacific and European theaters. Congress recognizes that the costs to acquire the aircraft have been significantly reduced, and it has now rightfully turned its attention to the costs associated with sustaining the aircraft. But most lawmakers missed the opportunity during July's hearing to more fully explore a key statement made by the F-35′s prime contractor, Lockheed Martin. Lockheed announced that it has reduced its share of the aircraft's sustainability cost per flying hour over the past five years by nearly 40 percent, plummeting the costs to fly the aircraft to nearly $5,000 less each hour than earlier hourly costs. The company says it has invested hundreds of millions of dollars to build state-of-the-art tools, analytics, machine learning and artificial intelligence, which has led to labor efficiency gains as well as improvements to supply response times and data quality. The company implemented robust asset management tools and robotic automation to eliminate manual tasks, while placing a concerted focus on improving the reliability of aircraft parts to meaningfully reduce future repair requirements and material costs. This is significant because the number of hours flown each year will increase by approximately 140,000 hours over the next five years alone. Those savings add up. And more can be done. The F-35′s manufacturer believes it can further drive down its cost share to fly the aircraft by approximately an additional 50 percent. This is all the more significant when considering that the military services and aircraft's engine maker, Pratt & Whitney, are responsible for more than one-half of the total sustainment costs of the program. If a similar level of savings can be achieved by the Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, and Pratt & Whitney, those savings can be confidently reinvested back into the program to ensure enough aircraft are being procured to deter and, if necessary, fight our adversaries. As the military services and foreign countries consider future threats and the capabilities needed to impede adventuresome opponents, these savings matter. These savings come at the same time the DoD reports that the aircraft's mission-capable rate has increased from the mid-50th percentile to the low 70th percentile from just a couple of years ago. And further improvements in the aircraft's mission-capable rate should be forthcoming as repair backlogs and mismatched spare parts are corrected by a new IT logistical system. A theoretical military principle suggests that steady quantitative changes can lead to a sudden, qualitative leap. After many, many years of sustained focus to drive down F-35 costs, the program may be representative of that maxim and allow the Defense Department to fully realize the advantages of the F-35′s gamechanging technologies. Steven P. Bucci is a visiting fellow at The Heritage Foundation. He previously served as a U.S. Army Special Forces officer and is a former deputy assistant secretary of defense for homeland defense. The Heritage Foundation takes no funding from any government. It does take donations from corporate entities, which average about 4 percent of their total funding in any given year. The think tank reports it does not take a position based on donations, nor do donors have editorial input.. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/09/01/f-35-program-costs-are-evolving-and-these-savings-matter/