UK: Defence Minister signs £250M aircraft deal, sustaining 450 jobs

Sur le même sujet

• 

  21 juin 2019 | International, Naval

  Navy Issues Final RFP for FFG(X) Next-Generation Frigate

  By: Megan Eckstein The Navy released the final request for proposals for its next guided-missile frigate (FFG(X)) today, outlining the program that will get the U.S. Navy into the business of operating high-end small combatants. The service is counting on the new frigate to help the fleet operate in a distributed manner in a contested maritime environment. To that end, the final solicitation for bids for the FFG(X) program highlights a particular interest in what industry can offer in range; margins for weight, cooling, electrical and arrangeable deck area, to allow the ship to bring in new technologies as they develop; acoustic signature management; undersea surveillance; and over-the-horizon capabilities. After previous iterations of the frigate were ditched as the Navy's view of what capability it wanted evolved, the current FFG(X) effort sought to bring in industry early to ensure that requirements were in line with what technologies were currently feasible at the right price point. Those ongoing discussions led the Navy to settle on a ship that would have at least 32 vertical launching system (VLS) cells, an Aegis-based combat system, the Cooperative Engagement Capability datalink so the frigate could share targeting data with other ships and aircraft, and advanced anti-submarine warfare and electronic warfare systems. The service announced earlier this year the frigate would include as government-furnished equipment: A fixed-face Raytheon Enterprise Air Surveillance Radar (EASR) that will serve as the primary air search radar. At least 32 Mark 41 Vertical Launch System cells that could field Standard Missile 2 Block IIICs or RIM-162 Evolved SeaSparrow Missiles (ESSM) and a planned vertically launched anti-submarine warfare weapon. COMBATSS-21 Combat Management System based on the Aegis Combat System. Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) datalink that would allow the frigate to share targeting information with other ships and aircraft. Space, weight and cooling for 8 to 16 Over-the-Horizon Anti-Ship Cruise Missiles An aviation detachment that includes an MH-60R Seahawk helicopter and an MQ-8C Firescout Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. AN/SQQ-89(V)15 Surface Ship Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) Combat System AN/SQS-62 Variable Depth Sonar. SLQ-32(V)6 Surface Electronic Warfare Improvement Program (SEWIP) Block 2 electronic warfare suite with allowances to include SEWIP Block 3 Lite in the future. Space, weight and cooling reservation for a 150-kilowatt laser. Further highlighting the focus on allowing the ships to be upgraded as technology evolves, the solicitation asks that bids include a “description of the flexibility in the design to accommodate efficient warfare systems upgrades by explaining equipment removal and upgrade paths with an emphasis on avoiding hull cuts or the need for dry docking,” as well as provisions for upgrading hull-mounted and towed undersea warfare sensors. Five industry teams have been involved in early design maturation efforts, which both helped industry refine their plans to be more in line with what the Navy wanted, and allowed the Navy to refine its idea of how much this new class might cost. Earlier this year, USNI News reported that costs were coming down as a result of the design maturation contracts. “$950 (million) was the threshold; $800 million is the objective,” frigate program manager with Program Executive Office Unmanned and Small Combatants Regan Campbell said in January at the Surface Navy Association symposium. “We started closer to the $950; we are trending to very close to the $800 now. We have taken some very significant costs out,” she said of the second through 10th ship of the class. The Navy intends to buy at least 20 frigates, though the first contract will only cover the first 10. After the first contract, the Navy could continue with the same builder or re-compete the program to potentially bring in a second builder, if it wanted to accelerate frigate production to keep in line with its drive to reach a 355-ship fleet and leadership acknowledgement that it will need more small combatants and fewer high-end destroyers going forward. After the release of today's final RFP, interested bidders will have until Aug. 22 to submit their technical proposals to the Navy and until Sept. 26 to submit their pricing proposal. A winner will be selected in Fiscal Year 2020 to build the frigate. Of the five companies that participated in the design maturation phase, four are expected to submit bids to the RFP. Austal USA, who builds the Independence-variant Littoral Combat Ship; Fincantieri Marine, which builds the Italian FREMM multipurpose frigate; General Dynamics Bath Iron Works, who will partner with Spanish F100-builder Navantia; and Ingalls Shipbuilding, who has declined to discuss its design, all worked with the Navy to take their existing parent designs and mature them to become in line with the Navy's vision for its guided-missile frigate. Lockheed Martin, which builds the Freedom-variant LCS, was part of that effort as well but announced it would not continue on with the frigate competition. Despite the earlier design work that the Navy funded, the frigate competition is open to any bidder who has a parent design to base the frigate offering on. https://news.usni.org/2019/06/20/navy-issues-final-rfp-for-ffgx-next-generation-frigate

• 

  21 décembre 2020 | International, Terrestre

  Solicitation for Bradley replacement offers flexibility for foreign participation

  By: Jen Judson WASHINGTON — The request for proposals from industry for the U.S. Army's optionally manned fighting vehicle, or OMFV, intended to replace the Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle, has hit the street and allows for greater flexibility for foreign companies to compete. In the service's second stab at holding a competition for OMFV, the Army is driving as much flexibility as it can across the board, from avoiding stringent requirements in favor of loose characteristics and creating a phase for industry to design concepts without much company investment that will form requirements along the way. The Army's previous attempt required the delivery of physical bid samples, which hamstrung foreign competitor Rheinmetall of Germany and drove Bradley-maker BAE Systems to avoid the competition. Ultimately, the service received just one bid sample from General Dynamics Land Systems, which forced the Army to rethink the effort and come back with a new approach. The OMFV competition has foreign industry jumping to join in with new and modernized platforms, and the Army appears to be ditching much of the restrictions that would typically keep them out. Rheinmetall has already partnered with American firms Raytheon and Textron to solidify its participation in the competition, but many other companies are poised to submit bids to design concepts. The pool needs to be deep because the Army anticipates awarding up to five contracts to design platforms. “The challenges we've typically had in getting foreign participation is we often have a lot of classified material that we release up front, and we have some detailed specification that has very detailed performance requirements that's classified,” Brig. Gen. Glenn Dean, the new Army program executive officer for ground combat systems, said in a Dec. 18 press briefing. Foreign competitors “have to have clearances in place to be able to take that information,” Dean said. This means foreign companies must either be partnered with a prime contractor in the United States, have a subsidiary stateside, or have other clearances that take time to get through the approval process in order to exchange the classified information. Working through consortiums, which the Army regularly does, also makes it hard for foreign contractors to come through the door, Dean said. This time, the Army isn't working with a consortium and is using a more traditional federal acquisition regulation-based contract, according to Dean. Furthermore, he said, classified reports will not be required in order to submit a bid or receive an initial design contract award. “We've eliminated the limitation on primes and, because we don't have classified information we are providing at the front end, that allows us to share more broadly and gives those companies time if they're going to continue to play as lead, to establish their facilities, clearances and have the necessary structures in place to receive classified information when we get to that point,” he said. Dean expects more classified requirements to kick in toward the end of the concept design phase where requirements begin to take shape, which translates to specifications. “Obviously, every company is going to make their own determination about what strengths and partners may bring to the table, whether they want to come in as a sub, whether they want to be prime with a bunch of U.S. subs,” Dean said, “but the response has been very promising.” He also said there is strong interest from abroad. “I would say that we at least heard from or have participation ... from all the major companies in the West capable of doing a full combat vehicle. Companies from Israel, South Korea, Singapore, Germany, in addition to companies both you're familiar with in the U.S. who've [supplied] combat vehicles, but also some companies that operate in the defense space but haven't traditionally been combat vehicle suppliers,” he said. “We will see how many of them ultimately decide they want to throw their hat in the ring and participate. I think we've done what we need to do to make it as open at an initial point.” Sources following the competition are expecting to see participation from South Korea's Hanwha, which is in a head-to-head competition in Australia with Rheinmetall to produce a new infantry fighting vehicle. Germany-based Krauss-Maffei Wegmann has also touted an infantry fighting vehicle option, most recently at the last in-person Association of the U.S. Army's annual conference in Washington, D.C., in 2019. Belgium's CMI Defense is also rumored to be forging a partnership with a U.S. prime to participate in the competition. Now that the solicitation has been posted to Beta.Sam.Gov, companies have until April 16, 2021, to submit a conceptual bid. The Army will award contracts in July, according to Dean, which will kick off 15 months of funded work. During the phase, industry will work on designs without bending metal that will inform an abbreviated capabilities development document — or an initial set of requirements. Once the design phase ends, the Army will take a pause and then open the competition back up for a more detailed design effort ahead of prototyping, where up to three bids will be selected to proceed. The detailed design phase will be executed over the course of fiscal 2023 and fiscal 2024. The prototyping phase will begin in FY25, according to slides presented at the OMFV industry day. Vehicle testing will begin in FY26 and wrap up in FY27, with a production decision planned for the fourth quarter of FY27. Full-rate production is expected to begin in the second quarter of FY30. In parallel to the concept design phase, the Army will develop an open architecture for OMFV. An open architecture has risen to the top of the OMFV planner's list of required capability, particularly after seeing the need to be networked with other capabilities across the battlefield and at the forward edge at Project Convergence at Yuma Proving Grounds, Arizona, over the summer. The Army will establish a voluntary consortium beginning in January 2021 that will represent industry, government and academia in order to develop such an open architecture, according to the statement. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2020/12/18/bradley-replacement-request-for-proposals-hits-street-with-flexibility-for-foreign-participation/

• 

  22 août 2023 | International, Aérospatial

  Opening up National Security Space Launch program endangers access

  A former U.S. Air Force secretary argues against allowing a vendor who has not yet successfully launched to compete on the basis of a paper proposal alone.