28 septembre 2018 | International, Aérospatial
By: Valerie Insinna
WASHINGTON — A Boeing-Saab partnership has won a $9.2 billion contract to produce the U.S. Air Force's next-generation training jet.
Boeing's award for the T-X trainer program marks the third major victory by the company in about a month, following an $805 million contract to build the Navy's first four MQ-25 unmanned tankers, and a contract worth up to $2.38 billion to manufacture the Air Force's Huey replacement helicopter. The T-X downselect was first reported by Reuters.
As the winners of the competition, Boeing and Swedish aerospace firm Saab are set to capture sales of at least 351 training jets to the U.S. Air Force, with possibly more in the international market. The program promises to keep Boeing's tactical aircraft business strong after the F-15 and F/A-18 Super Hornet lines disappear in the next decade.
"Today's announcement is the culmination of years of unwavering focus by the Boeing and Saab team,” said Leanne Caret, president and CEO of Boeing's defense business. “It is a direct result of our joint investment in developing a system centered on the unique requirements of the U.S. Air Force. We expect T-X to be a franchise program for much of this century.”
The indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract will allow the Air Force to buy up to 475 aircraft and 120 simulators, the Air Force said in a Sept. 27 statement, although the current plan is to buy 351 T-X aircraft, 46 simulators and associated ground equipment.
The Air Force stated that the T-X program originally was to cost about $19.7 billion, and that Boeing's bid shaved $10 billion off that amount.
“This new aircraft will provide the advanced training capabilities we need to increase the lethality and effectiveness of future Air Force pilots,” Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson said in the news release. “Through competition we will save at least $10 billion on the T-X program.”
Although the contract could be worth up to $9.2 billion, that sum is by no means a sure thing for Boeing.
During a briefing with reporters on Thursday afternoon, Will Roper, the service's acquisition executive, and Lt. Gen. Arnold Bunch, its top uniformed acquisition official, said the $9.2 billion amount would be obligated to Boeing if the service executes all of options that would allow it to buy more aircraft at a quicker pace, purchasing all 475 planes.
Additionally, Boeing assumes the preponderance of the risk with the T-X program, which starts as a fixed-price incentive fee contract, but at the fifth lot will transition to a firm-fixed price structure, Roper and Bunch said.
Boeing and Saab's clean-sheet trainer, designed specifically for the Air Force, beat out Leonardo DRS and a Lockheed Martin-Korea Aerospace Industries partnership. Throughout the competition, the Boeing-Saab jet was seen as the front-runner by analysts like Roman Schweizer of Cowen Washington Research Group, who pointed to Boeing's aggressive bidding strategy and ability to absorb financial losses on programs like the KC-46 tanker aircraft.
The T-X program is the Air Force's last major aircraft procurement opportunity up for grabs for some time, as the service's contracts for its next-generation fighter, tanker and bomber have already been awarded, as have the last remaining new-start helicopter contracts. As such, the decision could potentially trigger a protest with the Government Accountability Office.
But Roper and Bunch pointed to the repeated interaction with industry through the competition, which could shield it from a protest, and lessons learned from previous programs on how to structure a competition.
Roper also defended the service's selection of Boeing's design, which was the only proposed aircraft that was not a modified version of an existing plane.
“We have a very deliberate process to evaluate risk, cost, and technical factors in the program and so its rigorous because we do have to evaluate things that have variances in them. The team looked at that, rolled up cost benefit, technical factors sand risk, to give best value to the government and overall our assessment was Boeing had a proposal that was best value,” Roper said.
Under the initial $813 million award, Boeing will be responsible for delivering five T-X aircraft and seven simulators, with the first simulators arriving at Joint Base San Antonio-Randolph, Texas, in 2023. According to the T-X request for proposals issued in December 2016, the Air Force will then execute contract options for two batches of low-rate production and eight rounds of full-rate production. The contract also includes ground training systems, mission planning and processing systems, support equipment, and spares.
Initial operating capability is planned by the end of fiscal 2024 when the first squadron and its associated simulators are all available for training. Full operational capability is projected for 2034.
Beyond the 351-aircraft program of record, analysts have speculated there could be significant international interest in T-X from countries that plan to fly the F-35 fighter jet or from the U.S. Air Force as it considers buying new aggressor aircraft for air-to-air combat training, making the opportunity potentially even more lucrative.
Although each of the three competing teams offered very different trainers to the Air Force, they were united by their cooperation with international aircraft manufacturers.
Boeing partnered with Saab, which is building the aircraft's aft fuselage and other systems.
The team produced two single-engine, twin-tailed prototypes, which were unveiled at Boeing's St. Louis, Missouri, facility to much fanfare in 2016. Saab promised that, should the partnership emerge victorious, it would build a new plant in the United States for its T-X work, although a location has not been announced.
Leonardo DRS and Lockheed Martin offered modified versions of existent designs, hoping that a mature aircraft would be more palatable as the U.S. Air Force continues to foresee budgetary challenges in its future.
DRS' T-100 is based on the Leonardo M-346 trainer, which is being sold to two F-35 users — Italy and Israel — as well as Singapore. Leonardo initially looked to partner with a big-name U.S. defense prime, first joining with General Dynamics and then, when that teaming agreement fell apart, Raytheon.
Ultimately, Leonardo and Raytheon couldn't agree on pricing for the T-100, leading that partnership to also break up in January 2017.
After Leonardo DRS was tapped to prime the program, the company announced its intention to do structural subassembly, final assembly and check out of the aircraft stateside at Moton Field in Tuskegee, Alabama, where it would build a new $200 million facility.
Lockheed Martin meanwhile joined with Korea Aerospace Industries — a longtime collaborator who manufactured South Korea's version of the F-16 — for a modified version of KAI's T-50. Lockheed said that its T-50A would be built in Greenville, South Carolina, where it also plans to fabricate the F-16 in the future.
25 août 2022 | International, Aérospatial, C4ISR
For the fourth year in a row, space industry leaders are calling for the U.S. to craft a broad, strategic vision to guide its ambitions in space.
9 novembre 2018 | International, Terrestre
By: Todd South As Army leadership looks to transform ground operations and logistics experts shave supply requirements such as fuel, work being done to generate more electric power with less fuel is at the heart of the land fight in the next wave of warfare. The two paths converge at work being done to “electrify” the future vehicle fleet at the Army's center for vehicle research – the Tank Automotive Research Development and Engineering Center. A November forum at TARDEC focused on advances in vehicle electrical power as service leaders, industry experts and researchers pursue ways to give more soldiers more power to run complex systems of the future. The first such forum took place in June and laid out an overview of what will need to happen to reach Army goals. Over the next year, participants will refine their plans to build a complex fleet of vehicles capable of a host of tasks not yet fielded. Vehicles have come a long way from moving forward and backward and carrying troops and ammo. “The electrical demands on the Army's vehicles today are growing far beyond anything we've seen before,” said George Hamilton, TARDEC's lead for Vehicle Electronics Architecture. “Our focus is on developing and providing a modular, flexible and adaptable vehicle architecture that can expand to meet future demands of all kinds.” And the goals are ambitious. The Army wants most of the electrification infrastructure in place or ready for testing by mid-2024 and a working, all-electric power train for the fleet by 2027. The systems and capabilities that the electrification project is pursuing are aimed at enabling seamless Multi-Domain Operations in which forces can access limited windows in the fight at various domains, from the traditional air-land-sea to cyber-electronic warfare-space domains. But, power demands on legacy vehicles only grow as more systems are added, experts said. Over time, that's meant entirely new wiring, amplifiers and other electronics architecture for the same vehicles that have been in service for decades. For example, in 2001, the standard vehicle only required a 150 amp alternator to power its onboard systems. Today, that same vehicle needs 10 times the amperage to run all of the weapon systems, computers, radios, monitors and cameras on current vehicles. At a recent talk at the Association of the U.S. Army, Lt. Gen. Aundre Piggee, the Army G-4, said that future combat operations will not be able to rely on forward operating bases. Logisticians will need to find expeditionary ways to move supplies, especially fuel, to combat units. Current brigade combat teams are able to operate for about three days before a full resupply. But Piggee said that the goal is to stretch that to seven days. To meet that end, a variety of options are being explored, but the main supply saver is reducing demand, specifically fuel. BCTs will need to use at least one-third less fuel to keep their standalone abilities at the one-week mark, he said. That extends beyond petroleum and to battery life, power consumption on smart grids, and anywhere else that technology procedures and advancements can make the formation lethal as long with less fuel or power consumption. So, at the same time that larger formations must be more self-sustaining and use less fuel, the systems that enable their fighting might will need more power. Tomorrow's vehicles will need to do much more than what's being demanded now. On the Army wish list are energy weapon systems to counter rockets, missiles and drones, wireless energy beaming to help with running unmanned ground vehicles and aerial drones with remote power, non-lethal energy weapons for crowd disbursement, silent modes for vehicle movement, high-power electronic jamming, electronic armor to deflect electromagnetic spectrum and projectile attacks, and long-range electromagnetic guns for multiple uses. And the backbone of those capabilities is an open architecture powering system on the next wave of ground vehicles that nearly any system built today or decades from now can plug into, and it will provide the power needed to run. Part of that, the Next-Generation Combat Vehicle Electrical Power Architecture, has been in development at TARDEC since 2012. Once implemented, the system is expected to provide fuel efficiency that will reduce fuel consumption by more than 10 percent and provide 20 percent more efficient power generation and energy transfer. That will put less strain on the vehicle systems while using less fuel and providing more power. And, it can take powerful hybrid vehicles, those using both petroleum-based fuels and battery or fuel cell power. This effort is coupled with a recent partnership between TARDEC and the U.S. Department of Energy into hydrogen fuel cell technology. “We think hydrogen as a fuel source, and the fuel cells that generate electricity from the hydrogen, will enable enormous capability for our warfighters,” Paul Rogers, director of TARDEC, said in a release. The applications go beyond fuel efficiency and reducing fuel logistics burdens. “Vehicles using hydrogen run on electric motor propulsion, giving very low noise and thermal signatures while in operation,” Rogers said. “Additionally, we can generate valuable electrical power using hydrogen fuel cells that currently requires noisy and heavy generators.” Both of those efforts could help not only operational forces in the tactical fight but the surrounding support that brings them their supplies. https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2018/11/08/from-crowd-control-to-wireless-energy-beaming-the-armys-new-vehicles-must-have-more-power-but-use-less-fuel
19 mai 2021 | International, Aérospatial
The F-35 aside, the report recommends that the Air Force "resist future participation in any joint aircraft procurement or development programs."