Nouvelles

La Libre Eco avec Belga Publié le 17-07-20 à 10h59 - Mis à jour le 17-07-20 à 11h00 Le groupe chimique belge Solvay et l'américain Lockheed Martin ont annoncé vendredi la conclusion d'un accord permettant la sélection de projets d'innovation des universités belges dans le secteur aéronautique, une initiative qui fait suite au choix de l'avion de combat F-35 Lightning II américain par le gouvernement belge. Solvay et Lockheed Martin, ainsi que sept entreprises belges (Asco, Coexpair, Feronyl, SABCA, Safran Aeroboosters, Sonaca et Thales Belgium) ont démarré la procédure de sélection dans le cadre de l'+Innovative Growth University Challenge+ ces 1er et 2 juillet. Soutenus par le gouvernement belge, les projets de l'"University Challenge" s'inscrivent dans une stratégie de renforcement des pôles de défense, d'industrie et de technologie de la Belgique, ont précisé Solvay et Lockheed dans un communiqué conjoint. En tout, plus de vingt projets ont été présentés par sept universités belges, reconnues pour leur expertise de haut niveau dans les matériaux avancés, répondant à l'objectif du "Challenge" qui vise à découvrir ou faire émerger la future génération de composites de l'industrie aéronautique belge. Solvay, Lockheed Martin et les sept autres sociétés feront leur sélection finale d'ici la fin août. Les projets concernent cinq domaines suivants: les matériaux composites de nouvelle génération, la diminution des coûts de production gr'ce aux technologies hors autoclave, le collage de métaux et composites, l'intégration des fonctions et simplification des assemblages et les techniques de réparation des composites. Les projets prévoient la participation d'un ou plusieurs membres des neuf entreprises impliquées pour assister le développement de produits de haute technologie pour le secteur aérospatial, souligne le communiqué. Solvay, Lockheed Martin et les sept autres sociétés avaient signé l'an dernier un accord-cadre visant à développer l'+University Challenge+ et stimuler la recherche et développement dans le secteur aéronautique. Cette initiative s'inscrit dans le cadre de l'accord entre les gouvernements américain et belge pour l'achat de 34 avions de combat F-35 de Lockheed Martin en remplacement des F-16 vieillissants. Selon ses promoteurs, les projets de l'"University Challenge" constituent une "opportunité unique" pour soutenir la recherche et l'innovation aéronautique en Belgique. https://www.lalibre.be/economie/entreprises-startup/f-35-solvay-et-lockheed-promeuvent-l-innovation-universitaire-dans-le-secteur-aeronautique-5f1167e7d8ad58621946a3bb

By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — The U.S. Army on Friday issued a draft request for proposals for the preliminary design phase of its delayed optionally manned fighting vehicle, or OMFV, the first major step in a relaunched competition to replace the Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle. The preliminary phase will be open for 40 days, with the goal of gathering industry feedback ahead of the final RFP, which will come later this year. That final RFP will award of up to five design contracts in June 2021, setting the next stage in the competition. “As we continue to progress through the first phase of our five-phased approach for the OMFV program, communication, inclusive feedback and innovative thinking from industry remains key,” Maj. Gen. Brian Cummings, the Army's program executive officer for ground combat systems, said in a statement. “We are looking forward to receiving feedback and learning from industry what's in the realm of the possible as we continue to develop this truly transformational vehicle for our Soldiers.” Added Brig. Gen. Ross Coffman, director of the Next Generation Combat Vehicles Cross-Functional Team: “Accurately defining the desired set of capabilities without over-constraining the design is critically important. “The Army is committed to open communication with industry to ensure the characteristics and eventual requirements of the OMFV are informed by technological advances.” The focus on gathering industry feedback should not be a surprise, given the recent history of the program. When the OMFV program was conceived, the Army planned to hold a prototyping competition, selecting two winning teams to build prototypes with a downselect to one at the end of an evaluation period. But in October, the Army ended up with only one bidder in the OMFV competition — General Dynamics Land Systems — after other competitors dropped out, citing requirements and schedule concerns. As a result, the Army in January announced it would be relaunching the program to ensure more competition going forward — a decision that led to service leaders taking heat from Congress during testimony in March. OMFV is the first large acquisition effort to come out of Army Futures Command. The draft RFP, posted on a government contracting website Friday, drives home the point by stating: “To permit industry design freedom and promote innovation, the Army has avoided quantifying or prescribing critical levels of performance wherever possible.” “We do not want to box industry into a solution,” Cummings said. “We want to incentivize industry as they lean forward and think creatively to bring the Army innovative technologies and solutions necessary to achieve our vision — both in terms of the ability to integrate newer technology we are seeing today and leaving space for future growth on the OMFV platform.” https://www.defensenews.com/land/2020/07/17/army-drops-draft-rfp-for-bradley-replacement/

By: Sebastian Sprenger   COLOGNE, Germany — The German government continued another round of talks with vendors Lockheed Martin and MBDA this week about a contract for the TLVS missile defense system. The ongoing negotiations suggest there is still no common ground on the legal framework for costs and risks associated with the next-generation program. Berlin had asked the contractors in early May to submit a revised bid, the third attempt to nail down a replacement for the country's aging Patriot fleet. For its part, the Defence Ministry is still expecting a formal offer later this summer, a spokeswoman told Defense News on Friday. Hiccups lie mostly within the industry team, specifically relating to how and if the U.S. defense giant Lockheed can bend to Berlin's demands that the contractors absorb the majority of risk if problems come up in the program. German officials have so stretched the scope of desired capabilities of the former Medium Extended Air Defense System — the basis for TLVS — that the effort amounts to a new development, including a ramp for integrating defenses against hypersonic missiles. Those high-tech aspirations come packaged in Germany's new defense acquisition process that seeks to right past procurement failures by pushing more liability to companies. The ongoing negotiations come with the understanding that the new offer, if Lockheed decides to go forward sometime next month, equates to a contract-ready agreement that would be presented to lawmakers after the summer break. Next year is an election year in Germany, which means there's little appetite to push big-ticket acquisitions come January. A lot hangs on the TLVS program for Lockheed, as German defense leaders last year connected its outcome to the competition for a new heavy-lift helicopter fleet. Lockheed's subsidiary Sikorsky is offering the CH-53K for that race, going against Boeing's CH-47 Chinook. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/07/17/its-do-or-die-for-germanys-new-missile-defense-weapon/

Nathan Strout Starting in 1961, the National Reconnaissance Office has been tasked with designing, building, launching and operating the United States' fleet of intelligence satellites. Over the years, that mission has evolved, bolting on new components and missions. Now in 2020, the NRO is looking to change once again, moving beyond the status quo by issuing a new set of contracts toward the end of this year that will reshape the intelligence community's relationship with commercial imagery. Peter Muend, the head of NRO's commercial imagery efforts, told C4ISRNET that the agency is “obviously very committed to utilizing commercial imagery to the maximum extent practical in support of defense, national security and all the other mission areas that we serve.” “I think the best philosophy that underpins that is one that says ‘We really are looking to buy everywhere we can and only build what we have to—what's really not available on the commercial market,‘” Muend said. An important condition to that approach is that the commercial imagery market actually have commercial support. In other words, Muend doesn't want any of these companies to exist solely to support government requirements. There should be a real commercial market for these capabilities, which will help drive down costs for the government. To understand the agency's approach to commercial imagery, it's best to go back to 2017, when the NRO took over the role of acquiring commercial satellite imagery on behalf of the intelligence community from the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency. Under this new paradigm, NGA serves as the geospatial intelligence (GEOINT) functional manager, determining what imagery the intelligence community needs and writing those requirements, but it's up to NRO to determine how those requirements are filled. Then in 2018, another step occurred when the NGA's EnhancedView contract was transferred to NRO, which issued a follow-on contract to Maxar shortly thereafter. That single EnhancedView contract has been one of the primary source of commercial imagery for the intelligence community for years. The goal now is to start the move beyond EnhancedView. That process started in 2019, when the NRO issued a request for information (RFI) to see what types, quality and quantity of imagery industry could provide. For Muend, that RFI sent a message to industry: the intelligence community was looking to the commercial sector for imagery that went beyond the requirements, capacity and capability the government had sought in the past. That RFI initially led to a trio of study contracts for Maxar, BlackSky and Planet. “Really, the purpose of those study contracts was to serve a couple purposes, one being to take a look at their systems and really understand their performance from a modeling and simulation standpoint to really see what they can do and how they would measure up and meet our capability,” said Muend. “The other part was really to assess imagery, because of course a lot of the input we got back from the RFI emphasized the quality of the imagery and how much they could deliver. It's one thing to get an RFI response. It's another thing to actually formally assess and measure.” In the year since those first study contracts were issued, the agency has issued a handful of other study contracts, primarily to companies offering different phenomenologies than electro-optical imagery, including synthetic aperture radar and radio frequency sensing. Muend clarified that those study contracts were less focused on purchasing data from those phenomenologies and more focused on ensuring the agency's systems could interface with those phenomenologies. “We certainly see a very vibrant future ahead for those phenomenologies. We're excited for them to continue to mature and we're certainly looking forward to taking advantage of them in the future,” said Muend. “But again, the specific contracts we're moving forward with toward the end of the year are more focused on the electro-optical side.” Back on that electro-optical side of things, the study contracts have been mutually beneficial, said Muend. Not only has NRO learned what capabilities are available commercially and how they can be incorporated, the vendors have gotten a better understanding of what the agency is looking for. “And then on the imagery side, we've certainly learned a lot — certainly some of the differences between what the glossy advertising sheets say and then what's really available when looked at analytically in the way that we and the larger community do,” said Muend. When pressed on that point, Muend declined to characterize whether any company had failed to live up to or superseded its claims. All of those efforts are leading up to source selection and contract awards toward the end of the year. Muend noted that there were likely to be awards to multiple companies and those contracts will specifically pertain to electo-optical imagery. “One thing that we have seen out of our study contracts and our market research is that no single provider can currently meet what we're asking for out of our requirements. So it is going to be an aggregate of capability from multiple vendors, and in addition it's going to be something that they're going to have to grow into over time, that they expand their capabilities to meet our needs,” he explained. As a precursor to that decision, NRO issued an RFI in June to help the agency standardize end user license agreements for imagery. Those agreements govern how the agency is able to use and share the imagery it collects, explained Muend. As NRO prepares to begin purchasing imagery from multiple companies, it wants to make sure those agreements are clear, intuitive and broadly uniform. “We're very, very excited about the future, about establishing a new set of operational imagery contracts to not only take advantage of our current industry base, but the growing new entrants and new providers as well,” said Muend. “We're eager to get moving.” https://www.c4isrnet.com/intel-geoint/2020/07/17/how-the-intelligence-community-is-approaching-commercial-imagery/

Lt. Col. Brett Lindberg and Jan Kallberg There is always something taken away when there are added functionalities. Does the concept of wearing augmented reality that digitally provides situational awareness create an upside that outweighs what it takes away for rifleman skills? The supercharged hearing, six senses for those equipped, broader view of sight, picking up smells, changes in lights and shadows, slightest change in the near environment: With all these close-action skills, will augmented reality create more distraction than enhancement? Is it too early to push digital situational awareness all the way down to the soldier in maneuver units? Is the upside present? Naturally, all new defense technology takes time to find its place in the fight. The helicopter was invented in the 1930s, and it found a limited military role in the Korean War, not meeting the military expectation of higher impact. But 15 years later, it played a pivotal role in the war in Vietnam. New technology is not only technology — the human component to properly implement it is likely slower than the technological advancements. It is always easier to question than explain, and we understand that many thoughts and thousands of work hours have gone into designing the early augmented reality systems. However, still we find our questions worth discussing because once fielded, utilized and put into action in a conflict, it is too late to raise any concerns. This is the time to discuss. How reliable are the sensors? Can the sensors be easily spoofed? Is it too early to push it all the way down to the individual soldier? A technologically advanced adversary will likely devote research already in peacetime to develop one-time use, tossable, simple, low-cost devices that can — in close combat — create spurious sensor data and derail augmented reality. If the integrity of the sensor data is in question, it will likely force commanders to refrain from using augmented reality. A similar, relevant issue is the extent of the augmented reality technology's electromagnetic signature. Will the interconnectivity of the squad's augmented reality compromise the unit and deliver information to the enemy? What we do not want to face is a situation where adversaries can pinpoint the location or proximity to U.S. forces by simple detection measures. So, worst-case scenario, inexpensive devices can nullify a significant U.S. investment in technology, training and tactics. Added to the loss of usable augmented reality equipment, the soldiers could be “HUD-crippled.” Navy aviators use the term “HUD-cripple” to visualize a complete dependency of heads-up displays in the cockpit. The “HUD-cripple” is the loss of traditional Navy aviator skills such as landing on an aircraft carrier without the heads-up display. Will soldiers have retained the skills to fight effectively without augmented reality if it goes down? Technical advancements bring us new options and abilities, and they increase mission success. But as with all uncharted territory, they also bring surprises and unanticipated outfalls. During the war in Vietnam in the 1960s and 1970s, military aviation instruments took a significant leap forward, going from World War II-styled gauges in fixed-winged Douglas A-1 Skyraider planes to an earlier version of today's instrumentation in McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle fighter jets rolled out as the war in Vietnam came to an end. Parallel with the military advancements, these avionic upgrades were transposed into civilian cockpits with increased complexity and variations, as jetliners are multi-engine airframes, where the number of information points and alarms became numerous in the jetliner cockpit. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, civilian aviation faced several accidents that were hard to explain with standard aviation physics and crash evidence. Instead, the conversations recorded in the black boxes revealed these fatal air crashes. Several of the deadly crashes could have had another outcome if the pilots had not become overwhelmed by all the blinking lights, alarms, buzzers and avionics grabbing their attention, so the pilots lost situational awareness and focus. The warnings, avionics and buzzers had the correct information, but the presentation was a tsunami of red blinkers and alarming sounds, lacking any hints on how to prioritize what needs to be done to recover from a dangerous in-flight emergency. In our view, the key to effective augmented reality is to structure and segment what matters and when. Units — and it varies from soldier to soldier — have different experience levels, so information has a variation in value down to the soldier level. In research design, you seek to explain as much as you can with as little as you can without losing rigor. The same challenge goes for augmented reality, where rigor could be said to be the integrity of the information. Transferred to the ground-fighting world, are we, as an engineering-driven nation, so technology-happy that instead of creating tools for increased survivability and mission success, we initially increase the risks for the war fighter and only correct these after we suffered a surprise in combat? We understand that implementing augmented reality is a long process that is just now at the stage of proving the concept; with setbacks and successes, where are we on the learning curve? In our view, synthetic learning environments have already matured and provide an ample opportunity to use the augmented reality technology with a high return on investment. The opportunities reside in knowledge transfer, sharing experiences, preparing for an ever-changing operational environment, and by doing so, increasing soldiers' survivability and ensuring mission success. The question is: Are we ready to rely on augmented reality in combat? Lt. Col. Brett Lindberg is a research scientist at the Army Cyber Institute at West Point and a simulation operations officer. Jan Kallberg is a research scientist at the Army Cyber Institute at West Point, and an assistant professor at the U.S. Military Academy. The views expressed are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Army Cyber Institute at West Point, the U.S. Military Academy or the U.S. Defense Department. https://www.c4isrnet.com/opinion/2020/07/17/augmented-reality-seeing-the-benefits-is-believing/

By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — The Pentagon's top weapons acquisition official on Thursday called for another review of what defense technology is export-restricted, in an attempt to ensure the United States remains a defense technology provider of choice for other nations. Speaking at an event hosted by the Reagan Foundation, Ellen Lord said she has in recent months become “passionate” about revisiting export controls. “In the next six months, I very much hope to open the envelope, particularly on some of the weapons technology that we can export,” Lord said. “I am concerned that sometimes we are losing international competitions, because we have — as we have increased our capability, we have not increased the capabilities that we export in a commensurate fashion,” she added. “And we sometimes are having some of our potential customers, typically in the Mideast turn to Russia or China — you see the same thing in India, for instance.” Export control reform is hardly a new issue. In 2018, the Trump administration unveiled new defense export policies that it said should increase sales of U.S. weapons abroad; during the rollout, officials used some of the same phrasing about the need to think “strategically” as Lord did on Thursday. And in a process that started under the Obama administration and continued into the Trump administration, the U.S. State Department reviewed the 21 categories on the U.S. Munitions List, moving thousands of pieces of technology into categories that allow for straight commercial sales without a government review. Many of those technologies that were reviewed are systems that are no longer unique to America, or are so prevalent in commercial systems that to restrict them would be to harm broad swathes of American industry. But Lord's comments indicated that she feels not enough has been done in the realm of making it easier to export defense items. “We are having a very focused discussion on: Let's rethink this from a strategic point of view” she said. “A lot of this technology — frankly, the magic sauce is in the manufacturing of it, the technical data package doesn't always give it to you. So obviously we have to make sure we're very careful not to have things that could be disassembled and understood and so forth.” Lord also noted a desire to “beef up” the National Technology and Industrial Base, or NTIB, which currently covers Canada, the United Kingdom and Australia. Countries in the NTIB are considered part of the American defense industrial base, making it easier to collaborate on materiel. The U.S. remains the largest arms exporter in the world. Per data from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, America represented about 35 percent of all arms exports from 2015-2019; Russia, at 18 percent, was a distant second. https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2020/07/16/lord-hopes-to-loosen-weapon-export-restrictions-in-next-six-months/

AIR FORCE Lockheed Martin Corp., Marietta, Georgia, has been awarded a $15,000,000,000 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for C-130J development, integration, retrofit and production activities for all C-130J variants. This contract provides flexibility to accommodate the broad enterprise of activities associated with the C-130J program. Work will be performed in Marietta, Georgia, and is expected to be completed July 16, 2030. This contract involves Foreign Military Sales and is the result of a sole-source acquisition. Fiscal 2018 and 2019 aircraft procurement funds in the amount of $3,300,000 are being obligated at the time of award. Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Wright‐Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, is the primary contracting activity (FA8625‐20‐D‐3000). Leidos Inc., Arlington, Virginia, has been awarded a ceiling $30,000,000 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for high speed attack munitions research. The first task order will be for a $341,500 award under task order FA8651-20-F-1011. The five-year contract will support research and development, advancing state of the art in weapons airframe research to explore the impacts of complex flight environments on advanced weapon systems. Work will be performed at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, and is expected to be completed August 2021 for the initial task order. Fiscal 2020 research, development, test and evaluation funds in the amount of $325,000 are being obligated at the time of award. Air Force Research Laboratory, Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, is the contracting activity (FA8651-20-D-0011). DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY Stryker Corp., doing business as Stryker Endoscopy, San Jose, California, has been awarded a maximum $225,000,000 fixed-price with economic-price-adjustment, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for patient monitoring and capital equipment systems and accessories. This was a competitive acquisition with 52 offers received. This is a five-year base contract with one five-year option period. Location of performance is California, with a July 16, 2025, ordering period end date. Using customers are Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and federal civilian agencies. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2020 through 2025 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (SPE2D1-20-D-0011). Stonewin LLC, Miami, Florida, has been awarded a minimum $7,775,696 modification (P00001) to a 54-month contract (SPE605-20-D-4522) with a six-month option period to increase funds for various types of fuel. This is a fixed-price with economic-price-adjustment contract under solicitation SPE605-20-R-0200. This modification increases the contract ceiling from $2,700,575 to $10,476,271. Locations of performance are Arizona, California, Florida, Nevada and Utah, with a Sept. 30, 2024, performance completion date. Using customers are Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and federal civilian agencies. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2020 through 2024 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Energy, Fort Belvoir, Virginia. U.S. SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND Collins Aerospace Inc., Cedar Rapids, Iowa, was awarded a $126,000,000 maximum indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity, firm-fixed-price, cost-plus-fixed-fee and cost-reimbursable contract (H92241-20-D-0002) in support of U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) for continued research, development, production and sustainment of the common avionics architecture system, avionics management system and cockpit management system used on Army special operations aircraft. Fiscal 2020 operations and maintenance funds in the amount of $346,082 were obligated at the time of award. The majority of the work will be performed in Cedar Rapids. The contract is a non-competitive award and is in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation 6.302.1. USSOCOM, Tampa, Florida, is the contracting activity. NAVY Raytheon Missiles and Defense, Marlborough, Massachusetts, is awarded a $125,881,928 fixed-price, incentive fee modification to previously awarded contract N00024-16-C-5370 to exercise options for the Enterprise Air Surveillance Radar (EASR) low rate initial production (LRIP). Work will be performed in Marlborough, Massachusetts (76%); Andover, Massachusetts (18%); Sudbury, Massachusetts (5%); and Portsmouth, Rhode Island (1%). This option exercise is for the production of six EASR LRIP units; four AN/SPY-6(V)2 (air and missile defense radar) EASR rotator LRIP units; and two AN/SPY-6(V)3 EASR fixed-faced LRIP units. The AN/SPY-6(V)2 EASR rotator LRIP units will be deployed on the USS Bougainville (LHA-8); USS John C. Stennis (CVN-74); USS Richard M. McCool Jr. (LPD-29); and USS Harrisburg (LPD-30). The AN/SPY-6(V)3 EASR fixed-faced LRIP units will be deployed on USS John F. Kennedy (CVN-79); and USS Brooke (FFG-1). Work is expected to be completed by January 2023. Fiscal 2017, 2018 and 2020 shipbuilding and conversion (Navy) funding in the amount of $122,301,170 will be obligated at time of award. Funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, D.C., is the contracting activity. Lockheed Martin Corp., Fort Worth, Texas, is awarded a $935,530,602 contract, which consists of an $895,531,143 not-to-exceed cost-plus-incentive-fee, cost-plus-fixed-fee, fixed-price-incentive-firm, firm-fixed-price undefinitized line item; and a $39,999,459 cost-plus-incentive-fee definitized line item. The undefinitized line items procure support equipment, autonomic logistics information system hardware, training systems, site activations and integrated contractor support for the F-35 Lightning II. Additionally, definitized line items on this contract support tasking that will result in improvements to the reliability, availability, maintainability and total ownership cost of the F-35 Lightning II for the Air Force, Marine Corps, Navy, non-Department of Defense (DOD) participants and Foreign Military Sales (FMS) customers. Work will be performed in Orlando, Florida (76%); Fort Worth, Texas (10%); Redondo Beach, California (9%); Owego, New York (4%); and Samlesbury, United Kingdom (1%), and is expected to be completed by March 2026. Fiscal 2020 aircraft procurement (Navy) funds in the amount of $205,656,772; fiscal 2020 aircraft procurement (Air Force) funds in the amount of $153,835,313; non-DOD participant funds in the amount of 279,748,427; and FMS funds in the amount of $62,479,903 will be obligated at time of award. No funds will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity (N00019-20-C-0032). ARMY Bryan 77 Construction JV, Colorado Springs, Colorado (W912GB-20-D-0004); Framaco International Inc., Rye Brook, New York (W912GB-20-D-0005); Sociedad Espanola De Montajes Industriales SA, Madrid, Spain (W912GB-20-D-0006); Serka Taahhut Insaat Anonim Sirketi, Istanbul, Turkey (W912GB-20-D-0007); SKE SRL, Vicenza, Italy (W912GB-20-D-0008); and Zafer Taahhut Insaat Ve Ticaret Anonim Sirketi, Ankara, Turkey (W912GB-20-D-0009), will compete for each order of the $49,950,000 firm-fixed-price contract to provide design-build and design-bid-build construction services in Bulgaria and North Macedonia. Bids were solicited via the internet with 12 received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of July 16, 2025. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wiesbaden, Germany, is the contracting activity. South Dade Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Inc.,* Homestead, Florida, was awarded a $49,877,832 firm-fixed-price contract to provide all plant, labor, materials and equipment to provide road repair and paving in support of Fort Stewart and Hunter Army Airfield, Georgia. Bids were solicited via the internet with nine received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of July 19, 2023. U.S. Army 419th Contracting Support Brigade, Fort Stewart, Georgia, is the contracting activity (W9124M-20-D-0007). Savi Technology Inc.,* Alexandria, Virginia, was awarded a $45,805,123 firm-fixed-price contract for active radio frequency identification transponder tags to track equipment worldwide. 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 July 16, 2024. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois, is the contracting activity (W52P1J-20-D-0034). Hughes Construction Services LLC,* Ozark, Alabama, was awarded a $45,000,000 firm-fixed-price contract for rapid-response temporary roofing projects in the continental U.S. coastal regions in the event of an emergency. Bids were solicited via the internet with 16 received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of May 31, 2027. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha, Nebraska, is the contracting activity (W9128F-20-D-0037). General Dynamic Land Systems Inc., Sterling Heights, Michigan, was awarded a $44,415,556 modification (PZ0003) to contract W56HZV-20-F-0060 to procure improved fire control electronics units in support of the Abrams expedited active protection system-trophy. Work will be performed in Tallahassee, Florida, with an estimated completion date of Oct. 1, 2022. Fiscal 2020 weapons and tracked combat vehicles procurement (Army) funds in the amount of $44,415,556 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Detroit Arsenal, Michigan, is the contracting activity. Southwest Valley Constructors, Albuquerque, New Mexico, was awarded a $22,303,760 modification (P00015) to contract W912PL-19-C-0015 to modify existing barrier wall electrical attributes, closed circuit television, linear ground detection system and shelters. Work will be performed in Lukeville, Arizona, with an estimated completion date of Sept. 7, 2021. Fiscal 2020 operations and maintenance (Army) funds in the amount of $22,303,760 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Phoenix, Arizona, is the contracting activity. ESI Contracting Corp.,* Kansas City, Missouri, was awarded an $11,662,196 firm-fixed-price contract for Missouri River levee system repair. Bids were solicited via the internet with two received. Work will be performed in Brunswick, Missouri, with an estimated completion date of Feb. 1, 2022. Fiscal 2020 civil flood control and coastal emergencies funds in the amount of $11,662,196 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Kansas City, Missouri, is the contracting activity (W912DQ-20-C-1087). Great Lakes Dredge and Dock Co. LLC,* Oak Brook, Illinois, was awarded an $8,841,345 firm-fixed-price contract for maintenance dredging of the inland waterway C&D Canal federal navigation project. Bids were solicited via the internet with two received. Work will be performed in Chesapeake City, Maryland, with an estimated completion date of Jan. 29, 2021. Fiscal 2020 civil operations and maintenance funds in the amount of $8,841,345 were obligated at the time of the award. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, is the contracting activity (W912BU-20-C-0031). DEFENSE ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY Lockheed Martin Corp., Rotary and Mission Systems, Riviera Beach, Florida, has been awarded an $11,196,098 cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to support a Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency program. Fiscal 2020 research and development funds in the amount of $5,600,000 are being obligated at the time of award with an estimated completion date of September 2021. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Arlington, Virginia, is the contracting activity (HR0011-20-C-0139). Lockheed Martin Corp., Missiles and Fire Control, Grand Prairie, Texas, was awarded a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to support the Operational Fires Integrated Weapon System Phase 3 program. This modification exercises the Contract Line Item Number 0005 option (valued at $7,451,558) for the development, building, integration, assembly, testing and checkout of the propulsion components for the Stage 2 section of the missile. Fiscal 2020 research and development funds in the amount of $1,000,000 are being obligated at the time of award. Work will be performed in Camden, Arkansas (50%); Huntsville, Alabama (45%); and Orange, Virginia (5%), with an estimated completion date of January 2022. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Arlington, Virginia, is the contracting activity (HR0011-20-C-0038). (Awarded Jan. 10, 2020) *Small Business https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Contracts/Contract/Article/2278883/source/GovDelivery/

"We were in a very frenzied state," Air Force acquisition head Will Roper says of DoD efforts to stave off the collapse of key suppliers during the early weeks of the coronavirus crisis. By THERESA HITCHENSon July 17, 2020 at 4:38 PM WASHINGTON: Air Force acquisition head Will Roper says DoD needs to develop a new supply chain strategy that incentivizes industry to build a more diverse, responsive and resilient supply chain. “What I hope sticks on the other side of COVID-19 is a strategic focus on the supply chain,” he told a webinar co-sponsored by Government Matters and the Farnborough International Association today, on the even of the virtual air show. “Government has to have a strategy. We have to explain to industry what we consider good supply chain management practices to be, and not to be. And we need to write that in plain English, which the government has a tough time doing frequently.” That strategy also has to be followed up with incentives for industry to do the right thing, he said. “We have to put our money where our mouth is,” Roper said. For example, he said, it should include incentivizing contractors, big and small, to use digital manufacturing technologies that allow companies to quickly pivot to different missions in times of need. “That's a strategic capability for the nation. We need to encourage that,” he said. Roper noted that the Air Force is attempting to do just that with its centerpiece Advanced Battle Management Program (ABMS), being designed as a technology foundation for running future all-domain wars via the Joint All-Domain Command and Control System (JADC2). “We've got a pretty cool program called the Advanced Battle Management System. It's not a cool name — it's kind of like Castle Anthrax in Monty Python: ‘it's not a good name but it's the one we've got',” he joked. “That's a program where adaptability is king.” He explained that the service is working with industry to both explain, and reward, technology initiatives that will give operators the ability to rapidly upgrade or switch out old capabilities for new ones. As Breaking D readers knows, ABMS is attempting to iterate technologies developed under the program on a four-month cycle. Roper said the first three weeks of the COVID-19 crisis threw DoD into a maelstrom as acquisition authorities tried to cope with the potential of supplier collapse. “We were in a very frenzied state,” he said. The Air Force is the executive agent for all DoD use of Defense Production Act Title III contracts to support industry suffering from the coronavirus pandemic. However, the Defense Industrial Base Sector Coordinating Council under the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) actually chooses which companies to support based on service requests — including for the Air Force. While Roper sees ongoing problems from COVID-19 impacts on suppliers, especially small firms for whom cash-flow is highly important, he said that the Air Force and DoD are in a much better place now to handle them as they arise. “I don't think we'll see something as frenzied as what we went through during the first three weeks of COVID,” he said. “I think if this continues in future, we will have to take aggressive actions when there are hotspots that fire up in the country. Smaller companies are always going to be at risk by a few number of COVID-19 cases — they're going to have to shut down their facilities, they're going to have to clean, they're gonna have to be work force quarantining — and for companies of that size, having cash on hand to make payroll, to make invoicing, is critically important. Cash flow and liquidity is everything during a crisis. But we're more ready for that.” This is in part because leaders have a better grasp on what companies are likely to be at risk, Roper explained. “Now, we know who those critical suppliers are we have insight into our supply chain that we have ever had,” he said. For example, the small launch industry is one sector that Roper continues to keep a close eye on. “Small launch is still a big need for our industrial base for the Space Force and we want to try to try to do whatever we can to keep that market healthy,” he told reporters on July 14. Roper expressed some disappointment about OSD's July 1 decision to rescind a June-announced award of $116 million for six small launch companies: Aevum, Astra, X-Bow, Rocket Lab, Space Vector and VOX Space. He explained that OSD determined there “were some additional small business needs” that came up, because the small launch package was one of the last DPA approved actions, it was “the first to be put back in the batter's box.” “My hope is that whenever there's new Title III funding, or when resources free up due to other efforts not executing as planned, that those are the first to go back into the hopper. If I were asked today to put in one new Title III initiative, it's small launch,” he added. As Paul reported, Pentagon acquisition chief Ellen Lord on June 22 said she is seeking approval for a funding package request in the “lower double digit billions” from the White House to cover COVID-19 related costs, including paying for industry claims of supply chain and workforce reductions. And a group of CEOs from major defense primes, in a letter obtained by Breaking D, are asking for DoD help in seeking yet more COVID-19 stimulus funds from Congress. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/07/dod-needs-supply-chain-strategy-to-survive-future-crises-roper

The draft RFP for the Bradley replacement, out today, also opens the possibility for a government design team to compete with private industry. By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR.on July 17, 2020 at 1:51 PM WASHINGTON: The Army is giving industry a lot of freedom in their designs for its future armored troop transport, letting them pick the gun, weight, number of passengers and more. But there's one big exception. While the current M2 Bradley has three crew members – commander, gunner, and driver – a draft Request For Proposals released today says that its future replacement, the OMFV, must be able to fight with two. Fewer humans means more automation. It's an ambitious goal, especially for a program the Army already had to reboot and start over once. The other fascinating wrinkle in the RFP is that the Army reserves the right to form its own design team and let it compete against the private-sector contractors. This government design team would be independent of any Army command to avoid conflicts of interest. If the Army does submit its own design, that would be a major departure from longstanding Pentagon practice. But the Army has invested heavily in technologies from 50mm cannon to automated targeting algorithms to engines, so it's not impossible for a government team to put all that government intellectual property together into a complete design. The Army has embraced automation from the beginning of the Bradley replacement program, and that's been consistent before and after January's decision to reboot. OMFV's very name, Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle, refers to the service's desire to have the option to operate the vehicle, in some situations, by remote control – eventually. But an unmanned mode remains an aspiration for future upgrades, not a hard-and-fast requirement for the initial version of the vehicle scheduled to enter service in 2028. By contrast, the two-person crew is one of the few hard-and-fast requirements in the draft RFP released this morning. It's all the more remarkable because there few such requirements in the RFP or its extensive technical annexes (which are not public). Instead, in most cases, the Army lays out the broad performance characteristics it desires and gives industry a lot of leeway in how to achieve them. That's a deliberate departure from traditional weapons programs, which lay out a long and detailed list of technical requirements. But the Army tried that prescriptive approach on OMFV and it didn't work. Last year, in its first attempt to build the OMFV, the Army insisted that industry build – at its own expense – a prototype light enough that you could fit two on an Air Force C-17 transport, yet it had to be tough enough to survive a fight with Russian mechanized units in Eastern Europe. Only one company, General Dynamics, even tried to deliver a vehicle built to that specification and the Army decided they didn't succeed. So the Army started over. It decided heavy armor was more important than air transportability, so it dropped the requirement to fit two OMFVs on a single C-17; now it'll be satisfied if a C-17 can carry one. In fact, it decided rigid technical requirements were a bad idea in general because it limited industry's opportunity to offer ingenious new solutions to the Army's problems, so the service replaced them wherever it could with broadly defined goals called characteristics. And yet the new draft RFP does include a strict and technologically ambitious requirement: the two-person crew. Now, since the OMFV is a transport, it'll have more people aboard much of the time, and when an infantry squad is embarked, one of them will have access to the vehicle's sensors and be able to assist the crew. But when the passengers get out to fight on foot, there'll just be two people left to operate the vehicle. A two-person crew isn't just a departure from the Bradley. This is a departure from best practice in armored vehicle design dating back to World War II. In 1940, when Germany invaded France, the French actually had more tanks, including some much better armed and armored than most German machines. But a lot of the French tanks had two-man crews. There was a driver, seated in the hull, and a single harried soldier in the turret who had to spot the enemy, aim the gun, and load the ammunition. By contrast, most German tanks split those tasks among three men – a commander, a gunner, and a loader – which meant they consistently outmaneuvered and outfought the overburdened French tankers. A lot of modern vehicles don't need a loader, because a mechanical feed reloads automatically. But in everything from the Bradley to Soviet tanks, the minimum crew is three: driver, gunner, and commander. That way the driver can focus on the terrain ahead, the gunner can focus on the target currently in his sights, and the commander can watch for danger in all directions. A two-person crew can't split tasks that way, risking cognitive overload – which means a greater risk that no one spots a threat until it's too late. So how do fighter jets and combat helicopters survive, since most of them have one or two crew at most? The answer is extensive training and expensive technology. If the Army wants a two-person crew in its OMFV, the crew compartment may have to look less like a Bradley and more like an Apache gunship, with weapons automatically pointing wherever the operator looks. The Army's even developing a robotic targeting assistant called ATLAS, which spots potential targets on its sensors, decides the biggest threat and automatically brings the gun to bear – but only fires if a human operator gives the order. Now, industry does not have to solve these problems right away. The current document is a draft Request For Proposals, meaning that the Army is seeking feedback from interested companies. If enough potential competitors say the two-man crew is too hard, the Army might drop that requirement. The current schedule gives the Army about nine months, until April 2021, to come out with the final RFP, and only then do companies have to submit their preliminary concepts for the vehicle. The Army will pick several companies to develop “initial digital designs” – detailed computer models of the proposed vehicle – and then refine those designs. Physical prototypes won't enter testing until 2025, with the winning design entering production in 2027 for delivery to combat units the next year. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/07/omfv-army-wants-smaller-crew-more-automation/