Defense Procurement News

Northrop Grumman Delivers 500th Directional Infrared Countermeasures System

Jeffrey Bradford — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 16:52:00 +0000

Northrop Grumman Delivers 500th Directional Infrared Countermeasures System
March 16, 2010

ROLLING MEADOWS, Ill. –– Northrop Grumman Corporation (NYSE:NOC) has announced the delivery of the 500th Directional Infrared Countermeasures (DIRCM) aircraft self-protection system to the U.S. Government.

Representatives of the U.S. Navy and Air Force were on hand to commemorate the event, which took place at the company’s facility in Rolling Meadows, Ill.

“Your IRCM system is a high priority inside the U.S. Marine Corps because it protects the pilots out flying important missions every day,” said Dan Johnson, Integrated Product Team lead for the Department of the Navy’s DIRCM Systems. “It allows us to go where we need to go, whenever we need to be there.”

“Since the program’s inception, our team members have been focused and dedicated to producing high-quality self-protection systems to protect our nation’s warfighters,” said Carl Smith, vice president of Infrared Countermeasures Programs at Northrop Grumman’s Land & Self Protection Systems Division. “The work we do here provides the most robust, battle-proven capability to protect the warfighter on the battlefield today.”

The only such aircraft protection system currently in full production, Northrop Grumman’s DIRCM system is now installed or scheduled for installation on several hundred military aircraft to protect approximately 50 different types of large fixed-wing transports and rotary-wing platforms from infrared missile attacks. The system functions by automatically detecting a missile launch, determining if it is a threat and activating a high-intensity laser-based countermeasure system to track and defeat the missile.

###

Technorati Tags:
Northrop Grumman (NYSE:NOC)

MIDS JTRS Receives NSA Certification — Press Release

admin — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 15:37:14 +0000

SAN DIEGO – The Joint Program Executive Office for the Joint Tactical Radio System (JPEO JTRS) announced today that the Multifunctional Information Distribution System Joint Tactical Radio System (MIDS JTRS) has received National Security Agency (NSA) Certification to provide secure distribution of situational awareness and command and control information among airborne warfighters. The NSA Certification was granted March 9, 2010 by Mr. Richard C. Schaeffer, Jr., Director, NSA Information Assurance Directorate (IAD). This is the first JTRS product to be certified at this level of security by the NSA.

“Formal NSA Certification is a monumental accomplishment for the MIDS JTRS Program and the JTRS Enterprise. This is another first for MIDS JTRS as the program continues to blaze new trails and pave the way for other JTRS products to be successful and meet warfighter requirements. The MIDS Program Office has been working extremely close with NSA for over six years to bring this leading edge, next generation technology to the warfighter at the right time. I want to thank NSA, the MIDS JTRS vendors, and all the government personnel for their outstanding work. This is huge for the MIDS JTRS Program,” stated CAPT Scott Krambeck, USN, MIDS Program Manager.

The NSA Certification confirms that the MIDS JTRS terminal has met the highest standards in ensuring the confidentiality and integrity of the data and the availability of the system. NSA Certification is a critical milestone in support of the Initial Operational Capability (IOC) for MIDS JTRS on the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet. A successful NSA Technical Review Board (TRB) was conducted on MIDS JTRS in December 2009 which was the precursor to this NSA announcement.

The MIDS JTRS terminal is the first in a series of networking systems that will provide a single chassis, multiple channel capability to the warfighter, significantly reducing the number of different and unique radios in the operational environment. Use of JTRS radios also means a very real reduction of the upkeep and spare parts necessary to support our forward deployed forces.

###

About JPEO JTRS

The Joint Program Executive Office for the Joint Tactical Radio System, headquartered in San Diego, Calif., was initiated in early 1997 to improve and consolidate the Services’ pursuit of separate solutions to replace existing legacy radios in the Department of Defense inventory. The JTRS program has evolved from separate radio replacement programs to an integrated effort to network multiple weapon system platforms and forward combat units where it matters most – the last tactical mile. JTRS will link the power of the Global Information Grid to the warfighter in applying fire effects and achieving overall battlefield superiority.

JTRS is developing an open architecture of cutting edge radio waveform technology that allows multiple radio types (e.g., handheld, aircraft, maritime) to communicate with each other. The goal is to produce a family of interoperable, modular software-defined radios which operate as nodes in a network to ensure secure wireless communication and networking services for mobile and fixed forces. These goals extend to U.S. allies, coalition partners and disaster response personnel. For more information, please visit http://jpeojtrs.mil/.

Lockheed’s JSF is Overdue, Over Budget – and Too Big to Fail

Matthew Potter — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 14:31:45 +0000

The Department of Defense revealed last week that the estimated cost of each F-35 JSF doubled in the last ten years. Despite this the program will...

Contracts for March 15, 2010

admin — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 22:01:00 +0000

Contracts valued at $5 million or more are announced each business day at 5 p.m.

Valley Forge Composite Technologies, Inc. Announces First Pending Sale of the THOR-LVX Cargo Scanner — Press Release

Matthew Potter — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 18:00:25 +0000

Valley Forge Composite Technologies, Inc. Announces First Pending Sale of the THOR-LVX Cargo Scanner

COVINGTON, Ky., March 12 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ — Valley Forge Composite Technologies, Inc. of Covington, KY (OTC:VLYF) (BULLETIN BOARD: VLYF) and Caravan International Corporation of New York, NY, announce today that the Federation of Malaysia has included THOR LVX(TM) as a line item in the upcoming Five Year Acquisition Plan. THOR LVX will be used by the Royal Malaysian Customs Department to screen containers at selected major ports in Malaysia.

“We are honored to be chosen by the Malaysian government to help them protect their ports of entry”, said Louis Brothers, CEO of Valley Forge. “We believe that this will be the first of many orders of THOR LVX from Pacific Rim countries and from around the globe.”

THOR LVX is an advanced screening system for sea and airline cargo. It provides enhanced detection capability with high processing speed and great accuracy. THOR LVX can scan a 40′ shipping container in approximately 30 seconds, allowing it to quickly detect many types of contraband including explosives, narcotics and radioactive materials.

About Valley Forge

Valley Forge Composite Technologies, Inc. develops, manufactures and distributes next-generation detection systems. Its THOR LVX(TM) system is designed to detect nuclear material, explosives, narcotics and other contraband hidden in cargo containers and baggage, even through shielding. VLYF is also marketing the Odin personal screening system for use in airports, high-security buildings and border entry points. More information about Valley Forge Composite Technologies, Inc. can be found at www.vlyf.com.

About Caravan International

Caravan International Corporation is an export management company representing high technology companies in the aerospace, security / threat detection, communications and advanced electronics areas.

Caravan International Corporation is proud to represent Valley Forge Composite Technologies. More information on Caravan International can be found at www.caravan-ny.com.

Forward-Looking Statement

The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 provides a ’safe harbor’ for certain forward-looking statements. Statements in this press release that relate to Valley Forge Composite Technologies, Inc.’s future plans, objectives, expectations, performance, events, reports made by others, and the like, including a statement about the assumptions underlying a forward-looking statement, are forward-looking statements protected by the safe harbor. Investors should understand that future events, risks and uncertainties, individually or in the aggregate, are factors that could cause our actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied in our forward-looking statements. These factors could include changes in economic conditions or government policies that may change the demand for the Company’s products and services and could include other factors discussed in the sections of the Company’s report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, entitled ‘Description of Business’ or ‘Management’s Discussion and Analysis or Plan of Operation.’ This release is comprised of interrelated information that must be interpreted in the context of all of the information provided and care should be exercised not to consider portions of this release out of context. Valley Forge Composite Technologies, Inc. uses paid services of investor relations organizations to promote the Company to the investment community. Investments in the Company should be considered speculative, and, prior to acquisition, should be thoroughly researched. Valley Forge Composite Technologies, Inc. does not intend to update these forward-looking statements prior to its reporting of its quarterly or annual results.

MRAP-ATV Continues To Drive Work For Plasan Bennington

Matthew Potter — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 11:00:10 +0000

The MRAP-ATV is the new lighter, more maneuverable MRAP made for service in Afghanistan. Oshkosh won the production contract and so far has been awarded contracts for over 8,000 vehicles by the U.S. military. Plasan Bennington makes armor plates for the vehicles and as Oshkosh receives contracts so does the Vermont company.

It announced that Oshkosh had given it a sub-contract worth over $170 million as part of a recent order of 1,460 MRAP vehicles. As the U.S. industry geared up to produce not only MRAPs but also uparmored HUMVEE and trucks several companies expanded their capabilities. Plasan Bennington is one along with BAE Systems. Protection against IED and mines demands the production of sophisticated metal plates for use on military vehicles.

Now Reports That EADS May Bid After All

Matthew Potter — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:00:29 +0000

There is a rumor that the Pentagon may delay the deadline for submission of a proposal for the KC-X to accommodate either a solo bid or another partnership. This contradicts what was reported yesterday that EADS-NA CEO Sean O’Keefe said the company wouldn’t bid without Northrop Grumman (NOC). It will be seriously difficult for the company to bid by itself. It would need to find another U.S. company to work with.

This might be second thoughts by DoD as they realize how difficult doing a single bid contract award will be. This is not a sole source contract but right now it would only receive one qualified offer.

Wall Street Journal Says Trans Atlantic Defense Deal Falters

admin — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 03:50:25 +0000

The Wall Street Journal has weighed on the KC-X Tanker bid process, in an article entitled “Trans Atlantic Defense Deal Falters.” The article notes:

The decision by Northrop Grumman Corp. and its European partner this week to drop out of a $40 billion competition to build aerial-refueling tankers for the Air Force is the latest example of how trans-Atlantic defense ventures have faltered. Many observers view the size of the tanker deal, and the prominent role played by Northrop partner European Aeronautic Defence & Space Co., as the most significant instance of how trans-Atlantic partnerships can get tripped up. Noorthrop billboard in Alabama in 2008 advertised a future tanker plant, but the company quit the project. “There’s no doubt that this outcome will reinforce the long-held understanding in Europe that the U.S. defense market is highly protected,” said Alex Nicholl, a specialist on European defense companies at the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies. “This is not the first time that the rules of a U.S. competition have been rewritten to suit the American competitor. No doubt it won’t be the last.”

Read the entire article at theJournal.

Fourth 787 Joins Boeing Flight-Test Fleet: Press Release

admin — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 03:35:13 +0000

EVERETT, Wash., March 14 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ — Boeing (NYSE: BA) has added the fourth 787 Dreamliner to its flight-test fleet with the completion of the first flight of ZA003. The airplane departed Paine Field in Everett, Wash., at 10:55 a.m. (Pacific time) and landed at 2:01 p.m. at Boeing Field in Seattle.

Captains Ray Craig and Mike Bryan piloted the airplane on its three-hour-and-six-minute flight. ZA003 is the final 787 with Rolls-Royce Trent 1000 engines to enter the flight-test program.

“We’ve done a significant amount of ground testing on the new systems on ZA003 in preparation for first flight. Engineering, manufacturing and flight operations have really pulled together as a team to enable first flight,” said Craig. “It has been very rewarding to watch the Boeing team pull together in support of this milestone.”

ZA003 is the only 787 in the flight test fleet that will include elements of the passenger interior features including cabin and crew support systems. The 787 is introducing new passenger amenities and provisions for a more comfortable flying experience. Among the new features are improved lighting, bigger stowage bins, larger windows with electrochromatic shades and redesigned lavatories with easier access.

In addition to demonstrating that the interior meets certification requirements, ZA003 will be used to conduct tests on systems, noise performance, flight-deck operations, avionics, electromagnetic effects, high-intensity radio frequency response and extended operations (ETOPS).

“The Boeing team is doing great work. We’ve established a good pace of accomplishment on the program,” said Scott Fancher, vice president and general manager of the 787 program, Boeing Commercial Airplanes. “The priorities are clear and the entire team is focused.”

Defense Procurement News Mugs Available

admin — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 01:03:43 +0000

Just a reminder that Defense Procurement News mugs are available at our Defense Procurement News Store. Buy one today!

General Dynamics Awarded $9 Million Contract for U.S. Army Medical Command Lean Six Sigma Support

Jeffrey Bradford — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 16:04:00 +0000

General Dynamics Awarded $9 Million Contract for U.S. Army Medical Command Lean Six Sigma Support
July 6, 2009 10:00:00 AM

FAIRFAX, Va., -- General Dynamics Information Technology, a business unit of General Dynamics (NYSE: GD), has been awarded a $9.2 million dollar, three-year contract to support the U.S. Army Medical Command (MEDCOM) and Office of the Surgeon General.

General Dynamics will support the Army MEDCOM Lean Six Sigma Concepts and Methodologies program by providing instruction and consulting services to internal organizations for MEDCOM's Director of Strategy and Innovation.

"General Dynamics is thrilled to provide its Lean Six Sigma experience and expertise to the U.S. Army Medical Command," said Ken Hess, vice president and general manager at General Dynamics Information Technology. "We will lend our organizational capabilities, traditionally used with supply chain management, to MEDCOM for achievement of sustained results and mission success of promoting, sustaining and enhancing soldier health."

As a trusted systems integrator for more than 50 years, General Dynamics Information Technology provides information technology (IT), systems engineering and professional services to customers in the defense, intelligence, homeland security, federal civilian government and commercial sectors. With approximately 16,000 professionals worldwide, the company manages large-scale, mission-critical IT programs delivering IT services and enterprise solutions.

Technorati Tags:
Contract win, General Dynamics (NYSE:GD), Information Technology, US Army

Sniper ATP Demonstrates Enhanced ISR Capability at Empire Challenge

Jeffrey Bradford — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 16:03:00 +0000

Sniper ATP Demonstrates Enhanced ISR Capability at Empire Challenge
September 15, 2009

ORLANDO, FL, -- Lockheed Martin's [NYSE: LMT] Sniper. Advanced Targeting Pod (ATP) demonstrated its advanced intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) capability during the recent joint forces Empire Challenge exercise. The enhancements respond to U.S. defense officials' call for improved ISR for convoy route reconnaissance and battlefield situational awareness.

During the joint and coalition military exercise conducted at Nellis Air Force Base, NV, and China Lake Naval Air Station, CA, pilots demonstrated a Sniper pod with enhanced algorithms, a digital data recorder and a high-definition sensor and datalink. U.S. Air Force crews flew the pod on an F-16 in support of the exercise's key objective - to evaluate proposed ISR solutions for Warfighter requirements.

"Field reports from ongoing contingency operations routinely attest to the use of the Sniper ATP to conduct non-traditional ISR missions," said Ken Fuhr, Fixed-Wing Program director at Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control. "To better serve the Warfighter, we're expanding the pod's role as an ISR tool. Empire Challenge provided an excellent opportunity to demonstrate the pod's capability in support of improvised explosive device search, convoy support and armed overwatch."

During the exercise, Sniper pod's ISR capabilities demonstrated autonomous reconnaissance and data collection, providing a complete battlefield picture for intelligence operations. Directed by pre-defined or pilot-designated flight points, this capability can be used to monitor convoy routes or wide areas of interest, in addition to capturing images of infrastructure such as oil pipelines, power lines and roadways.

Packaged in a single lightweight pod, Sniper ATP's enhanced image clarity provides critical long-range, positive identification of both moving and stationary air and ground targets, as well as real-time targeting for advanced laser-guided weapons. It is also equipped with a video downlink that relays high-resolution streaming video to forward-deployed forces for non-traditional ISR and rapid target coordination.

Competitively selected as the U. S. Air Force's advanced targeting pod in 2001, the Sniper ATP is used by the U.S. Air Force in current combat operations and is actively deployed on five different U.S. and coalition platforms.

With a proven 98 percent field availability rate and demonstrated supportability worldwide, Sniper ATP is designed to be "plug-and-play" for optimal flexibility. The Sniper pod is operational on U.S. Air Force, Air National Guard and multinational F-16, F-15, B-1, CF-18, Harrier, A-10 and Tornado aircraft. It is currently being integrated and is flying on the B-52. Sniper pods provide discriminating capability to the U.S. Air Force, Air National Guard and 11 international air forces, including coalition partners.

Technorati Tags:
C4ISTAR, Lockheed Martin (NYSE:LMT)

James Webb Space Telescope Core Completes Thermal Testing

Jeffrey Bradford — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 16:03:00 +0000

James Webb Space Telescope Core Completes Thermal Testing
July 6, 2009

REDONDO BEACH, Calif. -- Northrop Grumman Corporation (NYSE:NOC) has completed testing on a model of the "core" section of NASA's James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) to validate the observatory's sophisticated thermal modeling and design. The company is leading an industrial team in the design and development of the Webb Telescope for NASA Goddard Space Flight Center.

"This test represents JWST's first large-scale thermal performance and demonstration test after a decade in development," said Martin Mohan, JWST program manager for Northrop Grumman's Aerospace Systems sector. "At this early juncture, it appears that our test objectives were achieved. The team gathered a tremendous amount of data that we'll review over the coming months to assess the implications for the current observatory design."

The Webb Telescope's unique design features a sunshield that separates the observatory into a warm sun-facing side, and a cold side facing away from the sun. The warm side will be subjected to nearly 100,000 thermal Watts of heat from the sun, while the cold, anti-sun side, where the optical telescope element and science instrument module are located, will be cooled passively to as low as -414 degrees Fahrenheit (25 K, or slightly above absolute zero). These elements come together at the observatory's central, or core, region.

The core model built by Northrop Grumman is a thermal facsimile of the Webb Telescope's central region and stands about two stories tall, or 17.5 feet, and 17 feet wide. It consists of the top portion of the spacecraft bus, deployable tower, a truncated but fully tensioned five-layer sunshield, optical telescope element backplane support frame, integrated science instrument module (ISIM) compartment, cable trays, thermal management systems, and ISIM electronics compartment.

Testing was conducted in Northrop Grumman's largest thermal vacuum chamber at the company's space systems manufacturing facilities over nearly six weeks. To simulate the extreme cold JWST will experience in space, Northrop Grumman upgraded the chamber with a gaseous helium-refrigerated shroud and precisely monitored the test with 550 individual temperature sensors. The chamber provided a background operating temperature as low as -435 degrees F (13K).

The telescope operates at temperatures approaching absolute zero to best see the near- and mid-infrared light coming from the very first stars and galaxies.

"I can't overstate how much of a milestone this test represents and the remarkable achievement it is just getting this large test article to flight-like temperatures and gathering the needed data," said Keith Parrish, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, JWST Deputy Observatory/Sunshield manager. "The fact that it went as smoothly and with as little fanfare speaks volumes to the planning, build quality, facility operations, and foresight of the entire team. This test expands the joint NGAS/NASA institutional knowledge for large cryogenic testing and will contribute to the even more complex flight article testing later in the program."

The Webb Telescope is the next-generation premier space observatory, exploring deep space phenomena such as distant galaxies to nearby planets and stars. It will give scientists clues about the formation of the universe and the evolution of our own solar system, from the first light after the Big Bang to the formation of star systems capable of supporting life on planets like Earth.

# # #

Technorati Tags:
Northrop Grumman (NYSE:NOC), Space systems

Raytheon’s Excalibur Ib Demonstrates Accuracy During First Guided-Flight Tests

Jeffrey Bradford — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 16:03:00 +0000

Raytheon's Excalibur Ib Demonstrates Accuracy During First Guided-Flight Tests
July 6, 2009

YUMA PROVING GROUND, Ariz., -- Raytheon Company (NYSE: RTN) fired two precision-guided projectiles from a Paladin gun system during the first guided flight test of the Raytheon Excalibur Ib program.

The Excalibur Ib is a precision-guided artillery projectile based on Raytheon's combat-proven Excalibur 1a. The tests demonstrated how the new base design, changes to the Excalibur Ia warhead, fuzing and control actuation system work together to simplify the design, reducing round production costs and increasing system reliability.

The rounds, with Raytheon's new fixed-base design, software, and Excalibur Ia guidance and control section, exited perfectly from the gun tube, demonstrating correct fin erection and stable flight.

"Our robust and well thought out test program has achieved more than 50 successful test firings in less than a year," said Kevin Matthies, Raytheon's Excalibur Ib program director. "The Raytheon Excalibur Ib team continues to demonstrate the success of Raytheon's increased reliability design."

Raytheon's Excalibur Ib features a titanium base, uses fewer parts and requires simpler manufacturing than Excalibur Ia. Excalibur Ib is expected to reach full-rate production in 2016.

Technorati Tags:
Artillery, Raytheon (NYSE:RTN)

Lockheed Martin Delivers 1,000th Vertical Launch ASROC Missile

Jeffrey Bradford — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 16:03:00 +0000

Lockheed Martin Delivers 1,000th Vertical Launch ASROC Missile
July 6, 2009 9:03:00 AM

AKRON, Ohio, -- Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT) recently marked the production and delivery of the 1,000th Vertical Launch ASROC (VLA) missile during a ceremony at the company's Akron, OH, facility. The milestone VLA missile is part of a contract for the Japanese Maritime Self Defense Force.

The world's only urgent attack operational antisubmarine warfare (ASW) weapon for surface combatants, VLA missiles provide vessels with the capability to attack submarines beyond the submarine's attack range, even in adverse weather conditions. Lockheed Martin supplies VLA missiles to the U.S. Navy as well as the Japanese Maritime Self Defense Force through a combination of Foreign Military Sales (FMS) and direct commercial sales.

"The VLA missile has proven to be a very robust weapon," said Capt. Tom Wears, U.S. Navy program manager. "This weapon will be a critical component of the U.S. Navy's inventory for many years."

"This milestone demonstrates the longstanding teamwork and commitment from the VLA Program Team to our customers and to the warfighter," said Rick Perez, vice president of Lockheed Martin's Defense Systems market segment.

"We are pleased that the VLA missile is the primary ASW weapon for Japan's newest surface combatant ships," said Naoji Tomita, vice president and general manager, Mitsubishi International Corporation. Mitsubishi is Lockheed Martin's trading partner for the Japanese Maritime Self Defense Force.

Development of the VLA missile began in 1984 and production units have been delivered to the U.S. and allied navies since 1992.

To provide defense against existing and future ASW threats, Lockheed Martin is currently extending the range of the VLA. This new missile, the VLA Extended Range (VLA-ER), will provide four to five times more range by adding a wing glide kit to the existing system. VLA-ER reuses nearly 90 percent of the existing VLA and includes a common configuration allowing both ship and air launch.

Technorati Tags:
Japan, Lockheed Martin (NYSE:LMT), Missiles, Naval Systems

Vacation

Matthew Potter — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 12:16:11 +0000

You humble editor will be out of the country next week so posting may be light.

Thank you.

CNO Announces Flag Officer Assignments

Jeffrey Bradford — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 02:39:00 +0000

NNS100312-03. CNO Announces Flag Officer Assignments
March 12, 2010

From the Department of Defense

WASHINGTON (NNS) -- Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Gary Roughead announced March 11 the following assignments:

Rear Adm. (lower half) Michael J. Browne will be assigned as director, Personal Readiness and Community Support Branch, N135, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, Washington, D.C. Browne is currently serving as deputy chief engineer, Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, D.C.

Capt. Clinton F. Faison III, who has been selected for promotion to Rear Adm. (lower half), will be assigned as commander, Navy Medicine West/commander, Naval Medical Center, San Diego. Faison is currently serving as deputy chief, Medical Operations, M3/5, Bureau of Medicine and Surgery, Washington, D.C.

Rear Adm. (lower half) Donald E. Gaddis will be assigned as program executive officer for Tactical Aircraft Programs, Washington, D.C. Gaddis is currently serving as commander, Naval Air Warfare Center, Aircraft Division/assistant commander for research and engineering, Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Md.

Rear Adm. (lower half) Michael H. Mittelman, who has been selected for promotion to Rear Adm., will be assigned as fleet surgeon, U.S. Pacific Fleet/command surgeon, U.S. Pacific Command, Camp H.M. Smith, Hawaii. Mittelman is currently serving as command surgeon, Joint Forces Command/medical advisor to Supreme Allied Commander Transformation, Norfolk, Va.

Rear Adm. (lower half) William M. Roberts will be assigned as fleet surgeon, U.S. Fleet Forces Command, Norfolk, Va. Roberts is currently serving as director, Medical Resources, Plans, and Policy Division, N931, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, Washington, D.C.

Rear Adm. (lower half) Alton L. Stocks will be assigned as commander, Navy Medicine East/commander, Naval Medical Center, Portsmouth, Va. Stocks is currently serving as fleet surgeon, U.S. Fleet Forces Command, Norfolk, Va.

Technorati Tags:
Appointments, USN (US Navy)

DOD CONTRACTS for March 12, 2010

Jeffrey Bradford — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 02:38:00 +0000

DOD CONTRACTS for March 12, 2010
March 12, 2010

NAVY

LPI Technical Services*, Chesapeake, Va., is being awarded a $84,140,685 cost-plus-fixed-fee, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract to furnish repair, maintenance, modernization, logistical, and technical support services for material handling equipment (yellow gear) and hull, mechanical, and electric machinery and systems in order to ensure continued ship operation and performance. Work will be performed in Norfolk, Va. (25 percent); Chesapeake, Va. (15 percent); Mayport, Fla. (15 percent); Bremerton, Wash. (10 percent); San Diego (5 percent); Philadelphia (5 percent); Ingleside, Texas (5 percent); Naples, Italy (5 percent); Earle, N.J. (5 percent); Pascagoula, Miss. (5 percent); and Virginia Beach, Va. (5 percent). Work is expected to be completed by March 2015. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured via Federal Business Opportunities Web site, with one offer received. The Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock Division, Ship System Engineering Station, Philadelphia, is the contracting activity (N65540-10-D-0010).

KOR Electronics*, Cypress, Calif., is being awarded a $44,444,241 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity time-and-material contract for the procurement of up to 200 production miniaturized I/J band digital radio frequency modulators (DRFM) for the Navy and Air Force. DRFMs are installed in systems that are used to evaluate U.S. weapons systems and train fleet operators. In addition, this contract provides for one lot of engineering, technical, and repair services in support of the Navy/Air Force Airborne Threat Simulation Organization. Work will be performed in Cypress, Calif., and is expected to be completed in March 2015. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured via an electronic request for proposals as a 100 percent small business set-aside; two offers were received. The Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division, China Lake, Calif., is the contracting activity (N68936-10-D-0022).

BAE Systems Land & Armaments, LP, Ground Systems Division, York, Pa., is being awarded a $44,116,706 modification to previously awarded delivery order #0011 under firm-fixed-priced contract (M67854-07-D-5025) for field service representatives and instructors to provide support, inside and outside the continental United States, for the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles. Work will be performed in York, Pa., and is expected to be completed by December 2010. Contract funds in the amount of $44,116,706 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Marine Corps Systems Command, Quantico, Va., is the contracting activity.

DDL Omni Engineering, McLean, Va. (N66604-10-D-003A), and General Dynamics Information Technology, Fairfax, Va. (N66604-10-D-003B), are each being awarded an indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity cost-plus-fixed fee multiple-award contract for engineering services in support of the Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) program. The dollar value for both contracts combined is $16,139,998; DDL Omni Engineering is being awarded $8, 482,108 and General Dynamics is being awarded $7,657,890. Efforts will include planning; development of alteration plans and procedures; assembly; fabrication; installation; testing; refurbishment; and repair of ISR systems and equipment aboard Navy submarines. Work will be performed in Newport, R.I. (50 percent), and Pawcatuck, Conn. (50 percent), and is expected to be completed by March 2015. Contract funds in the amount of $35,000 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. These contracts were competitively procured via Navy Electronic Commerce Online Web site, with six offers received. The Naval Undersea Warfare Center Division, Newport, R.I., is the contracting activity.

Marvin Engineering Co., Inc.*, Inglewood, Calif., is being awarded an $11,717,049 modification to previously awarded firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract (N00019-08-D-0012) for the procurement of 377 LAU-7F/A missile launchers for the Navy. Work will be performed in Inglewood, Calif., and is expected to be completed in October 2012. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Md., is the contracting activity.

KITCO/kSARIA, LLC*, Virginia Beach, Va., is being awarded a $9,799,727 cost-plus-fixed-fee, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for CVN-78's automated fiber optic manufacturing initiative (AFOMI). The AFOMI is intended to mature fiber optic cable termination technologies, specifically focusing on automation and miniaturization. This contract promotes CVN-78 carrier program's goal to establish a manufacturing line to produce products developed through this initiative. CVN-78's goal is to drive lifetime fiber optic component manufacturing and repair costs down by miniaturizing and automating as many processes as possible. Work will be performed in Lawrence, Mass. (90 percent), and Virginia Beach, Va. (10 percent), and is expected to be completed in March 2015. Contract funds in the amount of $1,471,982 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured via the Naval Electronics Commerce Online and Federal Business Opportunities Web sites, with two offers received. The Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren Division, Dahlgren, Va., is the contracting activity (N00178-10-D-2003).

Marotta Controls, Inc.*, Montville, N.J., is being awarded a $6,210,698 modification to a previously awarded firm-fixed price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract (N00019-06-D-0021) for the production of 377 pure air generating systems for integration into the LAU-7F/A missile launcher, for cooling of the AIM missile. Work will be performed in Montville, N.J., and is expected to be completed in October 2011. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Md., is the contracting activity.

DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY

Petro Star*, Anchorage, Alaska, is being awarded a maximum $10,828,604 fixed-price with economic price adjustment contract for fuel. Other location of performance is in Anchorage, Alaska. Using services are Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and federal civilian agencies. There were originally four proposals solicited with four responses. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The date of performance completion is March 31, 2014. The Defense Energy Support Center, Fort Belvoir, Va., is the contracting activity (SP0600-10-D-0028).

Freeman Holdings of California, dba Million Air Victorville*, Topeka, Kan., is being awarded a maximum $9,548,338 fixed-price with economic price adjustment contract for fuel. Other location of performance is California. Using services are Army, Navy and Air Force. There were originally two proposals solicited with two responses. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The date of performance completion is March 31, 2014. The Defense Energy Support Center, Fort Belvoir, Va., is the contracting activity (SP0600-10-D-0032).

*Small business

Technorati Tags:
Contract Win, Department of Defense (DoD)

DOD News Briefing with Ashton Carter from the Pentagon

Jeffrey Bradford — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 02:34:00 +0000

DOD News Briefing with Ashton Carter from the Pentagon
March 12, 2010

STAFF: Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for joining us again this afternoon. It's my pleasure to introduce to you the undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, Dr. Ash Carter, who will spend a little bit of time this afternoon talking to you about the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program.

Sir?

MR. CARTER: Very good. Thank you. And delighted that you're all here. I do apologize for the delay in this. Something came up at whatever it was, 11:00, when this was scheduled, and I know some of you got yo-yod back and forth, and I do apologize for that, because I know it's Friday.

The purpose of this is to revisit some of the points that I made yesterday before the Senate Armed Services Committee regarding the restructuring of the Joint Strike Fighter program that Secretary Gates directed on the basis of the various estimates and analyses that were done in the fall and the department-wide review which I led over the last few months and which led to the decisions that he made and that he announced in connection with the FY '11 budget decision.

So in that sense, yesterday there was nothing new relative to that. But that was our first opportunity to appear before the Congress and kind of lay it out in detail. So let me kind of revisit some of the main points of the restructuring. And then I'll take questions.

And I'll do that as I did yesterday in the hearing, by addressing the three phases of the program: namely the development phase, the ramp-up to the transition from development to production and the ramp- up to full production and then full production, and the actions taken in each of those three phases.

For the development phase, the secretary directed three actions to reduce the overall duration of the development program. That duration had been lengthening with time, for reasons I'll go into in a moment. And in order to reduce that span of time, he directed three actions.

The first was the procurement of another aircraft, a carrier variant aircraft, to add to the test program.

That's another resource to get through the various test points that constitute the flight-test program. So it's not hard to understand that if you have more aircraft to do a certain number of tests, you'll get through them faster. That's an investment worth making, because you -- (pause) -- bring back the program's schedule, and you keep a lot of people doing flight testing for a shorter period of time.

Secondly, he directed the loan of three aircraft that would be in the operational test program to the developmental test program for the same reason: to hasten developmental tests.

And finally, he directed the creation of another software integration capability, which was intended to forestall the possibility that if you -- if you -- as we intend to do with the first two actions -- compress the developmental flight-test program, then you -- and you -- that is, bring back the schedule -- then you have to say, well, by the time you're done, you've finished up your testing there, is the software going to be done? We wanted to make sure the answer to that was yes.

And so those are the three actions that Secretary Gates directed to correct the schedule of the development program, and that's not to say that we were able to restore it to what it had been projected to be by the program office and the contractor, but we got some of the way back. And that's where the famous 30 months and 13 months comes in.

The secretary believed -- and this is a principle that's important -- that the investments needed to get back the development schedule oughtn't to be made solely by the taxpayer; that the responsibility for that should be shared -- and it is being shared -- with the contractor.

That's where the $614 million withheld fee comes in.

So with those actions, the -- we have restored some of the schedule erosion that was occurring the development program and reduced the risk in the development program, and saved the taxpayer money that they shouldn't have to spend and get to the next phase, and that's the transition to production, which is always a difficult -- historically difficult transition to make for aircraft programs.

And there we had another independent review done. That's the so- called independent manufacturing review team report. That report was commissioned by my office. And they just looked at the workings of the assembly line in Fort Worth, and they identified a number of steps that would be needed in order to guarantee that that assembly line could ramp up its production in the way that was originally planned.

So we identified those steps that needed to be taken to make sure we could ramp up production as quickly as possible. The secretary judged that the independent estimate of the ramp rate was the realistic one, and therefore we should plan for a later -- because the development program was a little bit later -- and a flatter, just -- that is, less risky -- ramp.

That means fewer jets produced in the early years, in the interests of a more predictable and more stable achievement of full rate production. So there will be fewer aircraft produced over the FYDP [future years defense program].

But the objective there is to reach full rate production in a predictable, stable way, and that was the secretary's decision in that regard, and additionally to require that in the contracts that cover that ramp that we transition from a cost-plus structure to a fixed- price structure.

He directed that also, that in order to ensure discipline in the transition, from development to production. Then we get out to full rate production itself, where we're going to buy a large number of aircraft for the -- our three services. And we have a number of international partners who are also counting upon this important aircraft.

And for the production phase, the secretary viewed the independent cost estimate as realistic. And that estimate projects a breach of the Nunn-McCurdy threshold for the entire buy of Joint Strike -- Joint Strike Fighter aircraft.

As I said yesterday, that is a disappointing fact, but it is a fact that is a fact of life at this point.

And he recognized that and put in place a number of measures to try to cap and control that cost, which include the fixed-price contracting that I described, a "should cost" effort, which is an analysis independently by us of what the Joint Strike Fighter should cost so that we have our own estimate of that and not just the contractor's estimate of that, and the -- and the implementation of the steps we are taking, which have -- we've identified also through the so-called Joint Assessment Team to control and reduce the costs of the engine, which were one of the things that was increasing the cost of the overall aircraft.

So just to take it from the top -- but I know some of that's technical, and Friday afternoon, I hope your eyes aren't glazing over, but this is the stuff of aircraft programs. And in the development phase, in the ramp-up to production and in full-rate production, in each of those areas we have done an assessment of where the program stood. We wanted to be realistic and candid but also managerially smart about how we address each of those three phases.

The secretary took actions in each of those phases and on the basis of that -- what we judge now to be a realistic, not optimistic, not pessimistic, realistic program, plan and schedule to plan on that basis and to put the management mechanisms in place that he had defined to ensure that, going forward, the program performs better than it's been performing over the last couple of years.

So that in a nutshell is what Secretary Gates directed back as part of the budget process.

Yesterday was our first chance to get in front of our committees and explain that. It was not new news to us. It wasn't -- it's not good news to explain a Nunn-McCurdy breach. It was not new news to us; it was the news that we first began to confront back in November and we began to do -- to act as though we were already in a Nunn- McCurdy breach -- which we weren't -- but to identify and take the managerial steps that you would need to take if you were in a Nunn- McCurdy breach. So that kind of in a nutshell is what I said yesterday.

And now I'm available for questions.

Q I'm wondering if you could just -- to take a step back and look at this -- try to explain it to the average taxpayer. You have a program that in 2001 was estimated to cost about $50 million a jet; now it's at as much as 113 million (dollars) per jet. You can account for inflation in there, but that's an astronomical increase. How do you explain that to just, you know, the average person without an acquisition background or legal background? How does that happen, and how do you keep it from happening again?

MR. CARTER: First of all, just to get the numbers straight, you do need to take account of inflation there. So I -- the -- what Christine Fox said yesterday was that the -- what was a $50 million aircraft, integrated over the entire buy in 2002, had grown to an 80 (million dollars) to $95 million aircraft in those year dollars of -- I didn't mean to correct you. I'm just saying that's what the facts are.

How do you justify that? Nobody wants to pay more than they were told they should have to pay, so that's poor performance.

And what -- and Secretary Gates has, I think, made it pretty clear how he feels about poor performance in acquisition systems. That's why he took the steps that he did that I'm describing to you.

They don't make that any better. They try to get it under control, and get back to a(n) affordable aircraft and to a story that we can tell that won't be different five years and 10 years from now.

So we are trying to be realistic now. Obviously, a realistic story has not been in people's minds for the last couple of years because this is a -- the picture that we came to see in November we had some indication of last year, but then it persisted for another year. And we had to say, hey, wait a minute, this -- there's a real issue here.

So that's an explanation. It's not -- I'm sorry?

Q I mean, is this wishful thinking that people think that it would cost less? Is it blatant lying? Is it entirely the contractors? Or, I mean, what's the Defense Department's role in this?

MR. CARTER: No, I think it's -- I think some of it is it's fact of life in terms of things are more complicated than people imagined they were going to be, and an unwillingness to recognize that things were getting more expensive and slipping behind uncontrollably. You can't control costs, you can't control schedule if you're being unrealistic about costs and schedule. And now, we're trying to be realistic about the cost and schedule. That puts us in a better position to manage.

Q There was some bipartisan anger about that yesterday. If Congress comes back and decides it doesn't want to fund the full -- the 2,100 planes and cuts back to, say, 1,5(00) or some other smaller number, that's going to increase the cost per plane, is it not? And is it -- is it possible, even with cutbacks, to truly reduce the total amount of the program?

MR. CARTER: There are -- there are more aircraft, by the way, than 2,100, just -- we'll get you the specific numbers. And I know we'll get this checked for you afterwards, but the number is 2,443 for the United States and 730 for the international partners over the entire lifetime of the buy.

I think that most of the customers are going to recognize that the -- a slip in time and a slower ramp up to full-rate production is -- doesn't mean that their aircraft aren't going to be there when they need them. And so I think most of the customers are going to stay with the Joint Strike Fighter program because of its capabilities.

And I don't think that -- our services are clear about what their requirements are. And I think that when we have the program on a realistic plan that everybody can see going forward, then Congress, as well as the military departments here and the international partners, will stay with their plan, which is to equip their fleets with this aircraft.

Q Mr. Secretary, you just said you think that most are going to stay with the Joint Strike Fighter program because of its capabilities. Do you understand that some are reviewing and reconsidering their plans to purchase?

MR. CARTER: The international partners have been reconsidering their plans for the Joint Strike Fighter right along. All of them have a dynamic situation budgetarily, strategically and so forth. And so that is a -- they're all have been reassessing their needs right along.

But I think that, as I said, that the capability of the aircraft is there, and it will be the best fifth-generation aircraft. We will emphasize its affordability, which was a critical feature for all those partners when they first decided to buy the Joint Strike Fighter. And we'll try to deliver to them what they wanted.

Q Now, Israel's not coming along as quickly as the United States had expected based on Israel's --

MR. CARTER: I don't know that it's not as quickly as the United States has expected. I mean, that's -- again, that's -- this is their decision-making, and their decision-making will evolve as they look at their needs and -- and we -- they are -- I can't tell you what the Israelis are thinking about it. They are obviously interested in the Joint Strike Fighter. I think that's a good thing for them. But we don't have any particular expectations of them.

Q Sir, Dr. Carter, you talk about the slower, flatter ramp up, but the aircraft will be there when people need them. What, at this point, is -- you know, how long does it take to get to maximum sustained rate of production, and what is that rate?

MR. CARTER: I tried to -- I gave that yesterday in terms of both -- and you have to be very specific about what exactly the -- what the question is. I gave the dates of first delivery of aircraft to our services yesterday and I gave the projected IOCs [initial operating capability]. It's in my written statement. And those are our projected dates on the basis of the restructured program that I've described and the actions that Secretary Gates has taken. So it's all laid out there.

Q To deal with the enormous number of fighters that are aging out, we have to get to a sufficiently high sustained rate over the 30- year life of the program. Does that rate come down? We get to it later, but is that --

MR. CARTER: No, it ramps up to the -- to exactly the same rate. It's just a little bit slower in getting up to that, just to be a little more careful.

And by the way, we hope to get to the original ramp rate, just we're being -- trying to be very realistic and we're projecting the -- if you like, the mid range of the estimates. This is an estimate about the future. And we'd like to do better than that. So we may be able to climb up that ramp faster. Obviously, we'd like to climb up it as fast as we can, but that depends on the stability of the assembly line, and that's something that we're working on making happen as fast as possible.

Q We don't reach that max rate, sir, in the current FYDP, do we? We do -- it's up somewhere in --

MR. CARTER: No, we don't. No, we don't.

Q Do you know what year that is, sir?

MR. CARTER: I can get that for you. It's a little bit outside of the FYDP. It's not that long in the future, but if you ramp up -- and that plateau has not changed at all. It's just the rate at which we get there.

Q I'm curious about fixed-price contracting. That's been a real push of yours. Going to fixed price potentially in LRIP [low rate initial production] 5 --

MR. CARTER: Mm-hmm.

Q -- what leads you to believe that Lockheed's operation will be stable enough to go fixed price? And what will protect the government from a potential change that might come from the government that would renegotiate the entire contract, thus nullifying the fixed- price leverage?

MR. CARTER: This is -- as always true in a fixed-price, there's a challenge for the contractor, which is to get control over the line and the stability of the line so that they can price its performance, recognizing that if they price it too low they will pay the extra, and the government to know what it wants. We know that. We're in a position to be specific about the configurations of the aircraft that we want in LRIP 5, to take your question.

So we're prepared on our side to be specific, and we're not going to change that. And I explained yesterday we haven't changed the combat capabilities of this airplane or not. There were not technological issues that caused us to believe we couldn't have all the military capability.

So the configuration of the airplane isn't changed -- hasn't changed, and we can specify exactly what we want in LRIP 5. And then it'll be up to the -- our industrial partner, as is always in a fixed- price environment, to specify the -- specify the price.

Q So the --

MR. CARTER: It's a good discipline to have to specify a price.

Q Okay. And so the changes up to now -- like, for example, the -- I think it was like a 50 percent overage in labor rates, the issue with the part fitting that you discussed, were those the kinds of things that would be on the contractor to pay for under a fixed- price situation?

MR. CARTER: Yes.

Q Okay. So the government would not have had to pick up the tab for those?

MR. CARTER: No. No.

Q Okay.

MR. CARTER: But that was done in the early stage of the program in a cost type of contract, in which all of those -- the cost of making those adjustments -- which are perfectly understandable, but cost money -- fell to the government --

Q And then finally, on --

MR. CARTER: -- except for that part of it which is now in the withheld fee.

Q Okay. And then finally, on fixed price, when you, Secretary Donley and Secretary Lynn spoke to us about the tanker, there was a discussion about going fixed price and what would happen if there was only one contractor, which seems now to be more then hypothetical; it may very well be a reality. There were some options that you gentlemen alluded to, but you didn't want to discuss it because it was hypothetical at the time.

MR. CARTER: Still don't. I don't have anymore to add on that -- on that -- on that today.

Q (Laughs.)

MR. CARTER: Yeah.

Q Mr. Secretary, producibility has been a big part of Lockheed's selling point on the JSF.

You talked a lot about basic problems with parts, quality control. Are you concerned that, as has happened with a lot of space programs and some of our others in the last few years, that Lockheed may not have a good grasp on its suppliers -- good enough to ensure that producibility?

MR. CARTER: That has not been a major problem recently. That's always a problem, and was early on in the airframe.

Remember, there's more than one airframe contractor, by the way. You keep singling out Lockheed Martin, but BAE and Northrop Grumman are an important part of the airframe. So it's a team.

Early on there were late-to-need parts issues, which is not uncommon, but not something you want to have a lot of. I think that particular problem has been dealt with very aggressively by the contractor team down in Fort Worth, and is in a much better place than it was, say, a couple of years ago.

In the F-135 engine, the supply chain has been an issue as well, another thing being worked on.

Q So at this point you're confident that the contractors have --

MR. CARTER: Yeah, I think that particular problem has been worked very aggressively and is in a much better place than it was, say, a couple years ago.

Q A couple questions.

One, out of the $614 million, you keep bringing this up that it's sharing the risk, accountability. How is it sharing the risk if they are having the opportunity to win it all back down the line?

MR. CARTER: Win some of it back. Well, that's an incentive for them to meet all of the targets, and so that's perfectly appropriate. It's reasonable for us to withhold that part of the fee which will be used for the remedial measures that I described: the new aircraft and the software integration line.

Q Okay.

MR. CARTER: But beyond that, they will have an opportunity to win back parts of that fee if, but only if, a very specific set of milestones are hit on schedule.

And that's the way fees are supposed to be awarded. They're not supposed to be awarded willy nilly. They're supposed to be awarded in return for specific performance. And that is not -- just not in -- just in this program, but in other programs, always been the case. And it is something we're going to insist upon.

Q That's fair. That's a fair -- a good point. But how much of that 614 (million dollars) will be --

MR. CARTER: I can't tell you that now because that's part of contract issues.

Q One of the big issues yesterday was trying to get a baseline on which to judge the delays. Going back to the way we were in October 2001, can you, as clearly as -- when was SDD [system development and demonstration] supposed to end? What were the IOC dates? When was milestone 3, uh C supposed to --

MR. CARTER: I'm going to refer you to CAPE [Cost Analysis and Program Evaluation office] for that, for the specific programmatic history, which they have. And they can lay out all of that for you: what was said and thought at every moment going back to the birth of the program, which actually goes back to 1995, what actually happened, and then we are projecting now --

Q Right.

MR. CARTER: -- which we believe to be realistic.

Again, I hope -- we hope to do better than that plan, but that's a realistic plan. They can take you through all that.

Q Did you authorize them to create -- (inaudible)?

MR. CARTER: Yeah, I don't think there's any problem. They are the keepers of all that data. It's perfectly realistic; they prepared -- (inaudible).

Q One final -- on cost, the current SAR [selection acquisition reports] has it, the whole program, at $298 billion in then-year dollars. What is the current estimate today going forward?

MR. CARTER: Again, I'm going to -- I'm going to ask CAPE to answer that question, just to make sure that all the numbers are internally consistent.

Q Okay. It would be useful to get that early next week if you can.

MR. CARTER: I think -- I think there's no problem doing that.

But again, they have all these numbers. I just don't want to mislead you. They are the keepers of those numbers. And it's all complicated; it depends on what year dollars you're using.

Q I know. Thank you.

MR. CARTER: And so I don't want to confuse you.

Yes.

Q Yeah, but, I mean, they were asked that question yesterday about the overall cost of the program and didn't have the figures then. Why is it so difficult to come up with --

MR. CARTER: Well, let me say, the one -- the number that was asked about was not the production of the aircraft. It was something called total ownership cost, the lifecycle cost, decades in the future, to own the aircraft, okay?

That assessment is being done. It's perfectly reasonable that it's not done yet. This is something -- this is a number that doesn't become operational for -- until the aircraft becomes operational. So we -- that is, the cost estimators -- have been focusing on the development program, the ramp to production and full-rate production.

So it's hardly surprising that that analysis hadn't been completed -- hasn't been completed yet. It's not germane to decisions -- managerial decisions we're taking now. This is something in the future. CAPE is doing that analysis, and that'll be part of the overall Nunn-McCurdy process.

We try to do total ownership costs for all our programs. Obviously, there's a certain amount of -- that's a(n) art of estimation because you're looking at the distant future.

Obviously, there's a certain amount -- that's an art, an estimation, because you're looking at the distant future. But those numbers will be -- will be provided.

Q And just -- I know we're talking about Joint Strike Fighter here, but I just was hoping to ask one about the tanker program to see, you know, what your plans are for possibly accelerating an --

MR. CARTER: I really don't have -- say the same answer before -- I don't have anything new to -- new to tell you on that. We will tell you as we proceed with the tanker solicitation, but that's not -- I don't have anything new for you today.

Yeah.

Q Dr. Carter, this is a -- you know, a fifth-generation fighter, a lot of new capabilities. It's not just airframe, engine, but there are a lot of avionics, sensors, the EW [electronic warfare] systems. How much of the problem so far is strictly -- I mean, is this problem strictly the aircraft and the airframe development so far? What about these sensors or the EW systems? Is that part of the delay, or is -- has that not developed yet?

MR. CARTER: It's a -- some of everything. Most of the drivers of the schedule issues that we've been discussing and that are so central, the SDD schedule issues, have been associated with the airframe assembly. But in the overall cost, for example, as I mentioned earlier, the engine has been an issue.

Q Speaking of the engine, yesterday Christine Fox [director, CAPE] told the Senate Armed Services Committee that the latest analysis showed that the second engine would -- there was a business case that showed that it would break even for taxpayers. And Chairman Levin said he was more convinced than ever of the wisdom of going ahead with a second engine.

What's your latest thinking on the pros and cons?

MR. CARTER: Well, first of all, I encourage you to read that business case.

Q Yeah, they told us that it was not available because it includes proprietary information --

MR. CARTER: I don't believe that's the case, so we will get you -- there -- I'm sure there are versions of it that do contain proprietary information, but I believe that the business case -- the essential case, which has certainly been made available to Congress -- can be made available to you as well.

I'll tell you what -- kind of what the essence of it is. I don't do these estimates -- Ms. Fox's office does these estimates -- but I -- I'm a consumer of them, as is the secretary. And the comparison you need to make in your mind is of a -- the program -- the F135 program to a hypothetical program in which you pay the up-front cost to develop an additional engine, to create the manufacturing capability for a second engine, to create the sustainment base for a second engine, to nurse that second engine along so that it catches up with the first engine and competes, and then you have a -- from that point on, a hypothesized competition between those two engines: Which competition -- question -- will it pay back all the money of buying two of everything?

And that's the analysis that Ms. Fox referred to. And if the -- and what she was saying was that if you do that analysis, you can -- you can hypothesize a competition out in the future in which some of the savings, even all of those expenditures, are recouped in the future.

But we judge that that -- that that analysis, that competitive analysis, is based on some very optimistic assumptions, optimistic assumptions that we don't think it is reasonable to accept -- for example, the assumption that -- just to take one very important one -- that the buyers of the engines would accept, in any given lot, whatever engine won.

Well, the Navy's -- well, you have two engines, so -- and you're competing them against each other. And so the economic theory is that whichever engine wins in a given year -- is doing better, is being more economically produced -- that's the one you'll buy.

Now -- but the Navy, just to take one example of a customer, doesn't want to buy this engine that year and that engine the next year. They want to have one engine. Certain of our international partners would not -- would probably have an engine that they wanted. So that's not a free and open competition. That's a series of directed buys.

And that's not what economic theory is all about. And so you look at the economic theory that is reflected in that hypothesized competition, and it -- it looks like, guess what, the facts aren't going to fit the theory.

Q But has this latest analysis changed the calculation that led the department --

MR. CARTER: No, none of the things -- none of the numbers have changed. People have been confused about the numbers. That's why I encourage you to get the business case. It's -- what is it, is it 2.5 billion (dollars) or 2.9 billion (dollars)?

And the reason people have trouble with those numbers is that they're doing apples and oranges. The number that -- one of the numbers that you'll find in that analysis is the $2.9 billion over the FYDP. And some people say, "Well, wait a minute, I remember some other number from some other time." Well, they were probably thinking of another kind of number, which is the number for just the development of the engine. Some people have been confused by that. But the development of the engine is not the only expense of having a second engine, as I explained. There are four elements to it.

So, you know, this isn't something to guess about. And it -- you have to do an apples-to-apples comparison. The business case does an apples-to-apples comparison. And it's not a good apple to only look at the development program when you're assessing the process.

Q I take your point. But the bottom line here is the question whether the department will continue to recommend a presidential veto of any defense spending bill that includes funding for a second engine.

MR. CARTER: That's what the secretary of Defense has said.

Q But the latest analysis suggests that it's not as open-and- shut a case as the department had presented previously.

MR. CARTER: Well, the latest analysis is as I described, and as you can read when you obtain it, which is that the hypothesized competition, the case for a second engine, hypothesizes or makes such optimistic assumptions about a theoretical working of competition. Then we give the reasons why we don't actually think that's what would happen. That's not our experience in these situations. It's not our historical experience.

Q (inaudible.)

MR. CARTER: And so you'd be paying a great deal of real money, that you can really see, up front, for a hypothesized savings in the past. We owe it to the taxpayer to take a hard look at how hypothetical are those hypothesized savings.

We have, and we've judged that they are hypothetical. And therefore we owe it to the taxpayer not to fall into the trap of spending real money up front for hypothesized savings in the past. It's an analytical judgment. It's analytical judgment. But to have a point of view on it, you have to have done the analysis, and we have, and that's available for people to look at and assess.

Q When can we get that? How can we get that?

MR. CARTER: I'll -- immediately after this meeting -- and it's -- again, I repeat, it's been provided to the Congress in some detail. And it is what it is. It's an analytical case. It's all there is to it, how it's the best way to spend the taxpayers' money to get engines for the Joint Strike Fighter. And you have to do the work to have an opinion.

Yeah.

Q Secretary Carter, the topic of lowballing or buying in came up yesterday during the hearing. And I think you said something to the effect -- when asked if Lockheed had bought in -- something to the effect of this is a pattern that would match that, which indicated that there might be some indication that Lockheed then lowballed.

MR. CARTER: I don't have any indication that anybody bought in 10, 15 years ago. The point is there that -- isn't to write history. The point is that one of the things we know we need to guard against in defense programs is -- and it's not contractors; it's everybody -- is kidding ourselves about what something's going to cost, because it's easier to believe that it'll be cheap, for all of us, not just for contractors, but for the government side as well.

We have to have the discipline not to fall into that trap.

That's what independent cost estimation is about. That's why the process that led the secretary to the restructuring he directed was important. It's an independent set of eyes, independent of those involved in the program, looking at it and saying, "Hey, wait a minute. What is this really going to cost? Let's look at how it's actually been going over the last two years, not how we said it was going to go. Let's look at how much things are actually costing, not what we thought they might cost."

Because things change, and -- (inaudible) -- but you have to be honest and realistic as you go along. And I -- it's a very healthy process, and it -- obviously, it is painful, but it's a healthy process and it is the one that led -- let him take the managerial steps he did, which will do the program good in the end.

Q I realize the $614 million withhold was a punishment -- (inaudible) -- to Lockheed, but the way that performance is tracked through the CPAR [contractor performance assessment report] for future work. Has their CPAR been dinged appropriately?

MR. CARTER: It's not -- it's not -- it's not -- it's not punishment. It's sharing the consequences of a failure to perform.

Q Okay. Well, but moving forward, how is their performance rating going to be affected by this situation that we're in today with the JSF? It potentially could affect, you know, future UAV work, future bomber work, that sort of thing.

MR. CARTER: The actions that we take with respect to the fee on this particular contract do not contractually spill over onto any other contracts.

I will say that we do -- we also look at -- in general, at overhead rates and that sort of thing, but it -- that doesn't spill over from one contract to another.

STAFF: We have time for one more.

Q You've used the word "realistic" several times in this briefing. Can you realistically -- the Department of Defense, can it realistically promise the taxpayers that the price increases for this program have stopped, barring inflation?

MR. CARTER: That's what realism is supposed to be. It's not a guarantee of -- that the estimate is correct. The estimate has -- is a projection. That is what we believe we can tell you is our most realistic estimate we have.

We'd like to do better than the estimate. We'd like to do better than the estimate. So realism means, I'm going to try to tell you as best I can what I think will happen. Would I like to do better than the estimate? Of course, I would. Will we be managing to do better? Yes.

I don't project -- I don't do a realistic projection and then say, I'll live that no matter what -- that future. I'd like to live a better future. That's what management is all about.

So we hope to do better than the CAPE estimate.

Q Speaking of realism, you talked about IOCs slipping yesterday. And each service has their own definition. The Marine Corps IOC hasn't changed. It's still 2012.

Yet the end of initial operational test and evaluation has slipped like four years. That's the test phase that says what --

MR. CARTER: There are different variants of the different aircraft. So as you follow IOCs, you have to dig into each one. The Marine Corps variant is different from the Air Force and Navy variants.

What they're looking for in the capabilities of the aircraft -- this is not new. This has been true right along. Each service has its own definition of IOC.

Q Right. You don't think the Marine Corps IOC should change, given that the main testing is going to --

MR. CARTER: It's not the matter that I think the Marine Corps IOC ought to change. The Marine Corps assessed on the basis of the restructured program --

Q They did.

MR. CARTER: Absolutely.

Their IOC, and they're in very different circumstances than the other two services.

And you -- we can go into that detail. You're welcome to go into it with the Marine Corps. But there's no disconnect there. They have their definition of IOC, and the other services have their -- and they're all based upon the restructured program.

Q (inaudible) -- how capable would the plane be --

MR. CARTER: The variant that the Marine Corps are starting with is less capable; has always been. That's what they want.

Q One last point --

MR. CARTER: It's not -- it's not a one-size-fits-all --

Q Sir, one compelling thing that is out there. Are you --

STAFF: Wait one second. We're going to take one more question --

Q Have the services changed their definition of IOC?

MR. CARTER: I'm sorry?

Q Like, has the Marine Corps then changed its definition of IOC?

MR. CARTER: No, I don't think the Marine Corps has changed their definition of IOC at all. They clarify things from time to time. Now, the Marine Corps have been very steady in the kind of aircraft they want. And we can provide you with that information about how the various services define their IOCs. There's no mystery there. But they are all different.

Q But are they different now than they were before the restructure?

MR. CARTER: No, some of them have clarified. I say "clarified," but not in any way related to the restructuring. But as the program goes on and it comes -- kind of comes more to the date at which you're actually going to deploy, you think about exactly what you -- how you want to stand it up, and so -- so they clarify their definition. And I'm sure they probably will continue to do so as they get closer to IOC.

They're the user of the airplane; they get to decide how they want to field the airplane. What we are trying to do is deliver them the airplane. So we show them when we will deliver them airplanes, when we can deliver them airplanes, and then they decide, on the basis of that, how they want to operate the airplanes, how they want to begin operating their airplane. So there are two parts to this IOC equation.

Q Sir, a lot of anger coming from Europe over what some European leaders have portrayed as a contest that was skewed from the start against the Northrop EADS variant.

MR. CARTER: I think Secretary Lynn addressed this point.

Q Yes.

MR. CARTER: I've read those press --

Q (inaudible)

MR. CARTER: I've read those press -- well, let me tell you what I'm going to say first, and then you can ask the question -- the press reports. And I just want to reiterate what he said, which is that we value the contribution of European industry to the choices we can make as a department. We welcome that. There is no protectionism going on and so forth. It's important to us. It's -- the wider technology base and the wider industrial base is good for the Department of Defense. Our position on that is completely clear.

Q And having said that, are you considering possible extension of the bidding deadline to allow EADS to put together a new team, if necessary, if it wanted to bid now that Northrop has pulled out?

MR. CARTER: We don't have a(n) indication of any additional bidders for the tanker. We're happy to have competition. We've said that right along, that we welcome competition in the tanker solicitation. And the deputy made it very clear the other day that no one should interpret this as having -- as a statement about the -- how welcome European industry is in our competition.

Q But will you extend the deadline to allow them to bid?

STAFF: Thank you.

Technorati Tags:
Department of Defense (DoD), F-35, JSF (Joint Strike Fighter) Program

Optex Systems Receives $3.4 Million Purchase Order from General Dynamics Land Systems

Jeffrey Bradford — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 23:00:00 +0000

Optex Systems Receives $3.4 Million Purchase Order from General Dynamics Land Systems
July 9, 2009 8:55:34 AM

RICHARDSON, Texas, -- Optex Systems Holdings, Inc. (OTCBB:OPXS), a leading manufacturer of optical sighting systems and assemblies primarily for Department of Defense applications, today announced that General Dynamics Land Systems, a business unit of General Dynamics (NYSE:GD), awarded Optex a $3.4 million purchase order for additional ICWS (Improved Commander's Weapon Station) Periscopes.

The ICWS Periscopes are a critical component of the M1A2 Abrams Tank; and additionally, Optex is currently manufacturing other plastic periscopes for General Dynamics Land Systems for the M1A2 Abrams Tank. Delivery of the ICWS Periscopes is scheduled to begin in 2011 and continue through 2012.

Danny Schoening, COO of Optex Systems, commented, "We are pleased to have been awarded this latest purchase order with General Dynamics Land Systems. This is the latest step in our ongoing relationship with General Dynamics Land Systems and demonstrates our ongoing track record of delivery of quality products and great customer service. We are proud to be able to continue to provide technology to support the efforts of our troops around the world."

ABOUT OPTEX SYSTEMS
Optex, which was founded in 1987, is a Richardson, Texas - based ISO
9001:2008 certified concern, which manufactures optical sighting systems and assemblies, primarily for Department of Defense (DOD) applications. Its products are installed on various types of U.S. military land vehicles, such as the Abrams and Bradley fighting vehicles, Light Armored and Armored Security Vehicles, and have been selected for installation on the Stryker family of vehicles. Optex also manufactures and delivers numerous periscope configurations, rifle and surveillance sights and night vision optical assemblies. Optex delivers its products both directly to the military services and to prime contractors.

Safe Harbor Statement
This press release and other written reports and oral statements made from time to time by the Company may contain so-called "forward-looking
statements," all of which are subject to risks and uncertainties. You can identify these forward-looking statements by their use of words such as "expects," "plans," "will," "estimates," "forecasts," "projects" and other words of similar meaning. You can identify them by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts. These statements are likely to address the Company's growth strategy, financial results and product and development programs. You must carefully consider any such statement and should understand that many factors could cause actual results to differ from the Company's forward-looking statements. These factors include inaccurate assumptions and a broad variety of other risks and uncertainties, including some that are known and some that are not. No forward-looking statement can be guaranteed and actual future results may vary materially.

The Company does not assume the obligation to update any forward-looking
statement. You should carefully evaluate such statements in light of factors described in the Company's filings with the SEC, especially on Forms 10-K, 10-Q and 8-K. In various filings the Company has identified important factors that could cause actual results to differ from expected or historic results. You should understand that it is not possible to predict or identify all such factors. Consequently, you should not consider any such list to be a complete list of all potential risks or uncertainties.

Technorati Tags:
Contract win, General Dynamics (NYSE:GD), Land Systems

Northrop Grumman’s Second E-2D Advanced Hawkeye Enters Next Phase of Flight Testing

Jeffrey Bradford — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 23:00:00 +0000

Northrop Grumman's Second E-2D Advanced Hawkeye Enters Next Phase of Flight Testing
July 8, 2009

BETHPAGE, N.Y. -- Northrop Grumman Corporation's (NYSE:NOC) second E-2D Advanced Hawkeye, known as Delta Two, has transitioned to Naval Air Station Patuxent River, in Maryland, as part of the carrier suitability phase of testing, in preparation for Initial Operational Test and Evaluation. The first E-2D System Development and Design (SDD) aircraft, Delta One, transitioned to Pax River on May 30 and testing began shortly thereafter, led by the U.S. Navy's Air Test and Evaluation Squadron (VX) 20.

"The joint Advanced Hawkeye team has been putting the two SDD aircraft through a rigorous flight test program at Northrop Grumman's Manufacturing and Flight Test Center in St. Augustine, Fla.," said Jim Culmo, vice president of Airborne Early Warning and Battle Management Command and Control programs for Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems. "This next phase of testing -- carrier suitability -- will be the first opportunity to get the E-2D out on the carrier. We're looking forward to the first Advanced Hawkeye carrier landing as it brings us that much closer to delivering this revolutionary weapons system to the warfighter."

To ensure that aircraft operating on carriers are compatible, all naval aviation assets undergo carrier suitability testing prior to joining the fleet. The bulk of the testing involves catapult and arrested landing structural tests as well as the interoperability between the aircraft and the carrier.

Designed and built for the U.S. Navy, the E-2D will utilize its newly developed AN/APY-9 Electronic Scan Array (ESA) radar, Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) system, Electronic Support Measures (ESM), and off-board sensors, in concert with surface combatants equipped with the Aegis combat system to detect, track, and defeat cruise missile threats at extended ranges. The E-2D Advanced Hawkeye will also provide unparalleled maritime domain awareness including airspace control for manned and unmanned assets, monitoring of surface movements, civil support, and command and control of tactical forces. The E-2D's new AN/APY-9 radar, designed and built by a radar team led by Lockheed Martin, represents a two-generational leap in radar technology. "The AN/APY-9 can see smaller targets and more of them at a greater range than currently fielded radar systems," Culmo added.

# # #

Technorati Tags:
E-2D Hawkeye, Naval Systems, Northrop Grumman (NYSE:NOC)

Government of Canada Names General Dynamics Land Systems-Canada as Prime Contractor for LAV III Upgrade Program

Jeffrey Bradford — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 23:00:00 +0000

Government of Canada Names General Dynamics Land Systems-Canada as Prime Contractor for LAV III Upgrade Program
July 8, 2009 3:08:00 PM

LONDON, Ontario, -- The Honourable Peter MacKay, Minister of National Defence, with Lieutenant-General Andrew Leslie, Chief of the Land Staff, announced today that the Government of Canada has approved an upgrade program for the LAV III family of vehicles. General Dynamics Land Systems-Canada will be the prime contractor and systems integrator for this program.

General Dynamics will now work closely with the Department of National Defence in defining the scope of the LAV III upgrades. At the heart of the upgrade program is a high-capacity driveline and suspension that significantly increases the vehicle's payload. Increased payload will allow the vehicle the ability to deliver even better protection for Canadian soldiers. Other features of the upgrade package will be determined through discussions with the Department of National Defence.

Dr. Sridhar Sridharan, senior vice-president of General Dynamics Land Systems-Canada, said, "We are proud of the LAV III's performance in theatres such as Afghanistan and have continually worked with DND in making the vehicle better. With this upgrade program, we can now incorporate the latest lessons learned in-theatre and evolve the vehicle to a significantly higher standard of performance. We are grateful for this opportunity to keep the LAV III at the forefront and our soldiers safe."

Once the scope of work is fully defined and a contract is issued, significant work will be performed at General Dynamics Land Systems-Canada facilities in London, Ontario, and Edmonton, Alberta, as well as by the company's nationwide network of over 400 Canadian suppliers. All regions of Canada will benefit from this work, including South Western Ontario.

General Dynamics Land Systems-Canada, located in London, Ontario, Canada is a business unit of General Dynamics Land Systems of Sterling Heights, Michigan. For over 30 years, more than 1900 highly skilled technical employees have designed, manufactured, delivered and supported to global customers a unique family of light armoured vehicles (LAV).

Technorati Tags:
Canada, General Dynamics (NYSE:GD), Land Systems

Northrop Grumman Plays Major Role in NASA’s Development of Alternate Astronaut Escape System

Jeffrey Bradford — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 23:00:00 +0000

Northrop Grumman Plays Major Role in NASA's Development of Alternate Astronaut Escape System
July 8, 2009

Launch Abort System Successfully Tested At NASA Facility

EL SEGUNDO, Calif. - July 8, 2009 - Northrop Grumman Corporation (NYSE:NOC) played a major role in NASA's development of an alternate astronaut escape system that was successfully demonstrated today in a simulated launch abort test.

The unpiloted test was part of an assessment by the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) of a potential alternate launch abort system concept that could be used for future piloted spacecraft. The test occurred at NASA's Wallops Flight Facility, Wallops Island, Va.

NASA's Constellation Program is designing the Orion crew exploration vehicle, Ares launch vehicles and Altair Lunar Lander that will return humans to the moon to live and work. The Orion launch abort system offers a proven method of pulling the crew out of danger in the event of an emergency on the launch pad or during the climb to Earth orbit.

The alternate system is called the Max Launch Abort System (MLAS), which could deliver aerodynamic performance benefits, weight savings and be relatively simple in some spacecraft applications. The demonstration vehicle consists of a full-scale composite fairing, a full-scale crew module simulator and four solid rocket abort motors mounted in the boost skirt with motor mass simulators in the forward fairing.

"Our contribution to the MLAS demonstration is one example of a number of Northrop Grumman initiatives designed to help NASA mitigate risks related to key aspects of its Constellation Program," said Carl Meade, director of Constellation Systems for Northrop Grumman's Aerospace Systems sector.

Northrop Grumman developed and produced the composite fairing, fins, drag plates, and motor cage structure. Company personnel based in Wallops Island, Va., performed structures and mechanism assembly and supported the vehicle integration and flight test. Northrop Grumman's subcontractor, Ensign Bickford Aerospace and Defense, Simsbury, Conn., provided pyrotechnic separation system mechanisms.

"We contributed our expertise in structures and mechanisms including advanced composites design, analysis and manufacturing from across the company," said Tod Palm, Northrop Grumman's MLAS program manager. "It was especially gratifying to work alongside NASA in a fast-paced, seamless team environment. We look forward to future opportunities to work with the NASA team to address similarly challenging issues."

The prototype in the test was used to evaluate the means to safely propel a spacecraft and its crew from an errant rocket. It represents a departure from the tower launch abort system used during Apollo launches and retained for the NASA Constellation Program.

The MLAS test was primarily a demonstration of unpowered flight along a stable trajectory, vehicle reorientation and stabilization, followed by crew module simulator separation from the MLAS fairing, stabilization and parachute recovery of the crew module simulator.

Northrop Grumman is working with NASA on other elements of the Constellation Program, including the Altair Lunar Lander. The company brings extensive experience with lunar landers, solar system probes and space observatories, along with its expertise in designing and producing large complex systems from spacecraft to ships to high performance aircraft.

# # #

Technorati Tags:
Northrop Grumman (NYSE:NOC), Space systems

General Dynamics Awarded Department of Homeland Security National Communications System Contract

Jeffrey Bradford — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 23:00:00 +0000

General Dynamics Awarded Department of Homeland Security National Communications System Contract
July 8, 2009 11:30:00 AM

FAIRFAX, Va., -- General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems has been awarded one of the National Communications System's (NCS) National Security and Emergency Preparedness Scientific, Engineering and Technical Assistance contracts by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. This five-year, multiple-award, indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract has a combined ceiling value of $388.9 million to be competed among all four awardees through the term of the contract. General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems is a business unit of General Dynamics (NYSE: GD).

General Dynamics will provide support to NCS national security/emergency preparedness (NS/EP) programs, including networking, emergency communications, national policy, operations, restoration protocols, industry and government guidelines, and pursuing new technical initiatives.

"With growing and changing threats to our nation, it is critical for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to continue to protect our national security and emergency preparedness telecommunications services and facilities," said Lou Von Thaer, president, General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems. "General Dynamics will help DHS achieve its mission of securing critical infrastructures across the federal government and private sector."

Technorati Tags:
Communications, Contract win, DHS (Department of Homeland Security), General Dynamics (NYSE:GD)

Lockheed Martin Receives $60 Million Worldwide LANTIRN Depot Award

Jeffrey Bradford — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 23:00:00 +0000

Lockheed Martin Receives $60 Million Worldwide LANTIRN Depot Award
July 8, 2009 9:32:00 AM

ORLANDO, Fla., -- The U.S. Air Force has awarded Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT) a five-year, $60 million contract to continue depot maintenance support for LANTIRN navigation and targeting pods at the Lockheed Martin Warner Robins Worldwide Depot. The depot supports repairs on LANTIRN pods for both U.S. Air Force and foreign military sales customers.

LANTIRN navigation and targeting pods provide aviators with enhanced range, resolution and reliability. Under provisions of the contract, Lockheed Martin will continue to operate the government-owned Worldwide Depot at Warner Robins Air Force Base, GA, through 2014.

"Lockheed Martin is proud of its 11-year partnership with the Warner Robins Air Logistics Center to keep LANTIRN pods available and battle-ready," said David Ragsdale, LANTIRN product support manager at Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control. "Our depot employees and U.S. Air Force team provide quick-turn repairs on LANTIRN assets with a commitment to quality. We're proud to be given the opportunity to continue this support."

The Worldwide Depot is located alongside the Warner Robins Air Logistics Center, strengthening a close partnership that has been a key factor in achieving LANTIRN fully-mission capable rates exceeding 90 percent.

"The renewal of this contract represents much more than the renewal of the successful public-private partnership between the U.S. Air Force and Lockheed Martin," said Marty Hutchinson, Air Force Precision Attack System program director at Warner Robins AFB. "It represents the continuation of our joint commitment to meeting the worldwide mission needs of LANTIRN Warfighters by providing them timely and highly effective LANTIRN support."

LANTIRN Extended Range (ER), an upgraded version of the highly successful LANTIRN, allows aircrews to operate in daylight or darkness, at mission altitudes from sea level to 40,000 feet, all with outstanding targeting performance. LANTIRN ER is offered as a newly fabricated pod, or as an upgrade to existing pods. The LANTIRN ER targeting pod is deployed and combat-proven on the U.S. Navy S-3B, and is integrated and tested on the P-3.

Technorati Tags:
Contract win, Lockheed Martin (NYSE:LMT), USAF (US Air Force)