Nouvelles

By: Tom Kington ROME — Italy shipbuilder Fincantieri has reopened its facilities after more than a month of closure due to coronavirus. The state controlled firm shut down on March 16 after talks with unions as the virus swept through Italy — the first Western country to be hit hard. Since then, Italy's death toll has been overtaken by the U.S., but remains the most exposed country in Europe, with more than 25,000 deaths and 187,000 total infections. As the contagion rate slows however, the government is targeting May 4 as the date to relax rigid lockdown rules for the public. Fincantieri was given the go ahead to restart production on Monday — at a reduced pace. At the firm's Riva Trigoso yard in the Liguria region, where 1,800 were employed before lockdown building Italy's final FREMM frigate and PPA vessels for the Italian navy, just 350 will initially return to work, a spokesman said. Of that number, 150 will be Fincantieri staff, while the remainder are maintenance, cleaning and security contractors. A similar policy is being followed at Fincantieri's Muggiano yard, also in Liguria, where 2,600 are normally employed, and where just 200 staff and 200 contractors have returned to continue work for Italy on a logistics vessel, the Vulcano and a new LHD, the Trieste; as well as a corvette for Qatar. “We hope to be back to full personnel numbers by the end of May or the start of June,” said the spokesman. In the meantime, safety precautions will be taken, including staggered entrances to the yards for staff, obligatory masks and gloves at work, temperature checks at entrances to spot fever sufferers and in-house medical staff. Each staff member will be given a packet of 20 masks per week so they can change them multiple times during each day. “We are planning buses to get staff to work so they don't have to use public transport,” said the spokesman. Similar measures will be taken at Fincantieri's other yards in Italy, which build cruise ships. During the shutdown, the firm's 8,900 staff were kept at home through use of vacation time, furloughs and home working. By contrast, Italian state defense group Leonardo did not close during the lockdown, although many staff worked from home when possible. A deal was struck with unions to introduce social distancing and cleaning at facilities in Italy, and no staff were furloughed, a spokeswoman said. Separately, the Italian government has reconfirmed Leonardo CEO Alessandro Profumo in his role after his mandate ended. The government did however appoint a new chairman, Luciano Carta, who moves from his post as director of Italy's foreign intelligence service. He replaces Gianni De Gennaro, who was head of the government department overseeing Italy's foreign and domestic intelligence services between he joined Leonardo in 2013. https://www.defensenews.com/coronavirus/2020/04/22/fincantieri-reopens-shipyards-in-italy

Goldfein said up to now no major programs have shown any signs of being "in a critical state ... at risk of cancellation" due to the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic. By THERESA HITCHENS WASHINGTON: Gen. Jay Raymond, as head of Space Command, will lead efforts to determine how to combat expected interference with GPS receivers from the future Ligado 5G wireless mobile communication network, says Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David Goldfein. “We are both very concerned about this,” Goldfein told the Defense Writers Group this morning. “The best way I've heard it described ... is, if you're in a room trying to have a quiet conversation, and in the next room you've got a 500-watt speaker blaring music. Chief Raymond and I are looking at different mitigation steps,” he added. “It's a huge challenge.” Goldfein explained that, as the SPACECOM commander, Raymond is the combatant commander charged with spectrum management so any mitigation plan would be primarily his responsibility — with Goldfein serving a support function as the service chief. However, he noted that, since Raymond is dual-hatted as chief of Space Force, the two peers “will work together closely with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to provide options” to DoD Secretary Mark Esper. Much of Goldfein's conversation with reporters this morning centered on the affects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the service and its programs, as well as his service's responses. A few weeks ago the service went through what he called a “reset to the new normal” as senior officials worked out methodologies to ensure its highest priority missions could be maintained “despite a 15 to 20 percent infection rate.”

While Tesla won't be building heavy tanks, the Army Futures & Concepts Center says moving lighter, wheeled vehicles from fossil fuel to electric drive could streamline supply lines – and save lives. By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR. WASHINGTON: In wartime, the cost of gas is often partly paid in blood. Hundreds of US troops have died and thousands have been wounded fighting to move supplies in Afghanistan and Iraq. Against an adversary with long-range missiles like Russia, the carnage among convoys would be worse. The bulkiest cargo and often the most needed (along with bullets and bombs): fuel. If you could dramatically reduce the amount of gas the US military consumes, you could reduce the logistics burden a great deal. Fewer fuel convoys on the road would save money in peacetime and lives in wartime. But how do you get there? With electric vehicles, answers Lt. Gen. Eric Wesley, head of the Futures & Concepts Center at Army Futures Command. “Tesla is building large [semitrailer] trucks,” he told reporters in a wide-ranging roundtable yesterday. “Battery costs have gone down precipitously over the last 10 years,” he said, recharge times have dropped, and ranges has grown longer. What's more, electric motors have many fewer moving parts than internal combustion ones, making them potentially easier to maintain and repair. “The entire automotive industry is migrating towards this idea of electrification,” he said. “We're already, I would argue, late to the need.” Not only do electric motors not need gas, Wesley said. They also can generate power for high-tech combat systems – sensors, command networks, even laser weapons and robots – that currently require dedicated auxiliary power units or diesel generators that burn even more fuel. Imagine a squad of soldiers recharging their jamming-resistant radios and IVAS targeting goggles in their vehicle between missions, or a mobile command post running its servers off the same truck that carried them. The Hard Part Electric motors can even help frontline forces sneak up on the enemy, he said. They run much quieter and cooler than internal combustion engines, making it much harder to hear electric vehicles approaching or spot them on infrared. The Army's cancelled Future Combat System would have included a family of hybrid-electric vehicles. Even the ambitious FCS program didn't try to build all-electric tanks. Now, Wesley isn't talking about electric tanks, just trucks. “Right now, we don't see the technology, on the near-term horizon, being able to power heavy vehicles,” he said. That's because even the latest batteries still provide less power per pound than fossil fuel. (Engineers call this “energy density”). So, for example, the replacement for the Reagan-era M2 Bradley troop carrier – likely to weigh about 50 tons — is going to need an internal combustion engine or at least a hybrid diesel-electric one. But the vast majority of Army vehicles are wheeled, from supply trucks to the JLTV, an armored 4×4 replacing many Humvees: That weight class, up to 10 or even 15 tons, can move on electrical power alone. Wesley had planned to kick off his electrification drive with a panel discussion at last month's AUSA Global Force Symposium in Huntsville, Ala. (I would've been the moderator). But that conference got canceled due to the COVID-19 coronavirus, so he's rolling it out to the press instead. His staff is working on an in-depth internal study for his boss, the four-star chief of Army Futures Command, Gen. John “Mike” Murray. There are a lot of thorny problems to work out, Wesley acknowledges. The big one: Where do you generate the electricity in the first place? In a war zone, you can't just pull into your garage and plug into a charger overnight. “We can't just go buy an electric vehicle. We have to look at the supply chains,” he said. One option the Army's considering, he said, is miniaturized, mobile nuclear power plants – something the Pentagon is now researching and says should be safe even after a direct hit. While Wesley didn't discuss other alternatives, the fallback option is presumably burning some fossil fuel to run a generator, which then charges batteries or capacitators. “We're writing a draft white paper proposal for Gen. Murray and the Army to look at this holistically,” Wesley said, “[and] we are building up a proposal that we will publish here in early summer that is going to describe a recommendation for how the Army transitions toward the future.” “My expectation is that it's about a 10-year horizon right now to do something like that which I just described,” he said. “If that's true, then we have to have a transition plan for the Army to move in this direction.” Extended excerpts from Lt. Gen. Wesley's roundtable with reporters, edited for length & clarity, follow below. He also discussed how Army units have to evolve for future multi-domain operations: more on that later this week. Q: The Army's been interested in electric vehicles and alternative fuel for some time. What's new here? A: We were going to have a panel on this to kick off [at AUSA Global Force]: a broader look at electrification and alternative fuel sources for the Army. We're writing a draft white paper proposal for Gen. Murray and the Army to look at this holistically. And we are building up a proposal that we will publish here in early summer that is going to describe a recommendation for how the Army transitions toward the future. Tesla is building large [semitrailer] trucks. UPS and FedEx are starting to buy these vehicles to learn how they move into that area. The entire automotive industry is migrating towards this idea of electrification, and there's a lot of good reasons for it. And as the entire industry goes to electrification, the supply of internal combustion engine parts is going to go down and therefore prices are going to go up. Battery costs have gone down precipitously over the last 10 years. Recharge times and range [have improved]. The trajectory that all of that is on, in the next two years, it'll be far more efficient to have an electric vehicle than internal combustion, so we're already, I would argue, late to the need. Q: What's slowed the Army down? A: The problem is bigger for the Army than it is for any corporation, industry, or family, because you have to have a means to move the energy and generate the energy at the right time and place. It's not that the Army is slow to move on this, we just have a bigger problem to solve, and I would argue that's what we have to do now. The issue is not whether we can build hybrid vehicles. That's easy. In fact, any one of us could go out and — as long as there's not a waiting list — buy a Tesla tomorrow and sell our Chevy Suburban. You plug it in at home, we've got the infrastructure. You don't have to change your supply chain or your way of life when you buy a Tesla. The Army, we can't just go buy an electric vehicle, we have to look at the supply chains. How are you going to have [electricity] sources for charging? If technology tells us that safe, mobile nuclear power plants, for example, something that goes on the back of a truck, are realistic, and if you add capacitor technology [to store the electricity], you can distribute that forward in varying ways. Q: Are we talking about electric-drive tanks here? Or just trucks? A: The Army hasn't said, we're going all-electric. Right now, we don't see the technology, on the near-term horizon, being able to power heavy vehicles, it's just too much of a drain on the battery. The Next Generation Combat Vehicle, it's still going to require you to have an internal combustion engine. But if we could reduce the fossil fuel consumption by transitioning our wheeled vehicles [to electric motors], you can reduce the volume of travel on your supply route to only [move] fossil fuels for the much heavier vehicles. Q: Could you make an electric version of something like the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle? A: The technology to power a vehicle of that weight exists today. We're talking [up to] about 10-15 tons; that technology exists now. If it exists now, you can anticipate that we're going to have to transition some of this in the next 10 years. And if that's true, then we have to have a transition plan for the Army to move in this direction. It should require a very detailed strategy and step by step pathways. It should include starting to build in hooks into our requirements [for new designs]. And then there are other experimentation efforts where we can learn about enterprise-level supply chain decisions. (Eds. note: We ask all fans of Phillip K. Dick to forgive us for the headline). https://breakingdefense.com/2020/04/do-soldiers-dream-of-electric-trucks

The service's aircraft carrier boss says the COVID economic slowdown hasn't effected building new carriers -- yet. By PAUL MCLEARY WASHINGTON: The Navy's rushed effort to retrofit its newest aircraft carrier to operate the F-35 will create a testbed for the service's other Ford carriers — which have not been built to fly the fifth generation aircraft — as the Navy juggles work on the remaining three big decks. The $11 billion USS John F. Kennedy (CVN 79) was designed and christened without the capability to fly the 5th generation fighter because of cost caps and the aircraft's infamously delayed development. Those schedule slippages forced the Navy to design and build the ships while the messy F-35 was still undergoing development. In the 2020 NDAA Congress indicated it had had it's fill of delays to the carrier and ordered the Navy to get to work refitting the Kennedy before it sets sail in 2024, forcing the Navy to improvise and refit the just-christened ship. Speaking with reporters today, Rear Adm. James Downey, head of the Navy's carrier programs, said those changes are forcing him to hold off on some early work on the forthcoming USS Enterprise (CVN 80), the third Ford-class carrier, and the USS Doris Miller (CVN 81) to ensure the Kennedy retrofits are done correctly before incorporating them on the other ships which have just started their build cycles. Downey said he's working to accelerate the integration of the F-35 on the JFK and prove out the upgrades in operational testing before doing similar work on the next Ford carrier to be built, the USS Enterprise. That way, all of the bugs will be ironed out on the JFK. The original plan to incorporate the F-35 on the four Ford-class ships was to phase the capability in after the ships were declared operational, and then to refit them as they came into port for overhaul. But Congress, frustrated that the nation's newest class of carrier couldn't operate the nation's newest fighter plane, told the Navy to speed things up. The namesake of the class, the $13.2 billion USS Gerald R. Ford, is currently acting as a training asset off the East Coast, where air wings get carrier certified as the ship continues to iron out remaining issues with its weapons elevators. Simply put, the Ford won't fly the F-35 for years to come. Those electromagnetic elevators have been one of the biggest issues plaguing the ship over the past two years, as the Navy installed them without first testing the new technology ashore, resulting in a ship that had no functioning weapons elevators. And what use is a warship without weapons? It's been slow progress to get them up and running, but the Navy recently certified that just the fifth of eleven elevators is now up and running. The working lifts have logged more than 8,000 cycles over the past several months of operational testing as the Ford acts as the Navy's East Coast training platform to certify pilots. The Ford has been operating one month at sea and one pierside for the last several months, and has launched 2,300 aircraft in that time. Downey said the Ford is keeping to its schedule, and that impending supply-chain issues the services are dealing with as the COVID-19 crisis shutters the global economy shouldn't have any near-term impact on the program overall. “We don't have any real significant concerns right now; we know where the suppliers are,” he said. “Prior to this, we had increased some of our procurements for spares and various materials so we had a pretty steady demand signal.” While the Ford class ships wait for the F-35 upgrades, the 36-year old USS Carl Vinson is undergoing a $34 million refit in Bremerton, Wash. so it can begin flying F-35s by 2021, making the veteran ship the first carrier in the Navy to fly the 5th generation aircraft even before the JFK. While both Nimitz and Ford-class aircraft carriers can operate with F-35Cs aboard, significant modifications are required for both classes to fly and sustain the aircraft for extended periods. Also, the ships will need the capability to push and fuse all the data the F-35s can generate, along with building additional classified spaces, new jet blast deflectors and other refits. Room also needs to be made for Osprey tiltrotor aircraft, which will replace the Navy's C-2A Greyhound fleet that are unable to haul the F-35's heavy engines out to the ship. The USS Enterprise is slated to deploy in 2028 and the USS Doris Miller will be ready to sail in 2032. In January, the Navy awarded Huntington Ingalls Industries' Newport News Shipbuilding a $24 billion contract for the two ships, compared to a predicted cost of $28 billion if the sea service had purchased them separately. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/04/navy-rushes-to-get-f-35s-on-uss-jfk-other-ford-carriers-will-wait

NAVY Lockheed Martin Corp., Rotary and Mission Systems, Moorestown, New Jersey, was awarded a $519,063,283 cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee undefinitized contract for the procurement of international Aegis fire control loop development, Solid State S-Band Radar Processing Group, tools and test equipment and spares for five new multi-mission frigates supporting the Aegis combat system (Baseline 9C.2). Work will be performed in Moorestown, New Jersey (72%); Verona, Wisconsin (6%); Mt. Laurel, New Jersey (5%); Ferrol, Spain (6%); Andover, Massachusetts (3%); Washington, District of Columbia (2%); Pleasanton, California (2%); Sunnyvale, California (1%); Rota, Spain (1%); Herndon, Virginia (1%); and Clearwater, Florida (1%), and is expected to be complete by April 2030. This contract involves Foreign Military Sales (FMS) to the Kingdom of Spain. FMS funding in the amount of $90,702,286 will be obligated at time of award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was not competitively procured in accordance with the authority from 10 U.S. Code 2304(c)(4) (international agreement). The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, District of Columbia, is the contracting activity (N00024-20-C-5105). (Awarded April 17, 2020) Lockheed Martin Corp., King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, is awarded an $88,988,000 cost-plus-fixed-fee, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract. This contract provides management and maintenance of the Tactical Tomahawk Weapons Control System software product baseline, required system and software documentation for the Navy and the government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Work will be performed at King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, and is expected to be complete by January 2024. No funds will be obligated at the time of award. Funds will be obligated on individual orders as they are issued. This contract was not competitively procured pursuant to Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation 6.302-1. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity (N00019-20-D-0017). Clark Construction Group LLC, Bethesda, Maryland, is awarded a $78,211,055 modification under a firm-fixed-price contract to allot the second increment which provides for the construction of the VC-25B hangar complex at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland. The total contract amount after allotting these funds will be $298,211,055. Work will be performed in Camp Springs, Maryland, and provides for the construction of a hangar complex, an aircraft access taxiway/parking apron, associated lighting, engine run-up pads and a hydrant refueling system with storage tanks. Additional requirements include, but are not limited to, site preparation, wetland/stream mitigation, storm water management, a parking lot, and a fire detection and suppression system. Work is expected to be complete by April 2022. Fiscal 2020 military construction, (Air Force) contract funds in the amount of $78,211,055 are obligated on this award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Washington, Washington, District of Columbia, is the contracting activity (N40080-19-C-0008). Pennsylvania State University, Applied Research Laboratory, Electro Optics Center, Freeport, Pennsylvania, is awarded a $50,000,000 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for the Navy Manufacturing Technology (ManTech) Electro Optics Center of Excellence (herein the center). Work will be performed in Freeport, Pennsylvania, and provides for the operation and management of the center in its mission to develop naval platform-related manufacturing technologies and transition the technology for implementation in U.S. electro optics and other industrial facilities. In addition to accomplishing the center's core mission, the contractor shall manage, operate, sustain and enhance the center's ability to function as a Navy ManTech Center of Excellence. Work is expected to be complete by April 2025. The total cumulative value of this contract is $50,000,000. Fiscal 2020 research, development, test and evaluation (Navy) funds in the amounts of $350,000 and $225,000 are obligated on two task orders at the time of award. These funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured under N00014-19-R-0003. One proposal was received in response to the solicitation. The Office of Naval Research, Arlington, Virginia, is the contracting activity (N00014-20-D-7001). Lockheed Martin Rotary and Mission Systems, Manassas, Virginia, is awarded a $41,946,591 cost-plus-incentive-fee modification to previously awarded contract N00024-13-C-5225 to exercise options for engineering services in support of the Navy's AN/SQQ-89A(V)15 Surface Ship Undersea Warfare Systems. This modification includes purchases for the Navy (54%); and the government of Japan (46%) under the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program. Work will be performed in Manassas, Virginia (83%); Lemont Furnace, Pennsylvania (10%); Syracuse, New York (6%); and Hauppauge, New York (1%). This option exercise is for Japan FMS; advanced capability build (ACB) engineering services; lab technician support; and integrated logistics support, production and engineering support of AN/SQQ-89A(V)15 Surface Ship Undersea Warfare (USW) Combat System Technical Insertion (TI)-20 systems. AN/SQQ-89A(V)15 is the Surface Ship USW combat system with the capabilities to search, detect, classify, localize and track undersea contacts and to engage and evade submarines, mine-like small objects and torpedo threats. The contract is for development, integration and production of future ACB and TI baselines of the AN/SQQ-89A(V)15 USW Systems. Work is expected to be complete by May 2021. FMS Japan; fiscal 2020 shipbuilding and conversion (Navy); 2020 research, development, test and evaluation (Navy); 2020 other procurement (Navy); 2020 operations and maintenance (Navy); 2019 shipbuilding and conversion (Navy); and 2018 shipbuilding and conversion (Navy) funding in the amount $13,153,266 will be obligated at the time of award and funding in the amount of $184,698 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, District of Columbia, is the contracting activity. Lockheed Martin Rotary and Mission Systems, Manassas, Virginia, is awarded a $33,806,558 cost-plus-incentive-fee contract modification to previously-awarded contract N00024-17-C-6259 to exercise and fund options for Navy equipment, production support, engineering services and required materials. Work will be performed in Manassas, Virginia (65%); Clearwater, Florida (32%); Syracuse, New York (2%); and Marion, Florida (1%), and is expected to be complete by August 2030. Fiscal 2019 and 2020 other procurement (Navy); and fiscal 2020 shipbuilding and conversion (Navy) funding in the amount of $33,806,558 will be obligated at time of award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, District of Columbia, is the contracting activity. ASR International Corp., doing business as ASR Management & Technical Services,* Hauppauge, New York (N64498-20-D-4001); The McHenry Management Group Inc.,* Chesapeake, Virginia (N64498-20-D-4002); EHS Technologies Corp.,* Moorestown, New Jersey (N64498-20-D-4003); NDI Engineering Co.,* Thorofare, New Jersey (N64498-20-D-4004); Advanced Internet Marketing Inc., doing business as The GBS Group,* Virginia Beach, Virginia (N64409-20-D-4016); and Transtecs Corp.,* Wichita, Kansas (N64498-20-D-4017), are each awarded $26 million – $34 million (approximately) for an indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity, cost-plus-fixed-fee contract with firm-fixed-price task order provisions for integrated logistics services to support logistics functional areas for planning, implementation and management of hull, mechanical and electrical new acquisition/construction systems. The contract awarded to ASR Management & Technical Services is not to exceed $29,400,673; the contract awarded to The McHenry Management Group is not to exceed $28,564,387; the contract awarded to EHS Technologies Corp. is not to exceed $29,583,745; the contract being awarded to NDI Engineering Company is not to exceed $28,551,630; the contract awarded to The GBS Group is not to exceed $33,757,971; and the contract awarded to Transtecs Corp. is not to exceed $34,165,405. Work will be performed in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (24%); and the remaining (76%) will be performed in Washington, District of Columbia; Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; Pascagoula, Mississippi; Norfolk, Virginia; Bath, Maine; Panama City, Florida; Slidell, Louisiana; San Diego, California; Port Hueneme, California; Keyport, Washington; Japan; and Sigonella, Sicily, Italy, as determined by individual task order awards. This requirement is to provide integrated logistics services (ILS) to support logistics functional areas for planning, implementation and management of hull, mechanical and electrical new acquisition/construction systems and initiatives. Services performed by the contractors shall include various logistics support tasks necessary for continued operational readiness of the organization. The services required include: acquisition program support; logistics program support; engineering program support; manpower, personnel and training support; planned maintenance/technical feedback support; ILS certification support; configuration support and associated analysis. Work is expected to be complete by April 2026. Fiscal 2013 and fiscal 2017 shipbuilding and conversion (Navy) funding in the amount of $60,000 ($10,000 minimum guarantee per contract) will be obligated at time of award via individual task orders and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. These contracts were competitively procured using full and open competition via the Federal Business Opportunities website, with eight offers received. The Naval Surface Warfare Center Philadelphia Division, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, is the contracting activity. Advanced Acoustic Concepts LLC, Hauppauge, New York, is awarded a $12,307,858 cost-plus-fixed-fee and firm-fixed-price modification to previously awarded contract N00024-19-C-6311 in support of the Littoral Combat Ship mission module program. The award is to build, deliver and install the three mission package computing equipment (MPCE) kits, one mission package portable control station, and one common mission package trainer for use with the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) mission modules. Additionally, the contractor will assist the Navy in the development of a new MPCE baseline. Work will be performed in Lemont Furnace, Pennsylvania (50%); Hauppauge, New York (36%); Columbia, Maryland (7%); Washington, District of Columbia (5%); and San Diego, California (2%). This contract procures the hardware and software that comprise the mission package computers, software, and trainers for the Navy's Littoral Combat Ship program, including the computing environment MPCE; hosted software (mission package operating environment); and mission package services. Work is expected to be complete by September 2021. Fiscal 2019 and fiscal 2020 other procurement (Navy); and fiscal 2020 research, development, test and evaluation funding in the amount of $12,521,155 will be obligated at time of award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, District of Columbia, is the contracting activity. Raytheon Co., Goleta, California, is awarded a $10,081,390 firm-fixed-price delivery order (N00383-20-F-BV03) under a previously awarded basic ordering agreement (N00383-17-G-BV01) for the repair of the ALE-50 towed decoy system used in support of the F/A-18 Super Hornet warfare air craft. Work will be performed in Forest, Mississippi, and is expected to be complete by October 2022, with no option periods. Fiscal 2020 working capital funds (Navy) in the full amount of $10,081,390 will be obligated at the time of award and funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. One firm was solicited for this non-competitive requirement in accordance with 10 U.S. Code 2304(c)(1) with one offer received. Naval Supply Systems Command Weapon Systems Support, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, is the contracting activity. Raytheon Missiles & Defense, Portsmouth, Rhode Island, is awarded a $7,006,525 modification to previously-awarded contract N00024-17-C-6305 to exercise options for fabrication, procurement, assembly, test and delivery of airborne mine neutralization system launch and handling system low-rate initial production units and associated engineering support services. Work will be performed in Portsmouth, Rhode Island. This action is to exercise Option Year Three for fabrication, procurement, assembly, test and delivery of two Airborne Mine Neutralization System load handling system and low rate initial production units and associated engineering support. Work is expected to be complete by December 2021. Fiscal 2020 other procurement (Navy) funding in the amount of $6,099,047 will be obligated at time of award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, District of Columbia, is the contracting activity. ARMY Ahtna Engineering Inc.,* Anchorage, Alaska (W911KB-20-D-0001); Brice Engineering LLC,* Anchorage, Alaska (W911KB-20-D-0002); Bristol Environmental Remediation Services LLC,* Anchorage, Alaska (W911KB-20-D-0003); Cape-Weston JV2 LLC,* Anchorage, Alaska (W911KB-20-D-0004); Paragon-Jacobs JV,* Anchorage, Alaska (W911KB-20-D-0005); North Wind-EA JV LLC,* Idaho Falls, Idaho (W911KB-20-D-0012); FPM Remediations Inc.,* Oneida, New York (W911KB-20-D-0013); and Bethel Environmental Solutions LLC,* Anchorage, Alaska (W911KB-20-D-0014), will compete for each order of the $140,000,000 firm-fixed-price contract for environmental remediation services at various locations in Alaska, U.S. Pacific Command and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Alaska Pacific Ocean Division areas of responsibility. Bids were solicited via the internet with 11 received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Oct. 22, 2025. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Joint Base Elmendorf Richardson, Alaska, is the contracting activity. Leidos Inc., Gaithersburg, Maryland, was awarded a $100,752,878 modification (P00021) to contract W912DY-18-F-0153 to provide enterprise-wide information management/information technology services in support of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' customers. Bids were solicited via the internet with four received. Work will be performed in Vicksburg, Mississippi, with an estimated completion date of April 25, 2021. Fiscal 2020 revolving funds in the amount of $100,752,878 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Huntsville, Alabama, is the contracting activity. S.E.A. Construction LLC,* Raymond, Washington, was awarded a $22,103,000 firm-fixed-price contract to repair damaged areas on the Humboldt North and South Jetties located near the Humboldt Bay entrance near Eureka, California. Bids were solicited via the internet with six received. Work will be performed in Eureka, California, with an estimated completion date of June 30, 2022. Fiscal 2020 civil operations and maintenance funds in the amount of $22,103,000 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco, California, is the contracting activity (W912P7-20-C-0004). Turner Construction, New York, New York, was awarded a $19,500,000 modification (PZ0001) to contract W912DS-20-C-0008 to definitize contract for New York State alternative care facilities. Work will be performed in Stony Brook, New York, with an estimated completion date of April 24, 2020. Fiscal 2020 defense emergency response funds in the amount of $19,500,000 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New York, New York, is the contracting activity. (Awarded April 21, 2020) General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems Inc., St. Petersburg, Florida, was awarded a $19,100,140 modification (P00029) to contract W52P1J-17-C0024 to procure 120mm M865A1 new production cartridges for 120mm tank training ammunition. Bids were solicited via the internet with two received. Work will be performed in St. Petersburg, Florida, with an estimated completion date of March 31, 2022. Fiscal 2019 and 2020 procurement of ammunition, Army funds in the amount of $19,100,140 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois, is the contracting activity. Haugland Energy Group LLC, Plainview, New York, was awarded a $12,950,000 modification (PZ0001) to contract W912DS-20-C-0010 to definitize letter contract for New York State alternative care facilities. Work will be performed in White Plains, New York, with an estimated completion date of April 22, 2020. Fiscal 2020 defense emergency response funds in the amount of $12,950,000 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New York, New York, is the contracting activity. (Awarded April 20, 2020) Gen-Probe Inc., Marlborough, Massachusetts, was awarded a $12,600,000 firm-fixed-price contract for COVID-19 testing kits. Bids were solicited via the internet with one received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of April 19, 2021. U.S. Army Health Readiness Contracting Office, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, is the contracting activity (W81K04-20-F-1113). (Awarded April 20, 2020) Khotol Services Corp,* Galena, Alaska, was awarded a $12,000,000 modification (P00005) to contract W911SA-17-D-2001 for sustainment, modernization and improvement projects for the 88th Army Reserve Centers throughout the Ozark Region, to include Iowa and Missouri. Bids were solicited via the internet with six received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of May 1, 2022. The 419th Contracting Support Brigade, Fort McCoy, Wisconsin, is the contracting activity. Troop Contracting Inc.,* Willowbrook, Illinois, was awarded a $12,000,000 modification (P00003) to contract W911SA-17-D-2002 for sustainment, modernization and improvement projects for the 88th Army Reserve Centers throughout the Hoosier Region, to include Indiana. Bids were solicited via the internet with two received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of May 1, 2022. The 419th Contracting Support Brigade, Fort McCoy, Wisconsin, is the contracting activity. U.S. SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND Sierra Nevada Corp., Sparks, Nevada, was awarded an $88,000,000 modification on an indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity, firm-fixed-price, cost-plus-fixed-fee, and cost reimbursable contract (H92241-19-D-0009) in support of U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) for the Degraded Visual Environment Pilotage System. This modification raises the contract ceiling to $110,000,000. Fiscal 2019 procurement funds in the amount of $5,000,000 are being obligated at the time of award. The majority of the work will be performed in Sparks, Nevada. This contract is a non-competitive award and is in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation 6.302.1. USSOCOM Headquarters, Tampa, Florida, is the contracting activity. *Small business https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contracts/Contract/Article/2161130/source/GovDelivery/

By: Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis (ret.) As Congress and the White House cope with the economic fallout of the coronavirus pandemic by passing multitrillion-dollar stimulus packages, many are already grappling with the thorny problem of how we'll eventually pay for the spike in spending. While no one ever wants to be a bill-payer, the defense industry is predictably first out of the blocks seeking immunity from any future cuts by trotting out its favorite weapon: fear. Don't be fooled by this tried-and-true tactic: The claim that any cuts to the defense budget will imperil defense is gravely mistaken. Without changes in the foreign policy we enact — and a rational reform of how we spend our defense dollars — our national security will continue to decay. First, the cold, hard economic reality: The damage done to our economy by the necessary measures federal and state governments have enacted to safeguard American lives has been breathtaking in its scope and severity. Some estimates suggest gross domestic product will contract this year by as much as 40 percent, and unemployment could balloon to 30 percent. To help stem the tide, Congress has already passed a $2 trillion stimulus package, with more yet to come. With an already massive national debt of $24 trillion, the combination of government spending and the loss of tax revenue is going to place serious pressure on future budgets for years to come. These bills will eventually have to be paid, and no area of the budget will be free from scrutiny — including defense. Though the Department of Defense should be funded to whatever level is required to ensure the ability of our armed forces to deter and, if necessary defeat any adversary that may seek to deprive our citizens of life or liberty, not all aspects of the status quo are helping keep us safe. Retired Army Lt. Gen. Thomas Spoehr recently co-wrote an article arguing that regardless of the financial strain imposed by the coronavirus stimulus bills, defense spending should be exempted. The reason, he says, is that the military today remains in a yearslong “free-fall” which “can't be fixed in a year or even four.” The last thing America's leaders should do when responding to the financial constraints imposed by the coronavirus, he concludes, is to “weaken the military.” His implications that military readiness has been in free fall because of inadequate spending and that any reduction in defense spending weakens the military are beliefs held by many — and are inaccurate for several key reasons. Clinging to forever wars might be the biggest. The DoD has to spend hundreds of billions annually to fight, maintain and prepare for subsequent deployments fighting the forever wars we've been waging for the better part of two decades. Congress has allocated more than $2 trillion in direct outlays since 9/11 to fight so-called emergency requirements of overseas contingency operations, or OCO, and we have incurred an additional $4 trillion in associated and long-term costs. For fiscal 2020 alone, we will spend upward of an additional $137 billion on these OCO wars. What is critical to understand, however, is that the perpetual continuation of these wars not only fails to improve our security — these fights negatively impact our ability to focus on and prepare for fighting adversaries that could one day pose an existential threat to us. The implications of this reality are considerable — and potential remedies can be of great help to our country. If President Donald Trump were to order an end to some or all of our unnecessary forever wars, we could instantly save more than $100 billion a year without cutting anything else in the defense budget. If we then conducted prudent and necessary reforms in how we manage research and development, procurement, and acquisition, and in shedding unnecessary or outdated expenditures, tens of billions of additional savings could be realized. Perhaps more importantly we could redirect much more focus and resources on training and professional education, which would enable the armed forces to better deter — and if necessary defeat — major opponents. Those two major changes alone would end the weakening of our military and materially contribute to strengthening its key capabilities — while lessening pressure on the federal budget. The financial pressures this coronavirus is already placing on our nation's finances is real, and its effects will be felt for years. We will have to make hard decisions in the days ahead on where we spend our limited resources. If we are wise, we can reduce how much we spend on defense while simultaneously increasing our military power. Retired U.S. Army Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis is a senior fellow for Defense Priorities. He retired from the Army in 2015 after 21 years in service that included four combat deployments. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/04/22/covid-19s-fiscal-impact-might-ironically-strengthen-national-defense/

Aaron Mehta and Valerie Insinna The U.S. Air Force is in the early stages of developing strategies to “mitigate” the damage expected to occur to Global Positioning System capabilities following the Federal Communication Commission's approval of a spectrum request by Ligado Networks, according to the service's top uniformed officer. On Wednesday, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David Goldfein said he was “very concerned about the Ligado decision,” adding those concerns are shared with Gen. Jay Raymond, the first head of the U.S. Space Force. “We as a nation, and I would offer as a [world], rely on GPS to do so much that affects far more than military operations,” Goldfein said. “This is our quality of life. This is how we run businesses. This is how we fly airplanes. This is the ATM that requires that timing signal to get money. This is the blue dot on your phone that allows you to get from point A to point B, so we have come to just rely completely on GPS.” On Monday, the FCC voted 5-0 in favor of Ligado's plan, which would allow the company to use L-band — a range of frequencies between 1 to 2 GHz, on which GPS relies in order to penetrate weather and dense vegetation. The company wants to use L-band as part of its plan to expand America's 5G capabilities, or next-generation connectivity. The Defense Department and other government agencies have opposed the proposal for almost a decade over concerns it would impact GPS. C4ISRNET first broke the news April 10 that the FCC would move forward with Ligado's request. “The best way I've heard it described — I'm a philosophy major and this works for me — if you're trying to have a quiet conversation and in the next room is a 500-watt speaker blaring music at you: That's a visual of what potentially could be the interference with this GPS signal that absolutely has got to be pristine, and the world relies on," Goldfein said. "So I am very concerned about it, and [Chief of Space Operations for the U.S. Space Force Gen. John “Jay”] Raymond and I are looking at different mitigation steps.” Goldfein didn't go into details about what those steps might entail. Later in the day, Mark Lewis, the Defense Department's director of research and engineering for modernization, said he hadn't talked with Goldfein yet on next steps, but expressed similar sentiments about the Ligado plan. “It's obviously a concern. Our ability to operate not only in space but in spectrum is critical. So I guess what I would tell you is right now we're considering what the implications will be and considering what the impacts will be,” Lewis said at an event hosted by the Mitchell Institute. It's something “we're working pretty actively,” Lewis added. Outside of the technical mitigation efforts, there may be policy efforts underway to try and block L-band use by Ligado. In an exclusive op-ed for C4ISRNET, leaders of the House and Senate Armed Services committees warned that Ligado's plan could ultimately “cost taxpayers and consumers billions of dollars and require the replacement of current GPS equipment just as we are trying to get our economy back on its feet quickly.” “We encourage the FCC to withdraw its approval of Ligado's application and take this opportunity to work with the NTIA [National Telecommunications and Information Administration] and other federal agencies, including the departments of Defense and Transportation, to find a solution that will both support commercial broadband expansion and protect national security assets. Moreover, we expect the FCC to resolve Department of Defense concerns before moving forward, as required by law,” the lawmakers wrote. “If they do not, and unless President [Donald] Trump intervenes to stop this from moving forward, it will be up to Congress to clean up this mess.” https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/2020/04/22/air-force-works-to-mitigate-ligado-deals-impact-on-gps/

Sen. Jim Inhofe, Sen. Jack Reed, Rep. Adam Smith, Rep. Mac Thornberry Right now, the coronavirus is rightly our country's most immediate concern. But the Federal Communications Commission has used the crisis, under the cover of darkness, to approve a long-stalled application by Ligado Networks — a proposal that threatens to undermine our global positioning system (GPS) capabilities, and with it, our national security. The FCC granted Ligado (formerly known as LightSquared) permission to repurpose spectrum adjacent to GPS frequencies for a terrestrial cellular network — framing this proposal as essential to “winning the race to 5G.” But what Ligado has done is conflate two different and important spectrum issues: the sharing of mid-band 5G spectrum by the Department of Defense and commercial industry, and harmful interference of Ligado's signal with the low-band GPS signals used in nearly every aspect of daily life. The result: some members of Congress, members of the administration, and the public are now confused about the real and immediate impacts of Ligado's proposal. So, we wanted to clarify things: domestic 5G development is critical to our economic competiveness against China and for our national security. The Pentagon is committed working with government and industry to share mid-band spectrum where and when it makes sense to ensure rapid roll-out of 5G. [Editor's note: C4ISRNET first broke the news that the FCC would move forward with Ligado's request on April 10.] The problem here is that Ligado's planned usage is not in the prime mid-band spectrum being considered for 5G — and it will have a significant risk of interference with GPS reception, according to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). The signals interference Ligado's plan would create could cost taxpayers and consumers billions of dollars and require the replacement of current GPS equipment just as we are trying to get our economy back on its feet quickly — and the FCC has just allowed this to happen. Think of all the ways Americans use GPS each and every day. GPS satellites provide free precise timing and navigation that powers thousands of functions: making financial transactions at our banks, keeping the lights on in our homes, traveling around the country — the list goes on and on. Studies show GPS satellites contribute at least $1 billion to our economy every single day. GPS also forms the backbone of countless military operations and applications — to get supplies to our war fighters on the battlefield, guide unmanned aircraft and vehicles, target its precision weapons, and much more. It would be practically impossible to identify and repair or replace all of the potentially adversely affected receivers. It would “needlessly imperil [Department of Defense] GPS-dependent national security capabilities,” per Secretary Esper, putting the war fighter, U.S. Space Force, military readiness, and even the defense of our homeland at risk. American families and businesses would lose coverage or be forced to use systems from our strategic competitors, China and Russia, jeopardizing our global leadership in precision timing. We're not the only ones with serious concerns. Nine federal departments and agencies have completed extensive engineering tests and analyses on Ligado's proposal; and the results are clear: Ligado's plan would interfere with millions of GPS receivers across the nation. The Departments of Defense, Commerce, Interior, Justice, Homeland Security, Energy, and Transportation — as well as NASA, the National Science Foundation, the Coast Guard and the Federal Aviation Administration — all strongly object to Ligado's plan. What kind of precedent is the FCC setting by disregarding near unanimous opposition of federal agencies to this proposal? It's not just the government, either — industry leaders representing GPS, satellite communications services, automotive companies, commercial aviation, and weather data have also voiced concerns over Ligado's proposal. We would expect that the FCC listen not just to Ligado's privately funded research, but also broad-based, in-depth research from experts in national security and other fields. This makes it all the more confusing — why is the FCC ignoring all the evidence, especially now, at the height of a global crisis? The Ligado application highlights the need to use a technical, data-driven approach to balance the use of the spectrum between war fighter requirements and commercial needs, rather than strong-arming a proposal through the process like the FCC just did. We can expect this issue to be an ongoing national security challenge. If we want to strike a responsible balance moving forward, the U.S. government must modernize the infrastructure needed to manage and share spectrum efficiently, promote policy and technology innovation, and improve the ability of military systems to operate alongside commercial systems. Considering the risks, it's clear the FCC commissioners made the wrong decision regarding Ligado's plan, which will set a disastrous precedent while impeding ongoing work on spectrum sharing. The vulnerabilities to our national and economic security are not worth the risk, particularly for a band of spectrum that isn't necessary to secure a robust 5G network. We encourage the FCC to withdraw its approval of Ligado's application and take this opportunity to work with the NTIA and other federal agencies, including the Departments of Defense and Transportation, to find a solution that will both support commercial broadband expansion and protect national security assets. Moreover, we expect the FCC to resolve Department of Defense concerns before moving forward, as required by law. If they do not, and unless President Trump intervenes to stop this from moving forward, it will be up to Congress to clean up this mess. Senator Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., is the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., is the ranking member on the Senate Armed Services Committee. Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., is the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, is the ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee. https://www.c4isrnet.com/breaking-news/2020/04/22/fcc-and-ligado-are-undermining-gps-and-with-it-our-economy-and-national-security/

By: Valerie Insinna WASHINGTON — Lockheed Martin anticipates another wave of international F-16 sales, with countries from Africa, South America and Southeast Asia among those interested in purchasing the jet, the company's chief financial officer said Tuesday. “I think this is a good fourth-generation aircraft for those customers that can't afford the F-35 or, frankly, can't at this time buy the F-35,” Lockheed CFO Kenneth Possenriede told investors during an April 21 earnings call. “It might be a good intermediary step for customers to go from the F-16 to F-35. So we see it frankly as complementary and not competing against themselves.” Unlike the F-35 program, which is seeing disruption within its supply chain that could delay future deliveries, the F-16 production line has experienced little impact as a result of the coronavirus pandemic, Possenriede said. The company moved production of the F-16 production line from Fort Worth, Texas, to Greenville, South Carolina, in 2019 to accommodate production of 16 Block 70 aircraft for Bahrain. Since Bahrain's order in 2018, Lockheed has garnered contracts for eight F-16s for Bulgaria, 14 aircraft for Slovakia, and is working with the U.S. government on a sale of 66 jets for Taiwan. “We also have a couple of orders for F-16 that we're working to try to shape,” Possenriede said. “There is an African country that is interested in F-16, so we're hopeful that will happen. [There is also a] South American country, and then there are some Southeast Asian countries that are interested in F-16 as well.” Possenriede didn't detail which nations were considering purchases of the F-16, as defense companies typically wait until international militaries publicly declare their interest in a sale before talking about specific customers. Richard Aboulafia, an aerospace analyst with the Teal Group, said there's a “pretty good chance” that some of those orders materialize. “Lockheed was doing a disservice by forgetting the F-16 program for so many years. They had this idea that the future was F-35 and nothing but F-35, ignoring the part of the market that is not prepared to buy the F-35 price tag,” he said. “It's actually a really good franchise with a really solid core market. It seems ill-advised to neglect it.” If a new customer in Africa is looking to buy F-16s, it could be Botswana, which has indicated an interest in buying fighter jets, Aboulafia said. Lockheed has already sold F-16s to Morocco and Egypt, and the U.S. State Department in 2019 cleared Morocco for new F-16s and upgrades. In South America, Lockheed has been trying to sell F-16s to Argentina for years, but Aboulafia believes a second order for Chile is a more likely prospect. In Southeast Asia, a sale to Indonesia “would seem to be one of the most likely possibilities,” he added. https://www.defensenews.com/global/mideast-africa/2020/04/22/lockheed-looking-to-sell-additional-f-16s-to-customers-in-africa-south-america/